Change the Name of the Hoover Building

[PatrickHenry]

Resolved: That the United States should discontinue honoring J Edgar Hoover.

Hoover was the first Director of the FBI.

But he was not a good man nor were his values consistent with the mainstream of American life and thought.

First, he was a tyrant, no fan of grassroots democracy: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/24/hoover.mass.arrests/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
He would have rounded up americans like a Gestapo thug if he had been allowed to.
He carried out a program of subversion to chase down "communists" that included burglaries, illegal wiretaps, forging doucment, planting evidence and spreading false personal information. All against Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO.
He accumulated information calculated to embarrass high-profile Americans, especially politicians in a cynical game to maintain his power over Washington's policies. Many historians think it was effective, even though distasteful, since its other name is BLACKMAIL.

Second he was a hypocrite in his personal life. He was likely a homosexual and a cross-dresser, or else so twisted inside that he could have nothing approaching a normal emotional life. His "associate", Clyde Tolson, also never married, was likely his homosexual lover as well as the Deputy director...surely nepotistic in the extreme. He inherited Hoover's home and fortune when Hoover died.

Hoover was a racist, who hated the civil rights struggle and refused to thoroughly investigate the murders of blacks during that era.

For these and many other misdeeds, J Edgar Hoover's name should not grace the FBI building in Washington and he should not be honored by our political establishment.

[lily]

Oh...........I agree the name should be changed.........but I also know it'll never happen. That would mean the FBI would have to admit a grave mistake.........not only that, but I think it's what they still stand for.

[apdst]

He carried out a program of subversion to chase down "communists" that included burglaries, illegal wiretaps, forging doucment, planting evidence and spreading false personal information.

And amazingly, Hoover rooted out many-a-Communist spy. Let us not forget that Hoover--under FDR's orders--used illegal wire taps to permanently cripple the Ku Klux Klan. People usually leave that little fact out, when slamming Hoover. I wonder why that is.

Whatever faults Hoover may have had as a person, he built one helluva crime fighting orginization. He got rid of Communists, Nazis, klansmen and gangsters. I say, job well done.

[PatrickHenry]

And amazingly, Hoover rooted out many-a-Communist spy. Let us not forget that Hoover--under FDR's orders--used illegal wire taps to permanently cripple the Ku Klux Klan. People usually leave that little fact out, when slamming Hoover. I wonder why that is.You favor having the nation's top police officer commit crimes? The end justifies the means? See, that leads us right into the conspiracy of 9/11. There are actually men like you, who have authority over men without consciences and believe that if they decide to do something...it must be right, because they NEVER do anything wrong...

Whatever faults Hoover may have had as a person, he built one helluva crime fighting orginization. He got rid of Communists, Nazis, klansmen and gangsters. I say, job well done.
He got rid of? By lawful means or unlawful?

Bourne, you need to do some historical research.

Commies were an obsession with the guy. And he pursued them aggressively. Heh. So did Joe McCarthy... but it isn't illegal to be a commie. The FBI is supposed to fight CRIME.

The Nazis were incorporated into the US establishment after WW2. See Operation Paperclip and the Gehlen Org. Hoover didn't stop that.

And gangsters? Are you saying that Organized Crime came to a halt due to J Edgar Hoover? That would not be a very bright thing to say.

And I must say that Hoover did little to help the black civil rights movement. There were a lot of crimes against the activists in that era and Hoover wasn't too sympathetic. I understand he may have even pulled some dirty tricks against ML King. What would be your take on that type of thing?

[apdst]

You favor having the nation's top police officer commit crimes?

C'mon, now, don't put words into my mouth and give me the, "people like you", routine. Pahleese!

Commies were an obsession with the guy. And he pursued them aggressively. Heh. So did Joe McCarthy... but it isn't illegal to be a commie. The FBI is supposed to fight CRIME.

