Frederick R. Smith Speaks: History

Showing posts with label History. Show all posts

Sunday, May 2, 2021

Festering Federal Courts

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

Checks and balances, or the separation of powers, is the foundation of our Representative Constitutional Republic. Your author respectfully repeats — Representative Constitutional Republic (not a democracy). Unfortunately, not one of the three branches of the government (Executive, Judicial, nor Legislative) is working under the Constitutional framework. It is sad and irritating that most of our leaders do not seem to understand these important precepts.

Under the Constitution, only the legislative branch (Congress) can write laws. The Federal Court’s job is to simply hear cases that fall under the purview of the Federal Constitution. Congress has some control over the lower federal courts by deciding the boundaries between the “circuits” while the Supreme Court is the highest or final arbitrator. The federal courts are a constitutional interpretative body and should be consistent, particularly the Supreme Court. [1] For example, if a court hears a case and decides an outcome, any future case of the same nature should be thrown out based on an earlier decision. Unfortunately, the debased elite have decided that the federal courts must be pro-active for they believe that the Constitution is a “living breathing” document. A clay-like instrument to knead and conform to their worldview.

Can the federal courts make a bad decision? Certainly, and it's the job of the legislature to counteract the federal courts by a variety of means such as:

Approving the appointment of judges that uphold the Constitution,
Exercising power to impeach and remove judges,
Controlling appropriations to federal courts,
Curbing judicial power by adding new judges and creating new court systems,
Writing rules that may limit powers of judicial review in certain legislation, or
Making pending bills that exclude funding to enforce a decision of the Court

Throughout the history of our Nation, the Supreme Court has made some questionable decisions with the Dread Scott case being an early example. [2] However, as time marches on, bad decisions outside the solid precepts of the Constitution are increasingly common. A more egregious example is the Roe vs. Wade decision, which is a state’s issue — nothing in the constitution remotely covers this topic. In this 1971 case, two of the Supreme Court Justices voted in favor of abortion, Potter Stewart and Harry Blackmun. Both had spouses that worked at Planned Parenthood but refused to recuse themselves from the case.

As much as this author detests abortion, it should not be federalized. Why? Because federalized issues nourish the leviathan. As this largess gets bigger it becomes less and less manageable at best, more prone for corruption at worst. Despite these truths, Congress will rarely exercise its prerogatives to counter the courts.

In recent years, the federal courts have ruled on many issues such as “gay rights” and the Ten Commandments. These decisions are not only outside the plain language of the Constitution but at odds with the sentiments of most of the people in the Nation. This is legislating from the bench (judicial activism) and many federal judges see nothing wrong with performing their duties in this manner.

The main culprits are those judges who are social activists, as they “honestly” believe that their notion of justice is more important than the letter of the law they are sworn to protect. As true as this may be, these usurpers will never admit to being outside the framework of the Constitution. Therefore, we find ourselves governed by unelected people – the federal judges. Unlike elected officials that we can vote out of office, federal judges get an appointment for life. It is only through impeachment that they can face removal.

One of the more repugnant “fiat laws” emanating from the Supreme Court was the 2003 decision that decreed the Texas law prohibiting sodomy to be “unconstitutional.” This decision was based on the 14th Amendment that somehow makes privacy a right. Nowhere in the Constitution, including the 14th Amendment, does it mention privacy as a right. However, the 4th and 5th amendments were crafted to ensure security. [3] [4] Further, the Constitution does indeed codify the fact that any issue outside the Federal purview shall be a state prerogative.

While one can argue if state laws about sexual matters are necessary, there is an overlooked element of this ruling. By simply declaring that Texas cannot declare sodomy to be unconstitutional, this Supreme Court ruling has the effect of making every deviant sexual behavior a “right.” While making sodomy a perceived right is bad enough, this decision is extremely dangerous, as we no longer have the checks and balances between the states. Under the Constitution, the State of Texas and all other states have (had?) the right to decide how to regulate social matters like sex, based on local standards.

June 26, 2015, was the clarion call for sexual rights in the United States. On this date, the Supreme Court decided the Obergefell v. Hodges case. By one vote, the court ruled that same-sex marriage is a right.

Another irritating case back in 2003 was the federal court judge in San Diego who ordered the city to evict the Boy Scouts from a camp. The Scouts have used and run the city park since the 1950s and a gay “couple,” with help from the crummy American Civil Liberties Union, sued the city claiming the Scouts’ presence was a violation of the “separation of church and state.” The judge who heard the case ruled that the Scouts are a religious organization because they mention God in their recited oath. This is ridiculous because the land in question was at one time privately owned and donated to the city for the express purpose of setting up a Scout camp.

Your author has harped on this subject repeatedly but despite what a wall of separation worshiper believes and says, the Founders did not intend that there be a “separation of church and state.” No such words are remotely mentioned in the Constitution. [5] Never in their wildest dreams did they believe that a secular public life was necessary for America. They simply wanted to prevent Congress from setting up a state religion such as in England.

It is unbelievable to even conceive of the notion that the Founding Fathers would even consider the Boy Scouts to be a religious body simply because they believe in God. The intellectual elite wall worshipers who can indeed talk the blood out of a rock. They will not succeed with this author.

The debased political leftists have their hook. In place of what they cannot do at the ballot box or in the legislature, they advance their putrid social agenda by fiat laws emanating from the federal judiciary. This ideology has even burrowed itself into the Senate, which is in tune with this agenda. It is here that senators will not even allow the appointment of judges who believe in the true Constitution.

