From: Hank Roth <odin@halcyon.halcyon.com>
Subject: REDBAITING on the nets...
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 21:03:48 GMT

REDBAITING ON THE NETS
 
On a Jewish (Fidonet) echo conference which I don't usual read 
but which I accidently browsed I came across this very revealing 
and personal diatribe against me. It was NOT a private exchange, 
but was broadcasted very publicly for ALL to read on a public 
echo conference so I have no compulsion against sharing it with 
everyone to see how it demonstrates the paranoid "Jewish" 
right-wing lunatic fringe and how they use "redbaiting" to 
manipulate public opinion. 
 
 ---------------------------Quoted as copied----------------------
 
From: Murray Kahl                                                         
     
To:   Y. Y. Hodakov                                                       
     
Subj: Re: URGENT                                                          
     
                                                                          
     
This fellow Hank Roth, a Jew, is from a different background 
[than ARF] as 
he is a communist,  despises all religions equally and does 
        ~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
little except criticize Israel, posts full texts of PLO 
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
speeches, whines continually how Israel is mistreating the   
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    ~~~~~~~~~~~
Arabs, every possible cliche you can possibly imagine.                    
     
~~~~~~~
He wants revolution to destroy the corrupt, capitalist system, 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and it is only a plot between the UN and the US to take 
                 ~~~~
over and free the proletariat (sounds familiar), and 
 worst part is that whenever possible he edits the material he 
 has to post and deletes information, or refuses to answer 
questions. One example is he posts many screens of text of a 
                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
speech from one who hates Jews and Israel with every inch of 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
his soul, and all he would name him was an "observer" at this 
UN meeting (I have mentioned this before). He didn't have the 
courage to  say that the PLO has observer status and this was the 
speech of a PLO official. If he doesn't post at least 10 
                                                ~~~~~~~~
posts a day critisizing Israel,  American Jews, any Jews (he 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
has also attacked Chabad specifically) something is wrong. What 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compounds this is that I have seen the same posts on other      
areas in both Fidonet and the Internet and he has admitted that 
                                                  ~~~~~~~~
he does this with a "group."                                              
                  
                     ~~~~~
I have never once seen him display the slightest sympathy for 
                                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jewish victims of terrorism (Toledano, Helena Rapp etc.), but 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
always tells us these sad stories of Arabs, and asks for 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
sympathy, AND letters of protest to everyone imaginable.                  
                                                  
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have offered to debate him many times, and a legal scholarly 
debate on  areas such as the 4th Geneva Convention, but all 
I see is his tuchas as he runs, and he claims he is an 
                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
attorney with experience in International law.    
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
----------------------<END of QUOTED TEXT>----------------------
 
[Kahl's [PUBLIC] scathing and irrational personal attack on me 
speaks voluminously about his mental condition, his paranoia, 
his chauvinism and very specificially his "redbaiting." -----HR]
 
 
Lately I have been the target of some very persistent 
"redbaiting" from Murray Kahl, ET AL. The tactic is the same 
whenever anyone challenges the dominent paradigm. It is part of 
the right wing reality to fear change and to oppose dissent.  
 
This "red-baiting," has been used by demagogues for years and 
also by the innocent. It is a virtual reductio ad absurdum for 
some [the innocent] to oppose distributional imbalances and at the 
same time defend the established order. While exploitation of labor 
is a form of injustice akin to theft, the labouring poor have in 
spite of that been conservative, patriotic, religious and 
subservient to the paternalism of power. And they are confused 
and manipulated by "redbaiting."
 
It [redbaiting] has been part of our culture from the founding of 
the United States.  Though there were no reds then, and 
"redbaiting"  specificly began after the 1917 Russian Revolution, 
but historically it had a parallel usage from the close of the 
18th century to attack whoever was on the cutting edge of social 
change.  Jeffersonian democrats were referred to pejoratively as 
"Jacobins", to imply a guilty association with the most radical 
wing of the French Revolution. 
 
Prior to the Civil War, those who would advocate the abolishment 
of slavery were likewise denounced by pro-slavery opponents as 
"abolitionists", the term of opporobrium then.
 
"Anarchists" were the boogie men of the labor movement in the 
1800s, those who helped and inspired unionism. 
 
As long as we have injustice in society, there will be "baiting" 
of one form or another. It is a preferred demagoguery of the 
apologists for class oppression, for race oppression, ethnic and 
sex oppression. 
 
And this insideous "red-baiting" also serves to divert attention 
from the issues and to manipulate public opinion. Our history is 
replete with examples where "scapegoating" and "red-baiting" has 
set back class struggle for justice. 
 
But struggles have been successful also, for civil rights and 
civil liberties; many of these battles won just in the last 40 
to 50 years, but perhaps they could have been won in less time 
if we opposed the baiting from the right. 
 
It took 23 years to abolish the House Un-American Activities 
Committee (HUAC). These irrational attacks on those who challenge 