You're right. It's not illegal to be a Commie. However, it is illegal to be a Commie spy. During Hoover's time, The American Communist Party was a conduit for Soviet spies, operating within The United States. The, "Pumpkin Papers", proved the involvement of Communist Party members in Soviet spying in The United States. Even if members weren't actual spies, they were, at best, knowledgable of the espionage operations that were going on. I think they call that, "complicity"?

The Nazis were incorporated into the US establishment after WW2. See Operation Paperclip and the Gehlen Org. Hoover didn't stop that.

There were several Nazi agents, captured by Hoover's FBI, and execution orders issued by FDR.

And gangsters? Are you saying that Organized Crime came to a halt due to J Edgar Hoover? That would not be a very bright thing to say.

It wouldn't be a bright thing, if that's what I had actually said. There you go again. Hoover didn't, as you say, "halt", organized crime. However, he put more heat on them than anyone, before, or since.

There were a lot of crimes against the activists in that era and Hoover wasn't too sympathetic.

How many agents were sent to one little jerk-water Mississippi town to look for THREE guys? 200? 300? Show us any other missing persons case that called for the deployment of that many agents.

Bourne, you need to do some historical research.

I'm not Bourne and I have done the research.

To answer your larger question: Yes! I think that the end justifies the means. I believe that the KKK, Nazi Party, Communist Party, the Skin Heads and any other reincarnation, or spin off of any of those groups should be illegal.

[PatrickHenry]

I think that the end justifies the means. I believe that the KKK, Nazi Party, Communist Party, the Skin Heads and any other reincarnation, or spin off of any of those groups should be illegal.
OK, then!

That's an understandable sentiment.

It'll get a lawman arrested, but I know what you mean.

But Hoover DIDN'T get hung for his crimes against those who had not done wrong.

That's why I want his name off the FBI building.

And my apology for mixing you up with my buddy, Bourne...

[apdst]

But Hoover DIDN'T get hung for his crimes against those who had not done wrong.

The activities that Hoover participated in--and that were approved by the presidents he served under--may have been illegal, but the targets of his operations were very, very guilty.

The Constitution isn't a suicide pact. I think that when dangerous criminals become untouchable, because of the protection provided them by The Constitution, it's time to bend the rules.

Alger Hiss was the deputy secretary of state for probably the most popular president in the history of The United States. He was also a Soviet spy. How does the FBI go about getting a warrant for someone in that position?

[Osborn F. Enready]

APDST said:
The activities that Hoover participated in--and that were approved by the presidents he served under--may have been illegal, but the targets of his operations were very, very guilty.

Illegal, is illegal. Unconstitutional, is unconstitutional.

Breaking the law in the name of justice, is akin to the old adage of performing the work of devils in the name of saintly goals.

Its all a matter of hypocrisy, and how much one feels they can fool themself about what IS a level playing field.

APDST said:
The Constitution isn't a suicide pact. I think that when dangerous criminals become untouchable, because of the protection provided them by The Constitution, it's time to bend the rules.

I have never, ever in history seen an example of this.

When one group breaks the rules and gets away with it, it sets precedent, and an UNacceptable precedent at that. It wreaks of elitism, of hypocrisy, and of blatant disregard for the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty.

APDST said:
Alger Hiss was the deputy secretary of state for probably the most popular president in the history of The United States. He was also a Soviet spy. How does the FBI go about getting a warrant for someone in that position?

By leaking it to the public, through the press, and making the PUBLIC DEMAND ACTION to achieve justice. The public does well with this when irrefutable facts are leaked.... the problem is, is that few irrefutable facts exist in Washington other than the fact that Washingtons political machine is almost entirely corrupted.

By doing it this way, it removes the ability of the spy to work effectively, creates a need for the spies host government to distance themselves from the spy, and leaves the spy in a position as he should be in, with no country, no honor, and waiting to face justice in the eyes of the law, by a NON-corrupted, NON-rule breaking, NON-biased legal system.