In the new Covid-1984 “work new normal” of today, it is time for the commie debased elite to ramp up the march to one-party rule. In April 2021, House and Senate Democrats drafted legislation to pack the Supreme Court, currently with nine, with four new justices. This move would radically change the balance of power on the nation’s highest court. The proposed bill is led by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, Subcommittee chair Hank Johnson, and first-year Rep. Mondaire Jones. In the Senate, Ed Markey of Massachusetts championed this bill.

Based on the above packing play, there is one concern your author has concerning the Constitution. It is the process of seating Supreme Court judges. Also of concern is the power vested in the President that allows him (or her, or other) to recommend judges. A constitutional scholar (cough, cough) like Bill Clinton (wink, wink) will claim the “balance” occurs in the confirmation process in the Senate. We know how that goes these days. While it may be entertaining to think about the possibility of electing federal judges, we know this is non-sequitur given the “wonderful” state of our election system.

Notes:

The courts have two main systems: the federal courts, referred to as United States courts, and the state courts. The Constitution sets up federal judicial power not entrusted to the states (many were jealous of the powers needed for a strong national government). Following these provisions, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789, organizing the Supreme Court of the United States and setting up a system of federal courts of inferior authority. The states are free to set up their own judicial systems subject to the exclusive authority of the federal courts and to Article VI of the Constitution (judges of state courts to be bound by the Constitution). The courts set up under the powers granted by the U.S. Constitution are known as constitutional courts. They are the district courts, the courts of appeals (before 1948, circuit courts of appeals), and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the highest appellate tribunal in the country and is a court of original authority in some cases. By its power of review, the Supreme Court is also the final judicial arbiter of federal constitutional questions. Members of the federal judiciary—which includes the Supreme Court, 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and 94 federal judicial district courts—are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Federal judges hold their seats until they resign, die, or are removed from office through impeachment by Congress. Other federal courts are the legislative courts. These are the Claims Court, the Court of International Trade, the Tax Court, and the territorial courts set up in the federally administered territories of the United States.
American slave who sued for his liberty after spending four years with his master in a territory where slavery had been banned by the Missouri Compromise. The resulting decision by the U.S. Supreme Court (1857) declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional because a slave could not be taken from a master without due process of law.
Fourth Amendment — “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Fifth Amendment — “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
In an 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, then-president Thomas Jefferson highlighted the “wall of separation” metaphor previously utilized by Roger Williams, who had referred to the “wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world.”

###

Cogent Author and Publisher, Frederick R. Smith
Cogent Editor, Sean Tinney

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

Recommended Videos (all top shelf)

Saturday, March 27, 2021

Notable and Wonderful Noah Webster

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

Noah Webster (1758-1843) was born in Hartford, Connecticut, and grew up in an average colonial family. His father was a farmer, a justice of the peace, and a deacon of a Congregational church. Noah’s sisters Mercy (1749 – 1820) and Jerusha (1756 – 1831) worked with their mother to keep house and to make food and clothing for the family. His two brothers, Charles (1762 – 1817) and Abraham (1751 – 1831) helped their father with the farm work.

During the colonial period, few people went to college, but Noah loved to learn, and his parents let him go to Connecticut’s only college, Yale. To make this happen, his father mortgaged the farm, and in 1774, at 16 years of age, Noah left home for Yale. Noah graduated in 1778 at the height of the Revolutionary War and he wanted to study law, but his parents were unable to provide him with any more money. So, to earn a living, Noah taught school in Glastonbury, Hartford, and West Hartford. Later he studied law under several lawyers. In 1781, the bar in Hartford admitted Webster.

Noah did not like the conditions in American schools because many children of all ages were crammed into one-room schoolhouses with no desks, poor books, and untrained teachers. Schoolbooks came from England and Noah believed that Americans should learn from American books. As such, in 1783 Noah wrote his textbook: “A Grammatical Institute of the English Language” which was called by most people the “Blue-backed Speller” because of its blue cover. For 100 years, this book taught children how to read, spell, and pronounce words. Ben Franklin used it to teach his granddaughter to read.

In 1784, Webster also wrote a grammar book and in 1785 a reader book. The speller, grammar, and reader were published beginning in 1785 as a three-volume set. Around 1836, William Holmes McGuffey published the McGuffey Readers to include a grammar book and a reader book. McGuffey intended to use Webster’s “Blue Back” as a supplement along with the McGuffey Readers.

Beginning in 1785, Webster began delivering a series of public lectures that promoted a more uniform language and education. One little-known and overlooked but important fact is the significant role that Webster played in the development of the American Constitution. In 1785, he wrote a pamphlet called “Sketches of American Policy.” Read by educated Americans, most of the principles in that pamphlet were incorporated into the Constitution as well as into the essays in the Federalist Papers. While the principles themselves were not Webster’s, he was the first to publish them in the form of specific proposals for a new Constitution.

In 1786, Noah met Benjamin Franklin in Philadelphia where they discussed their favorite subject — simplified spelling. It was during this time that Noah coined the terms “fœderal” and “anti-fœderal” to describe the sides for and against a strong national government.

In 1787, he briefly lived in New York to edit the American Magazine, but this venture failed. After the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he anonymously wrote an “Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution,” an easy-to-read pamphlet that was influential among the citizens. He also wrote a number of articles promoting the new Constitution under the pseudonyms “America,” Giles Hickory,” and “A Citizen of America.” He moved back to Hartford in 1788 and practiced law there until 1793.

It was also during his travels that Noah experienced difficulties in obtaining copyright for his works in each state. As such, he was at the forefront of the establishment of a national copyright system.

In 1789, Noah married Rebecca Greenleaf in Boston and they had eight children. In 1793, a prominent Federalist convinced him to move back to New York to edit a daily newspaper “The Minerva” (later the Commercial Advertiser) and the semi-weekly “The Herald” (later the Spectator).