injustice by scapegoating and baiting them blunted the effect 
of a real "free" market of ideas.
 
Attacks the peace movement, women's lib, union organizing and FBI 
misuse of power has in part been possible by manipulating 
public sentiment through baiting. There is today greater 
awareness of these abuses of power by federal intelligence and 
law enforcement agencies which are all a matter of public record. 
 
We now know (from FBI files) that all areas of social activism 
not only on the LEFT but also the center of the political 
spectrum were the target of FBI scrutiny and surveillance. And we 
now know these official "redbaiters" also carried out unlawful 
and unconstitutional acts to disrupt, harass and even incite to 
murder. In Greensboro, NC in 1979 five members of the Communist 
Workers Party, (most were Jewish doctors) were murdered by the 
Klan and COINTELPRO (counter-intelligence program) was implicated 
by infiltrating the KLAN and fomenting the confrontation. 
 
Some, like Kahl expect everyone to satisfy some kind of 
politically right-wing correct litmus test as his incessant 
inquisitorial tone would imply. And pragmatically, witch-hunters 
historically have not and do not accept honest answers. What he 
wants to hear and will not be satisfied until he hears is that I 
[and my group, however they may be] are planning the violent 
overthrow of the U.S. government. He won't accept anything less. 
His arguments are too often extraneous to the subject matter and 
consistently keeps coming back to this conspiracy theory of his, 
and eluding to me and my "groups", which are all figments of a 
very wild imagination. 
 
"Redbaiting" is like a "political smear" and nothing new.  In 
our time we have heard "liberals" besmirched and denigrated 
It is a mechanism employed by those who fear change to discredit 
those who attempt to bring change. 
 
The baiting is an attempt to discredit by alleging a communist or 
socialist association, and this has been the most common 
political smear employed in the United States during this 
century. We shouldn't forget that it's most evil and devastating 
manifestation occurred during the "McCarthy period" of the 
1950s, when a cloud of fear and suspicion hung over this entire 
country. 
 
These same people employ "terrorist-baiting" against the Arabs, 
and especially against ALL Palestinians. To the baiter, there are 
NO good Palestinians, none that can be trusted and all are 
members of some terrorist organization. They do it with Muslems, 
they do it with the Japanese and many of these baiters who are 
NOT Jewish, bait the Jews. To some Christian and also anti-
Christian groups, Communism has always been a Jewish conspiracy 
(Ask the Liberty Lobby.) 
 
Lately we call those the government justifies targeting, like 
Noriega, "drug dealers," used to justify an invasion. He was 
baited by the social order in power in this country. No matter 
that the CIA has dirty hands when it comes to drug involvement 
and Noriega was our man in Panama. But the baiting was the 
excuse. 
 
The baiting was the reason the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, a 
legislative product of the McCarthy era, and has been used by the 
government since that time to deport foreign-born dissenters and 
to deny entry to the U.S. to foreign visitors for political 
reasons. It is "redbaiting" that kept them out. The law, by the 
way was enacted over President Truman's veto, and bars Communists 
[and others] whose it is believed by allowing them in might be 
"prejudicial to the public interest." 
 
Among the more publicized McCarran-Walter Act exclusions in 
recent years are: Nino Pasti, a retired Italian Air Force General 
who was barred for opposing American nuclear deployments in 
Europe; Hortense Allende, the widow of Salvador Allende, the 
former President of Chile assassinated in 1973 during a bloody 
coup in which the CIA played a role; Four relatives of Salvadoran 
political prisoners who were invited to receive a human rights 
award in Washington, D.C.
 
In February, 1987 seven Palestinians with Jordanian passports, 
and the African spouse of one of them, were rounded up, shackled 
and jailed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, under 
provisions of the McCarran Walter Act. Government prosecutors 
were unable to present any evidence of violent or criminal acts, 
and the immigration judge eventually freed them all on bail 
despite the government's protests. 
 
This renewed offensive by netters, who tend to the right anyway 
[against peaceful dissent] is the logical extension of 
the Reagan/Bush rhetoric which discredits through "red-baiting" and 
"terrorist-baiting."  
 
Much of the "red-baiting" and "terrorist-baiting" are the current 
manifestations of a long line of scapegoating tactics employed by 
persons who to some degree hold a conspiracy view of history. 
Rather than deal with issues, they reduce debate to an 
inquisition to ferret out some real or imagined connection 
between the proponent of a viewpoint and some vague mysterious 
conspiracy.  This obsession with conspiracies was described by 
the late Professor Richard Hofstadter in his classic essay, "The 
Paranoid Style in American Politics." 
 
Hofstadter says that the political smear is a "paranoid style" 
often aided and abetted by disinformation which emanates from 
members of the government [of the social order] and it is the 
hallmark of the authoritarian right-wing. 
 
It is our democratic right to work for peaceful change.
Unfortunately "red-baiting" only diverts attention from the 
substantive matters under discussion, and prevents the real 
issues from being considered. There is no forum that is 
appropriate for the irrationality of "redbaiting." 
 
"Redbaiting" by Murray Kahl or anyone else is a breach of good 
sense and belittles these conferences, and never tends to move a 
discussion forward. 
 
Any visceral, vitriolic attacks against conferees divert our 
attention from the context of the discussion. I admit to falling 
into that trap at times too, especially when I am responding to 
someone who I perceive to be a bigot or demagogue. To some extent 
that is a natural human frailty and because we are ALL [all of us 
who think and talk] guilty at times, we need to try harder if we 
are to have proper forums and some degree of `intellectual' 
discourse.  
 
 
                     Hank Roth
 
 
[via P_news]

Xref: sparky alt.activism:19797 alt.politics.usa.misc:718 talk.politics.misc:65211