Also, the most important thing.... by doing things this way, you stop feeding fuel to those who make their political career on the PROOF that this system as most government systems, are corrupt from top to bottom.

That's my two cents.

[PatrickHenry]

How about changing the name of the Hoover building, Osborn?

[AlanC]

By leaking it to the public, through the press, and making the PUBLIC DEMAND ACTION to achieve justice. The public does well with this when irrefutable facts are leaked.... the problem is, is that few irrefutable facts exist in Washington other than the fact that Washingtons political machine is almost entirely corrupted.



This was attempted. The man at the forefront of investigating communist spies in govenrment was villified by govenment and a duplicitous press.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Patrick said:
How about changing the name of the Hoover building, Osborn?

You know me Pat, makes no difference as far as I am concerned. I would support the act of changing the name, but its not very high on my list of priorities.

Alan C said:
This was attempted. The man at the forefront of investigating communist spies in govenrment was villified by govenment and a duplicitous press.

Any links on the history of that Alan?

Its not that I don't believe you, its that I haven't read about that act taking place, and would like to see what materials were put out for the press.

[apdst]

I have never, ever in history seen an example of this.

Crips, Bloods, MS13, le Emme, la Cosanostra, Soviet spies holing high ranking positions in the government. Those are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. Maybe you should do more research?

Any links on the history of that Alan?

Read anything about Joe McCarthy.

By leaking it to the public, through the press, and making the PUBLIC DEMAND ACTION to achieve justice.

LOL...that's funny! You're one helluva comedian. That was a good one. Wow! Wouldn't that make it hear say? Therefore making it useless in court?

[AlanC]

Alan C said:
This was attempted. The man at the forefront of investigating communist spies in govenrment was villified by govenment and a duplicitous press.

Any links on the history of that Alan?

Its not that I don't believe you, its that I haven't read about that act taking place, and would like to see what materials were put out for the press.


I take it then that you have never heard of Senator McCarthy and his Senate hearings? The entire focus was to uncover and expose communist espionage existing in the highest levels of govenment. It was and has been consistently portrayed as an insidious witch hunt undertaken with no purpose. It is still looked upon as something evil and you will never ever read in the press that McCarthy was essentially right. There are those that still believe Algir Hiss and the Rosenbergs were framed and innocent. I will find the links if you need them.

[Osborn F. Enready]

APDST said:
Crips, Bloods, MS13, le Emme, la Cosanostra, Soviet spies holing high ranking positions in the government. Those are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head. Maybe you should do more research?

Sorry, none of those justify being treasonous to the Constitution, or removing the rights of citizens. :unreal:

APDST said:
Read anything about Joe McCarthy.

I have. Any suggestions, or just insults and marginalization? :grrrr:

ADPST said:
LOL...that's funny! You're one helluva comedian. That was a good one. Wow! Wouldn't that make it hear say? Therefore making it useless in court?

Irrefutable facts are never "just hear say".

AlanC said:
I take it then that you have never heard of Senator McCarthy and his Senate hearings? The entire focus was to uncover and expose communist espionage existing in the highest levels of govenment. It was and has been consistently portrayed as an insidious witch hunt undertaken with no purpose. It is still looked upon as something evil and you will never ever read in the press that McCarthy was essentially right. There are those that still believe Algir Hiss and the Rosenbergs were framed and innocent. I will find the links if you need them.

I have heard, and read a little about the Senate Hearings, but never read the hearings themselves.

Any informative source links would be appreciated.[hr]I would also state, as a rule, Senate and Congressional hearings are a dog and pony show used to do little else than smear people. Rarely, if ever, does justice or any meaningful good come from them.

[AlanC]

I have heard, and read a little about the Senate Hearings, but never read the hearings themselves.

Any informative source links would be appreciated.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would also state, as a rule, Senate and Congressional hearings are a dog and pony show used to do little else than smear people. Rarely, if ever, does justice or any meaningful good come from them.