In 1803, Webster moved to New Haven to work on his dictionary. In 1812 the Websters moved to Amherst, Massachusetts and Noah helped to start Amherst College (1821). He served in the Massachusetts legislature in 1815 and 1819. In 1822 the Webster’s moved back to New Haven. Noah traveled to France and England in 1824-25 to research lexicography (the practice of compiling dictionaries).

When Noah was 43, he started writing the first American dictionary. He did this because Americans in various parts of the country used words differently. Noah thought that all Americans should speak the same way. He also thought that Americans should not speak and spell just like the English. For example, Noah used American spellings like “color” instead of the English “colour.” He also added American words that were not in English dictionaries. His early success in 1782 with the blue-backed spelling book earned him a steady income and the wherewithal to devote his life to the first American dictionary, published in 1806. In 1828 after 27 years of work and at 70 years of age, Noah’s second edition dictionary had 70,000 words in it.

Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language was produced during the years when the American home, church, and school were set up on a Biblical and patriotic basis. Webster descended on his mother’s side from Pilgrim Governor William Bradford of Plymouth Plantation who made important contributions to an American educational system, which kept the nation on a Christian family base and a Constitutional course for many years. The famous “blue-backed Speller,” his “Grammars,” and his “Reader,” all had Biblical and patriotic themes. Webster championed the flood of educational volumes emphasizing Christian Constitutional values for more than a century.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the 1828 American Dictionary should have the greatest number of Biblical definitions given in any reference volume. For a salient example of the different worldview that Webster had in mind in 1828 compared to today, look at the definition of the word “law.” The New Collegiate Dictionary:

LAW: a binding custom or practice of a community; a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority. (This definition continues for two inches of one column of space.)

The American Dictionary of the English Language with pronouncing vocabularies of Scripture, classical and geographical names (1828):

LAW: A rule, particularly an established or permanent rule, prescribed by the supreme power of a state to its subjects, for regulating their actions, particularly their social actions. Laws are imperative or mandatory, commanding what shall be done; prohibitory, restraining from what is to be forborne; or permissive, declaring what may be done without incurring a penalty. The laws which enjoin the duties of piety and morality, are prescribed by God and found in the Scriptures…

It appears that Christianity in the form of Calvinism was important to Webster, but he was not always consistent with it in his thinking. For instance, for a period in his early life, he believed in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s social contract theory. [1] He later turned away from the social contract theory when he began to see the dangers of what today we would call “mobocracy” or “woke.”

Late in life, Webster was critical of the politics of dependency. [2] He set himself with the founders who believed that if a person depended financially on someone, they could not serve the public good, but would only be concerned about his dependent relationship. It was only a man who had no economic interests and sought no economic advantage who could serve well.

If there is any doubt to the veracity of Noah’s Christianity, the following from the preface to the 1828 edition of his “An American Dictionary of the English Language — with pronouncing vocabularies of Scripture, classical and geographical names:”

In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed . . . No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.

This above is just one of many examples of Webster’s Christian worldview expressed in his many works. It is curious but understandable why there is little about Webster in modern history (cough cough) books. What scant information that may be around is devoid of any Christian references. While the name Webster may still be known because of the modern namesake dictionary, Noah carried out many more wonderful things throughout his life.

Noah Webster and Daniel Webster are familiar names from history. While they lived during the founding of the United States and were from the same area, there is no known family relationship. Daniel Webster (1782-1852) was an American politician who twice served in the United States House of Representatives, representing New Hampshire (1813-1817) and Massachusetts (1823 -1827), served as a U.S. Senator from Massachusetts (1827-1841) and 1845-1850) and was twice the United States Secretary of State, under Presidents William Henry Harrison and John Tyler (1841-1843) and Millard Fillmore (1850-1852). He was a Dartmouth graduate.

Major sources for this paper:

The Debate on the Constitution, Volume One and Two, Library of America; (July 1993)
America’s God and Country: Encyclopedia of Quotations, by William J. Federer (Editor), Amerisearch, Inc. (2000)

Notes:

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) was a French philosopher and political theorist and considered the father of modern democratic ideals. He believed in “popular sovereignty” and free will whose idea influenced the godless French Revolution. Rousseau held that laws must be solely the creation of man, not handed down by God. His “Social Contract” (1762) proclaimed that civil order would be a product of “general will,” a mystical thought that civic responsibility is inclined towards the good of all and not each person’s particular will. Rousseau believed in the perfectibility of man. His novel Émile (1762) outlined an education system with self-expression encouraged and rote learning eliminated (does this not sound like today’s school system?).
Now we know why the debased woke commie gang loves the Caustic Cancel Culture Pogrom — it relegates the history of hard work to the dustbin.

###

Cogent Author and Publisher, Frederick R. Smith
Cogent Editor, Sean Tinney

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

Recommend (serious) Humor

The Peoples Cube

Recommended Videos (all top shelf)

Monday, March 22, 2021

USS Belleau Wood I CV-24

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

Foreword

Your Author Frederick R. Smith (FRS), the son of Frank G. (FGS), had a vivid dream on March 21, 2021. In this dream, my father (10/03/1920 – 08/01/2002) appeared and spoke about something from his past that was both good and bad. We talked about sharing this story. Upon waking up, a light bulb that went off in my mind. In 1988, my Father wrote about this story, and here it is for your reading pleasure.

The Story

“I WAS THERE”

OCTOBER 30, 1944

ABOARD THE U.S.S. BELLEAU WOOD

This “Mutt” will begin a story starting on July 7th, 1942. On this day, I enlisted in the Navy. To say the least, a memorial day because as I embarked on the train to Great Lakes, the temperature in Chicago was 107 degrees, an all-time high.

As usual, after arriving at Great Lakes, the B.S. began. Clothes that don’t fit and a hell of a time finding a pair of 12D shoes. What an ordeal! The first day at camp I fell out of my hammock about six times; I finally got to sleep. The next day the usual; oops there goes my curly hair! Yikes! Hated the 5:30 uptime, then on sloppy joes -- you know the rest of this bit.

After qualification exams, I got my answer soon. Now off to Purdue University for a ninety-day wonder program. Turned out a 3rd class electrician. This changed the rest of my life.

So on to Norfolk, VA. I was assigned to the “Charger,” a training ship -- yuck! What a bathtub! After seven days of this, I was shipped to Philadelphia Naval Center and assigned to the U.S.S. Belleau Woods. Since it was in the final stages of construction, I had time to “footsie.” A note of interest -- time to meet my wife of now forty-four years.

As our ship was completed, a call to a “shakedown.” So off to Trinidad Isle. Nothing could go wrong -- everything ship-shape. On the way back from Trinidad, the Captain let her loose zig-zag at 24 knots. Yikes! I thought it would shake her apart. Back to Philadelphia again to load up to the gunnels with supplies.

Our new Captain “McBride” (later to become Rear Admiral) was assigned to the ship. Now we knew we had to be ready. Time to leaver down the Pike to the Panama Canal Zone and on to San Francisco. We unloaded a lot there and took on planes. Little time wasted. Now off into the sunset and finally “Pearl Harbor.” Lucky for me my buddy from the U.S.S. Idaho was there. Somehow it made me feel it was all worthwhile, knowing he and I were fighting the same war. I liked liberty but was anxious to get out to sea. January 1943 -- now we were off, south to “Baker Island.” We circled that little island about twenty-three times (I think). No Japs there so an airstrip was set up as a stepping stone to the West. At this point, a little humor. I got a kick out of the chickens who crapped out on the “Polywog” ceremony. This includes “yours truly.” Big deal “going around the equator.” At least it created a lot of good laughs.

Now we’re going on to more serious sea areas. We headed for the “Gilbert Islands.” Talk about a “cakewalk.” This was it! While we lost the U.S.S. Independence (CVL-21) in a freak encounter with a Jap submarine, we plastered these islands like you wouldn’t believe. Little or no Jap resistance was evident. Clean up like “washing the dishes.” With this out of the way, we headed toward the Marianas group. It didn’t take long until we met some stiff resistance. The Japs said, “Oh oh, here comes more trouble.” You betcha -- I can still see the “Micky Mouse” planes that tried to get to us. What a laffer! None reached us and all were shot down. Another four-star performance! Kwajalein was a gift to us as it was a future home base for supplies. Time for more supplies -- back to our new base in the Gilberts, Majuro, recently captured from the Japs. Set foot on land for the first time in four months. Yuk! Warm beer was lousy. I sold mine for 50 cents a bottle to the suckers.

After loaded fully, we started our voyage to “Truk Islands.” Things seemed to slow down; plenty of time to shoot crap and for card games. I was a loser as usual. I can still hear the dice banging on the bulkhead. Fun for the time being. When we approached “Truk Islands,” more action. We and other task forces “plastered” the Japs, sinking most of their vessels in the Truk Islands Harbors by our air power -- this was a key offense to our eventual victory. They lost more than 600 vessels. Our losses next to none.

At Truk, we teamed up with another task force. Now we had the U.S.S. New Jersey, U.S.S. Franklin, U.S.S. Wichita and lots of “cans” with us. Northbound for all of us. We had two objectives -- Guam and Saipan. Can’t remember which came first, but I'll never forget the “turkey shoot” we fired at Saipan. We saw many Jap planes in the sky around us. The Japs were desperate to control the corridor to the Hawaiian Islands and Midway. This “turkey shoot” was something else. Jap planes dropping all over the area. Our fighters picked them off like flies. One Jap came close to hitting us. As Belleau Wood’s 20MMs were blasting away, we caught a Jap trying to make a run on us. This damned thing refused to go down or blow up. This Jap was already dead-headed directly towards us, but the Jap's timing was off. His burning plane missed us by only 50 feet above our aft elevator. The Jap hit the water about 200 feet from us. Close call. It didn't take long to get everything under control. The Japs lost over 600 planes to our 27. They were inexperienced pilots. Most of them were under 18 years of age! Two days later all seemed to be “A-OK.” Intelligence must have had some kind of insight.

After Saipan and Guam, we headed southwest toward the “Carolinas.” We took supplies aboard at sea. Other task forces joined us. The U.S.S. Idaho was in sight but not to be our partner, so there goes my buddy.

On the way to the Carolinas, our radar picked up three bleeps at nineteen miles. After sitting at general quarters for an hour, I could see my perspiration rolling down my leg. No ventilation and no freshwater. My perspiration rolled from one bulkhead and back to me as the ship rolled. How! If hell is this hot, from now on I’m going to be a good boy! Anyway, we shot down the three boogies. So, all’s well now.

No more encounter as we finally got to New Hebrides off the Australian coast for supplies. Talk about surprises; this was it. Natives were black with almost red hair. No liberty? time was precious. We didn’t stay long; we had other things to do.

A quick notice, back to the sea north to the Philippines. All hell broke loose! We cut off the Jap fleet including the prize Jap “Yamamoto” and many others. Our air support and the U.S.S. Enterprise plastered the Japs. Getting the “Yamamoto” was a real moral victory for us. What a delight it was to have the U.S.S. New Jersey with us. What a magnificent ship! Like having “Babe Ruth” play with teenagers. I can’t say enough to describe my delight at seeing her at our side.

To other places now. Oh boy! Here comes a typhoon -- yikes! Talk about tossing and rolling, listing to 25 degrees from one side to the other. Good thing I had good sea legs. I wish we had that rain now.