I agree with you about most Congressional Hearings. They are for political posturing and grandstanding while providing little productive result.

I will find some good links on the McCarthy hearings as soon as I get some time.

[apdst]

Sorry, none of those justify being treasonous to the Constitution, or removing the rights of citizens

You would rather sit back and allow the afore mentioned groups violate the rights of citizens? Where do you draw the line?

The Constitution was never expected to be the Alpha and Omega for every situation. As I said, it's not a suicide pact. I, for one, am not willing to watch the country go up in flames just to uphold a criminal's constitutional rights.

[PatrickHenry]

Undermining anyone's rights undermines them all.

[Osborn F. Enready]

APDST said:
You would rather sit back and allow the afore mentioned groups violate the rights of citizens?

No, and that's not what I said. I said no group is worthy of violating the Constitution in the name of justice, if the government expects to retain any credibility.

APDST said:
Where do you draw the line?

Well, its not entirely up to me, or you, but it is up to us as individuals when it comes time to vote.

As an individual and ex-armed service member, I draw my line cleanly at the Constitution and Bill of Rights. No crime is worthy of sacrificing my, or the nations credibility and values, and I took an oath to uphold the Constitution from all enemies, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

Sometimes people with your viewpoint sound an awful lot like what I would call a "domestic enemey" to my Constitution and Bill of Rights.

APDST said:
The Constitution was never expected to be the Alpha and Omega for every situation.

You're right, and that isn't what I inferred. The BOR LIMITS THE REACH OF GOVERNMENT for a reason, and that limitation is guaranteed by this government, and this government BASES its credibility UPON IT. The Constitution sets the path for new laws to take, while the BOR limits the depth of those laws in affecting individual citizens.

APDST said:
As I said, it's not a suicide pact.

I don't see how it could be.

What I do see in your argument is a lot of coloring in your description to make it seem as though protecting individual rights is an "unworthy" obstacle in the name of justice. (never mind its the law of the land) That sounds like emotions ruling over reason, which is NEVER productive, and sounds like a lot of people have issues coping with fear.

APDST said:
I, for one, am not willing to watch the country go up in flames just to uphold a criminal's constitutional rights.

Its not your country any more than it is any other citizens, and YOU nor THE GOVERNMENT have the right to null and void those rights, NOR DOES ANY MAJORITY.

There is no criminal element in this country today that can't be caught with due respect to individual rights, due process and any other argument is a lie, a cop out, and a SHRUGGING OF DUTY to the Constitution, the citizens who TRUSTED those representatives and put them in office TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS, while doing their best to protect and defend the Constitution, the nation, and our way of life.

The problem is the majority of citizens are politically apathetic, ignorant of pressing issues (thanks to the monopolized corporate media), and most simply don't or WON'T make time to educate themselves about what is really happening, since its harder than simply watching a tv news channel or reading more than one or two papers.

Many of them are being forced by their currency devaluation (thanks to the fed favoring corporate intrests over citizen intrests) to work two jobs to maintain a moderate, to bare-bones existence while raising a one-child family and the last thing they "think" they have time for is "educating themselves" to make an informed choice on election day.

Well, their wrong.

If you don't have your way with politics, politics and politicians will have their way with you, and it seems a lot of my fellow citizens are damned to learn it the hard way.

Haven't they learned from Clinton and Bush, who both hold the same mentality it seems you are espousing?