Now we begin in earnest. October of 1944. Our float with all of the “goodies” -- U.S.S. New Jersey, U.S.S. Franklin, U.S.S. Wichita and many “cans” -- steamed to the North. About 1:30 PM on October 30, 1944 -- Surprise! “Here come the Japs!” Our radar picked up the bleeps and to G.Q. we go. I was stationed on the hangar deck and watched out on the port blister when I saw a Jap plane make a run on the U.S.S. Franklin. The Jap dove down, dropped an “egg” on her. Clear as can be; it couldn’t miss. As it hit, the Jap “peeled off" and headed directly toward us. Oh boy! Jap was determined to hit us. As he approached I ran into the hangar yelling “fire on the hangar deck.” I only assumed it was a crash. Damned if I wasn't right! The Jap hit us on the aft elevator, plane, and all. Talk about confusion, this was it! Being very graceful about my language (I didn't swear or use vulgar language), now it's time to calm the crew. A boatswain above my rank had to get the planes on deck in order. Screaming and all pulling in different directions, I called down to the crew, “shut up you bastards and listen to the boatswain.” Shocked by my harsh language, they all pulled together and the planes were pushed to a safer place. The aft elevator pit was flooded from conflagration to a depth of four feet. As the injured come from the flight deck end down the rear ladder, I assisted them through the elevator to other help on the hanger deck.

I remember one of my favorite officers staggering through the elevator pit asking me, “Please, help me, I'm burned badly.” I got him to the hanger deck where others could help. Shame, I never did find out if he recovered or not. Sickbay was bulging with the injured. No time for crying -- now on to dumping “the inflammables.” Wow! What waste -- barrels and barrels of oil went over the side. I couldn’t keep my mind off having watched my buddy “Poxy” go over the side in flames as the Jap hit us. It’s now time to get the fire out, but the hangar deck did little good since the fire was on the flight deck. It’s now about 2:30 P.M. and the fire is still burning on the flight deck. A stubborn flame due to the gas from all the planes still aboard. We did our part on the hangar deck. It’s now about 3 P.M. and orders from “Comsat” to abandon the ship. Our Captain McBride asked permission for one more hour to put out the fire. Permission granted. Boy! What a relief.

About 4 P.M. the fire was under control. Since only about three hours of daylight was left, a rescue was almost impossible if we had to abandon ship. We got it done like seamen should. Fire out and off to safer places. The next day we were ordered back to Pearl Harbor. After reaching there, an evaluation of the damage was done. We were ordered to San Francisco for damage repairs. Now we are ready for an extensive leave -- much needed to say the least! Not much else in this “ditty.” A thirty-day leave and on to marry my sweetie pie of now 44 years.

A footnote at this point. September 3rd is a real bell. It’s the day I entered Purdue University. For days I kept dreaming the war would end on September 3rd. In 1944 on September 3rd, I entered the Radio Shack to ask what happened today? Was the war over? “No,” was the reply, “but the Italians surrendered today.” Dreams of September 3rd went on. I just couldn’t get it off my mind. Guess what? The Japs surrendered on September 3rd, 1945, Tokyo time.

Not to forget the day I went into business, September 3rd, 1947. In 1950 on September 3rd my first son was born. Coincidence? Maybe, but other notables happened on September 3rd. Goofy? Not to me, it isn’t.

The war is over, and now it’s time to goof off!

With my best regards to all my shipmates of the U.S.S. Belleau Wood, I am

FGS

Postscript

The following videos show the action from October 30, 1944.

Naval History and Heritage Command have an excellent write-up about the Belleau Wood.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/b/belleau-wood-cv-24-i.html

###

Cogent Publisher, Frederick R. Smith

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

Recommend (serious) Humor

The Peoples Cube

Recommended Videos (all top shelf)

Sunday, March 14, 2021

Elia Kazan the Great

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

Elia Kazan (1909 – 2003) was born in Constantinople (now Istanbul). In 1913, Kazan along with his Greek parents came to the United States and they settled in New York City. Kazan’s father, George Kazanjoglous, worked as a rug merchant and expected his son to follow him. However, Kazan’s mother, Athena, encouraged her son to make his own decisions.

Kazan attended public schools in the New York City area and graduated from Williams College in Massachusetts. Thereafter, he studied drama at Yale. In the 1930s, Kazan took part in New York’s Group Theater and it was during this acting stint that he worked with well-known actor Lee Strasberg. In 1935, he directed his first stage production and by the 1940s he was known to be one of the great Broadway actor/producers. He also was one of the founders of the “Actor’s Studio” in 1947. The more notable achievements were his direction of the plays “A Streetcar Named Desire” (1947) by Tennessee Williams and “Death of a Salesman” (1948) by Arthur Miller. After Streetcar Named Desire, Kazan also took part in the development of William’s scripts. In 1955, William’s felt that Kazan had taken over his authority as the writer of “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.”

Kazan also started to work on films during this period and his first feature film was “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn” (1945). In 1947, he won the Academy Award for the film “Gentleman’s Agreement” in which Gregory Peck portrayed a reporter investigating Anti-Semitism. Kazan worked with Marlon Brando during the Broadway production of “A Streetcar Named Desire” and in 1951 it was made into a screenplay. The movie adaptation starred Kim Hunter and Karl Malden. Brando said that “Kazan is the best actor’s director you could ever want… because he was an actor himself, but a special kind of actor. He understands things that other directors do not. He also inspired you. Most actors are expected to come with their parts in their pockets and their emotions spring-loaded, when the director says, ‘Okay, hit it,’ they go into a time-slip. But Kazan brought a lot of things to the actor and he invited you to argue with him. He is one of the few directors creative and understanding enough to know where the actor's trying to go. He’d let you play a scene almost any way you’d want.” [1]

Brando’s key role in “VIVA ZAPATA!” (1952) and “On the Waterfront” (1954) won him eight Oscars. Budd Schulberg's account of corruption in NYC harbor unions was the basis of “On the Waterfront.” Schulberg knew his subject as he testified as a friendly witness before a Congressional committee looking into the corruption of longshoreman. In this film, there were depictions of conflicting loyalties that paralleled Kazan’s own life.

On April 10, 1952, Kazan testified at the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA) hearings and admitted past membership in the Communist party. It was there that he committed the secular sin that certain people from the debased left have never forgotten — he named others in his former secret Communist group. Kazan not only admitted that he had been a Communist member for 18 months (1934-36), but he named eight people who had been in the party with him. He did not denounce them, as some newspapers erroneously reported. The unreported truth: Kazan felt that they joined for the same reasons he did, anger against Hitler and sympathy for the poor. Just two days after his appearance, Kazan placed an ad in the New York Times urging others who knew about this “dangerous and alien conspiracy” to inform the public or “the appropriate government agency.” Many with a debased leftist worldview were ballistic, as they could not stand such “betrayal” from one of their own.

Other former party members had appeared before the HCUA and spoke of ex-comrades. However, the debased lamestream media vilified Elia to the hilt because he was the most well-known former Communist from the entertainment industry to have cooperated with the HCUA. As an insult to the lamestream, even more, Kazan had become an anti-Communist. While he was initially reluctant, he thought that cooperating with HCUA was a justifiable position because of the menace that Communism posed to world stability. Kazan also supplied information on how key Communist leaders would show his Red Cell how to assist the party’s front organizations and how to make Group Theatre a Communist organ. Other debased leftist publications, including The Nation (still an open Commie rag) and the New York Post (then a far-left newspaper), went after Kazan. Playwright Arthur Miller (his longtime friend and collaborator) and Stalinist/writer Lillian Hellman joined in the assault. Even today, the lamestream will portray the “Kazan affair” as an illustration of “McCarthyism” but never mention the salient facts. The most outstanding item to consider is the fact that HCUA was a project of the House of Representatives; McCarthy was a senator.

Even today, people will invoke the “terror” of the “blacklist.” Kazan’s exposure that peeled open the Communist infiltration was the reason for the blacklist (supposedly). Hogwash and balderdash! The blacklist would have occurred even without Kazan’s exposure. On their own, after the HCUA hearings, Hollywood executives felt compelled to deny jobs to about three hundred Communists in Hollywood. About 150 more people were denied jobs in television and radio. [2] Nevertheless, the reporters who do not know history will spout off that “thousands” of people (Communist or not) had their careers ruined because of Kazan and others such as McCarthy. Nonsense! What is not reported are the correct numbers (as supplied above). Furthermore, a number of those blacklisted could continue to work under assumed names. The above illustrates why the McCarthyism mantra continues to this day — people are unaware of the facts at best or at worst they are in sympathy with Communism (debased woke folk). [3] Today, the Caustic Cancel Culture Pogrom, managed by the same Commie crowd and their puppets (useful debased woke folk), have the upper hand terminating the jobs of many people who dare question the new Communist woke worldview.

Just two years after his testimony, Kazan directed “On the Water Front,” which he considered an allegory about his life. The brave Budd Schulberg, who also turned against Communism in 1951, wrote the script. This work by these two brave former Communists inspired the public and Hollywood. Kazan forged ahead to produce many more wholesome movies. Other well-known actors that stared in his movies included Montgomery Cliff, Lee Remick, Natalie Wood, Warren Beatty, and Kirk Douglas. In the 1970s, Kazan devoted more of his time to writing.

In his autobiography “Elia Kazan: A Life,” he wrote “No one who did what I did, whatever his reasons, came out of it undamaged… I did not. Here I am, thirty-five years later, still worrying over it. I knew what it would cost me. Do I now feel ashamed of what I did? ... The truth is that within a year I’d stopped feeling guilty or even embarrassed about what I’d done...”

The measure of the success of Communist infiltration in Hollywood is the virtually total absence of movies to this day that chronicle the primary drama of the last century: the struggle for freedom against totalitarian communism. There are just a few exceptions with the motion picture Dr. Zhivago being one notable example. Nevertheless, not one Hollywood film has ever depicted the horrors of the Soviet-induced famine in Ukraine, the Gulags, the Moscow show trials, or the Hungarian uprising against the Soviet military. For the cogent un-woke folk reader, this sure proves the salient point. Specifically, the debased lamestream media and Hollywood were, and are, indeed Communist fronts.

In 1983, Kazan was honored with a Life Achievement award at a Kennedy Center ceremony. In 1999, he received an Honorary Oscar, and your author can clearly remember the television footage showing Warren Beatty applauding while Nick Nolte remained seated with his arms folded in his lap. This award was due in part to the persistent lobbying by Karl Malden and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences (sponsor of the Oscar night). Sad to say, the announcement of this event gave birth to some bitter protests, and right on cue the debased lamestream media made much of Kazan’s supposed “betrayal” of old friends. What a bunch of debased Communist creeps.

In 1932, Kazan married playwright Molly Day Thatcher and they had four children. She passed away in 1963. In 1967, he married the actress/writer Barbara Loden and she passed away in 1980. In 1982, Kazan married Frances Rudge.

On September 28, 2003, Elia Kazan passed away, in his Manhattan home. The debased lamestream media gave just a fleeting mention of the passing of this wonderful 94-year-old man. Films directed by Kazan garnered 22 Academy Awards, 62 nominations, and two Directing Oscars. Kazan had a liberal worldview, but he would be “moderate” by today’s standards. He gave us wonderful memories of the once upon a time decent entertainment industry.