“I can do any Goddamned thing I want. I'm President of the United States. I take care of my friends and I fuck with my enemies. That's the way it is. Anybody who doesn't like it can take a hike.”
-Bill Clinton, in a White House staff meeting, as reported by Capitol Hill Blue's Doug Thompson in his column on 1999-Apr-8, regarding sicking the IRS on Ken Starr

“If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.”
-President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

“If this were a dictatorship, things would be a lot simpler. As long as I was the dictator. Heh heh heh.”
-George W. Bush, 2000-Dec-18, in Washington DC, on the occasion of a public appearance with Democratic Congressional leaders

“It is important that you do not say that you [are] calling because the campaign asked you to, but because you are outraged with what was said about her.”
-campaign aide to Hillary Clinton, in a ca. 2000-Jul-19 bulk email asking the candidate's supporters to protest allegations that Clinton had once used the phrase “fucking Jew bastard” in anger

“What luck for the rulers that men do not think.”
-Adolf Hitler

“You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy.”
-Charles Manson, leader of a murderous cult of entirely unskeptical followers


IS it any suprise that the four front-runners in this election, two democrats, two republicans, are the most corrupt politicians in Washington for the year 2007?!?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007

Our government is being taken over by monied intrests, from the inside, and has been for the last 157 years.

As Bush would say, you are either "with them, or against them".

I stand against them, and I see Al-Quaeda, and all the groups you listed as equal enemies of my way of life as I do the overwhelming majority of both major parties canidates.

I still wouldn't ignore their rights in pursuing justice, however.

“America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.”
-Claire Wolfe, 1995-Nov[hr]AlanC said:
I will find the links if you need them.

Thanks Alan. If you find time to post them, I would enjoy educating myself a little more.

[apdst]

Quote:
APDST said:
As I said, it's not a suicide pact.

I don't see how it could be.

It can be, because affairs could fall into such disorder that an actual tyrrant would have grounds to suspend all rights, forever. The same way that tyrrants have taken power for thousands of years.

[Osborn F. Enready]

APDST said:
It can be, because affairs could fall into such disorder that an actual tyrrant would have grounds to suspend all rights, forever. The same way that tyrrants have taken power for thousands of years.


You mean like Bush's cabinet and appointees, who created the Unconstitutional Patriot Act, revoked habeus corpus, and who lied to get voted in(claiming a policy of no new nation building) and then reversing all of his stated positions under pressure?

They have certainly evoked emotionally, and proven objectively, to fit the bill of a group of tyrants, and a great clincher on his "lack of objectivity" was proven when he claimed he "communicated with God".

He, and most of his cabinet and appointees, are blatant and obvious hypocrites, sell-outs, and as "UN-American" as they come..... including those who aren't in jail YET. :shock:


Also, as a sidenote....

Many have tried to suspend rights, including some of our more "loved" (by the sheeple) Presidents, like FDR......

As long as I have arms, ammunition, my two hands and my spirit, my rights will never subside, cease to exist, or fail to be exercised, regardless of who is in charge, attempting to take over control, or creating havoc in our government.

Its the sheeple who sit and watch, and sanction through conscent and FAILING to have the nerve to speak out, stand out, march and ACT on their beliefs that are ALLOWING this nation to be taken over from the inside, by bi-partisan tyranny.

(Democrats by majority (today) echo the same philosophical positions today as communists of yesteryears, just as Republicans by majority (today) echo the same philosophical positions as fascists of yesteryears. This is what the sheeple get when they think "voting for the lesser of two evils" is a valid choice.)


ORWELLS 1984 will be in 2008, buy your tickets now, or boycott? Its your choice.

[apdst]

You mean like Bush's cabinet and appointees, who created the Unconstitutional Patriot Act, revoked habeus corpus

In an emergency, controlled suspension of certain laws is reasonable. It worked well for us during WW2 and during The Civil War.

Employment of The Patriot Act and revocation of habeus corpus when non-citizens are concerned is perfectly leagal and in this day and age, neccessary.

[Osborn F. Enready]

APDST said:
In an emergency, controlled suspension of certain laws is reasonable.

I would love to see an example you think is "reasonable".

APDST said:
It worked well for us during WW2 and during The Civil War.

It also started us down the path that brought us to where we are, a failing empire.

APDST said:
Employment of The Patriot Act and revocation of habeus corpus when non-citizens are concerned is perfectly leagal and in this day and age, neccessary.

Nonsense, and fear mongering.

What do you fear from the truth? Justice?