Notes:

Conversations with Marlon Brando by Lawrence Grobel, 1991
The “Hollywood Ten” were in this “list.” These were the unfriendly Communist witnesses who refused to cooperate with HCUA. While it is not illegal to be a member of the Communist Party, each of the Hollywood Ten served time for contempt of Congress.
“Debased woke folk” is Fred’s term for those who have lost critical thinking skills (debased) and have a programed mind (woke) because of the psychological operations of the media and education systems. The opposite: cogent non-woke folk.

###

Cogent Author and Publisher, Frederick R. Smith
Cogent Editor, Sean Tinney

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

Recommend (serious) Humor

The Peoples Cube

Recommended Videos (all top shelf)

Wednesday, February 10, 2021

Cancelled Crusades and More!

At the 1999 “Prayer Breakfast,” then-President Clinton gushed “Throughout history people have prayed to God to aid them in war. I do believe that even though Adolph Hitler preached a perverted form of Christianity, God did not want him to prevail.” Does Clinton believe this tale about Hitler and Christianity? Perhaps. The Main Lame Stream Media (MLSM) and Marxist academia rarely supply the complete story. The audience has little reference to place things in a proper and full perspective.

The MLSM may have found it convenient to focus on the fact that Hitler had received a Catholic Baptism. The truth — all his adult life Hitler hated Christianity in general.

The myopic vision about Christianity and the pagan/occult Nazi regime is one of many examples. Another is the “horror” of Christianity vs. the downplaying of Communism. See The Black Book of Communism. For example, the Crusades may have claimed about two million lives in three centuries. Pol Pot in Cambodia directed the murder of about the same number of people in three years. To summarize, Communism is the fulfillment of atheism. But of course, your author qualifies this statement because not all atheists are bad.

The mantra used by the debased woke crowd is the notion that Catholicism committed the “vast horrors” of the Crusades and the Inquisition. And our good protestant friends are not immune; the same woke crowd makes sure we all learn about the Salem Witch Trials. Revisionist type of history that is. For the serious student, there are plenty of documents that supply a comprehensive history of each of these points of interest. The gaslighting of this topic compels your author to write a summary of each one.

The Crusades

Despite the debased assertions, four centuries of Muslim aggression and conquest occurred. The Christian world defended itself with the Crusades. As such, it was not about colonialism or unprovoked aggression nor was it an affront by an aggressive pope or even ambitious knights. Rather than surrendering to the Muslim worldview, Christianity as a culture and faith had to defend itself. It is proper to compare the Crusades to western culture’s actions in the two world wars.

In the seventh century, the religion of Mohammed was spreading. Millions of Christians faced the choice to convert or pay the ultimate price. Mohammed was born in Mecca in what is now Saudi Arabia around the year 570 A. D. At the age of 40, he began to preach as God’s prophet of the “true religion.” Mohammed set up a theocratic state at Medina after 622 and began to convert Arabia to Islam.

Following Mohammed’s death in 632, Muslim forces began to direct outward their warlike energies. Previously, the Arabs sparred with each other and the result was a century of conquest. In less than a century, Muslims had seized control of Syria, the Palestine area, and North Africa. Muslims seized control of southern Spain, invaded France, and were threatening to invade Rome. Charles Martel held them at bay at the battle of Thurs (Tours) in France in 732. Also, during this same time, the Muslims took control of Jerusalem, but they allowed Christians to come to the Holy City to worship. In the eleventh century, the Christians were under persecution by a sect of Islam called the Seljuk Turks. This same sect had a fort at Nicaea near Constantinople. In the 820s the Muslims conquered Sicily and Crete.

Byzantium (a part of Christendom), was under the leadership of Emperor Alexius. He tried to expel the Turks from the area. Alexius requested help from the Pope. In response, in 1095 Pope Urban from France was able to mobilize an army of thousands. The warriors and knights expelled the Turks from the Holy City.

Four years after Urban II’s speech in France, some of the frustrated Crusaders made it to Jerusalem. Many of them died on the way and the frustrated warriors arrived in Jerusalem. These aggravated soldiers massacred thousands of inhabitants. They did so in the barbaric manner practiced during warfare at those times. History shows us that they had slaughtered Muslims and many Jews. The conquest of the Turks by the Crusaders paved the way for the Holy City to return to its Christian roots.

After they were checked in their expansion in Western Europe, Muslims later conquered Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and parts of India. The Crusades lasted about two centuries, and the only successful campaign was the retaking of Jerusalem. Fifty years after the battle for Jerusalem, the Muslims captured one of the key outposts Crusaders had created to protect the region (Edessa). This was the spark of the Second Crusade lead by St. Bernard of Clairveaux.

Unfortunately, as in all wars, many of those who were on the “front lines” were not in the fight for pure reasons. Since many were criminals, the people cherish their absence from Europe and many of the Crusaders were Christians in name only. Late in the Crusades, the Venetians used the Crusaders. Covertly, they destroyed one of their main competitors, the city of Constantinople (a part of Christendom). This helped to weaken Istanbul, Turkey, then Constantinople (Byzantine Empire), and caused it to fall to the Ottoman Turks in 1453, who by 1683 were encroaching as far as Vienna, Austria in 1683.

The capture of Constantinople by the Crusaders was the foundation for the waning popularity of their movement. A terrible military expedition was the Children’s Crusade. Here, the propaganda aroused children resulting in their deaths or capture into slavery.

The Muslims were being consistent with the Koran. This book sanctions the use of force to win converts. Christians were not being consistent with Christianity by this kind of warfare. Many of the Christians would not take up arms.

Many authors claim that the Crusaders were opportunists. They claim the Crusaders took advantage to rob and pillage away from their homeland. Research dispels that urban legend, and it would be dishonest to dispel the truth that elements of the Crusades plundered. While a few did become wealthy from the crusades, the vast majority returned with nothing.

Often, luminaries tout that the principal goal of the Crusades was to force Muslims into Christianity. The truth is Muslims in territories taken by the Crusaders could keep their religion. They also kept their property and livelihood. The only notable attempt at peaceful conversion was by the Franciscans in the 13th century. That was unsuccessful and abandoned.

All the above aside, we never should sweep terrible things committed in the name of “Christianity” under the rug. Nor should we look the other way because of the fear of Caustic Cancel Culture Pogrom (CCCP) using the epitaph of “Crusader.” Remember the Rwandans, as they mourn the 800,000 or so that have lost their lives in recent years. Or how about the plight of the Christians in Sudan? The MLSM has made it politically incorrect to discuss details about a certain religion. To talk about the “M” religion gets one accused by the CCCP of being a bigot. Meanwhile, to debase Christianity in general and Catholicism particular is more than acceptable, it is a sport. For balance, this author knows good people who adhere to the teachings of the Koran. It is a minority that causes the problems.

Brain Holdsworth’s “In Defense of the Crusades” video is an excellent recap of the above, and more.

The Inquisition

The Spanish Inquisition was a court set up in 1233 to decide whether a Christian accused of heresy was guilty of holding heretical beliefs. If guilty, the purpose of the court was then to persuade him to abandon his false beliefs and repent. If he remained intractable, the court turned him over to the secular authority. Death by burning at the stake was usually the punishment given to condemned heretics.

The key to understanding the Inquisition lay in the corruption of certain people in the Church at that time. Simony (buying or selling of ecclesiastical pardons and offices) was rampant. In short, there were many bad men throughout various levels of leadership of the Church at the time. This is analogous to the evil that has infiltrated the Church today – the sexual predators. As a side note, in the case of sexual predators, the debased folk enamored with moral relativism seem to have a black and white worldview here.

Wealth and power have charms even for bishop and priest. In the Church, as it grew through the centuries, wealth and power depended upon the obedience of the flock. A hardy disputant who questioned his corrupt ecclesiastical superior was a mutineer of the worst kind. If he succeeded in attracting followers, they became the nucleus of a rebellion that threatened a revolution. The motive, good or evil, prompted the suppression of such sedition at all hazards and by every available method.

In this context, some religious movements arose among the laity. Movements that said that the Church was not necessary for salvation. One of them, the Waldensians, was a precursor to modern evangelicals. But another one, that of the Albigensian (also known as Catharism) rejected the historic Christian faith. Another crusade constrained these new religions. Although many faced death, these heresies continued. What the Crusade was unable to carry out, the Inquisition was set up to complete.

Historians do not know for certain how many thousands faced death in the Inquisition. There are some reasonable approximations. Estimates show the entire number killed has been between 30,000 and 300,000. Any number is bad, but the total is far less than the “millions” the anti-God crew gush forth. New research shows that 1% of the 125,000 people tried in Spain by Church tribunals for heresy ended up dead.

The Catholic Church has every right to disavow the excesses of the Inquisition because oppression forms no part of her Creed; that these atrocities have been grossly exaggerated; that the Inquisition was a political tribunal; Catholic Prelates were amenable to its sentence as well as Moors and Jews; the Popes denounced and labored hard to abolish its sanguinary features. [1]

The Spanish Inquisition was a monstrous epic of brutality and barbarity. According to some historians, it occurred in part to promote national unity. Were these Christians persecuting non-Christians? It was the very opposite. Some writings suggest that the members of the Inquisition Party were not Christians. They lived in the Dark Ages when the gospel of Jesus Christ had been all but forgotten. The faith was so perverted that it bore little resemblance to that given to us by Jesus Christ. The corrupt authorities at the time of the Inquisition were banning the Bible.

The Salem Witchcraft Trials

During the late Middle Ages, the killing of thousands of alleged witches occurred in the name of Christ. The 1486 book by Jacob Spener, Malleus Maleficarum (The Witches’ Hammer), played a significant role in this madness. This hysteria even made a temporary appearance among the otherwise-civil Puritans of New England.

In the Salem witchcraft trials of 1692, judges of Puritan New England followed Deuteronomy 19:15. They accepted the evidence of two “unimpeachable” witnesses. But in 1692, some Salem judges accepted “spectral evidence.” This is testimony by individuals with a ghostly likeness of the accused. They (supposedly) burned houses, sunk ships, etc. Tribunals targeted several hundred of the accused and the lives of twenty ended with hanging. Contrary to popular opinion, no witches faced burning in America.

Hidden from the history books is the fact that the Christians helped to stop this hysteria. Increase Mather and his son Cotton, the leading Puritan ministers of the day, spoke openly against it. Increase wrote a pamphlet “Cases of Conscience,” in which he called for the implementation of the biblical pattern of two witnesses, and the killings stopped.

Sources:

Why Apologize for the Spanish Inquisition? by Rev. Fr. Alphonsus Maria Duran; Publisher, Eric Gladkowski; February 1, 2000

Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F. Madden; Publisher, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; October 1, 1999

What If Jesus Had Never Been Born by D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe; Publisher, Nelson Reference; April 9, 1997

Note:

James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, cited from his book The Faith of Our Fathers, 1876, Page 212.

###

Cogent Author and Publisher, Frederick R. Smith
Cogent Editor, Sean Tinney

Fred Smith’s clipped news items

Recommended Websites (bold is top shelf)

Recommend (serious) Humor

The Peoples Cube

Recommended Videos (all top shelf)