At one time, Americans believed that wholesale rewriting of history could happen only in the Soviet Union.
“The problem with writing about history in the Soviet Union,” went the joke, “is that you never know what’s going to happen yesterday.”
A classic example of this occurred within the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.
Lavrenti Beria had been head of the NKVD, the dreaded secret police, from 1938 to 1953. In 1953, following the death of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, Beria was arrested and executed on orders of his fellow Communist Party leaders.
Lavrenti Beria
But the Great Soviet Encyclopedia had just gone to press with a long article singing Beria’s praises.
What to do?
The editors of the Encyclopedia wrote an equally long article about “the Berring Straits,” which was to be pasted over the article about Beria, and sent this off to its subscribers. An unknown number of them decided it was safer to paste accordingly.
In the 1981 film, “Excalibur,” Merlin warns the newly-minted knights of the Round Table: “For it is the doom of men that they forget.”
Forgetting our past is dangerous, but so is “understanding” it incorrectly.
In Texas, state-mandated “history” textbooks omit selected events and persons from the historical record–such as Thomas Jefferson and Martin Luther King.
This can be as lethal to the truth as outright lying.
Joseph Stalin, for example, ordered that school textbooks omit all references to the major role played by Leon Trotsky, his arch-rival for power, during the Russian Revolution.
Similarly, in Texas students are required to study Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address alongside President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
Such “teaching” should be seen for what it is: A thinly-veiled attempt to legitimize the most massive case of treason in United States history.
(The Civil War started on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery opened fire on Fort Sumter, a United States fort in Charleston Harbor. Fort Sumter surrendered 34 hours later.
(At least 800,000 Southerners took up arms against the legally elected government of the United States.)
The late broadcast journalist, Edward R. Murrow, would have referred to this practice as “giving Jesus and Judas equal time.”
Recently, Jeb Bush has entered the “Rewriting History for Americans” contest.
On August 13, speaking at a national security forum in Davenport, Iowa, he defended the unprovoked 2003 invasion of Iraq by his brother, President George W. Bush:
“I’ll tell you though, that taking out Saddam Hussein turned out to be a pretty good deal.”
And he went on to defend the 2007 troop “surge”, calling it “a great success that made Iraq safer.

“I’ve been critical and I think people have every right to be critical of decisions that were made. In 2009, Iraq was fragile but secure. It was–its mission was accomplished in a way that there was security there.”
(Ironically, the phrase, “its mission was accomplished” proved an embarrassing reminder for the Bush family.
(A banner titled “Mission Accomplished” was displayed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln as George W. Bush announced–wrongly–that the war was over on May 1, 2003.)
Jeb Bush claimed that President Barack Obama had prematurely withdrawn troops from Iraq during his first term, thus allowing ISIS to “fill the void.”
One dissenter to Jeb Bush’s effort to rewrite his brother’s history is David Corn, Washington bureau chief for Mother Jones magazine.
Addressing Bush’s claims on the August 15 edition of The PBS Newshour, he said:
“I mean, I have to laugh a little bit, because I think he was setting a record for chutzpah.
“…It wasn’t until after his brother’s invasion of Iraq that you had something called al-Qaida in Iraq. And that was the group that morphed into ISIS.
“So ISIS is a direct result of the war in Iraq right there. And so he’s wrong on the history.
“But then he said what happened was that Obama and Hillary Clinton orchestrated this quick withdrawal after everything was secure. Nothing was really secure in 2009-2010.
“…But it was George W. Bush in December 2008 who created the agreement with [Iraqi] Prime Minister [Nouri] [al-]Maliki that said that U.S. troops had to be out by 2011.
“And then Obama didn’t renegotiate that. And there is a lot of question as to whether he could even have, given the political situation in Baghdad itself.
“So Bush is totally–Jeb Bush is totally rewriting this.”
Click here: Brooks and Corn on Cuba as campaign issue
This is no small matter. George W. Bush’s needless and unprovoked war on Iraq:
- Cost the lives of 4,486 American soldiers.
- Wounded another 32,226 troops.
- Resulted in the deaths of an estimated 655,000 Iraqis.
- Cost the American treasury at least $2 trillion.
- Turned up no Weapons of Mass Destruction–Bush’s pretext for going to war.
- Led to the rise of Al-Qaeda–and later ISIS–in Iraq.
- Strengthened theocratic Iran by removing its major secularist opponent.
All of which simply proves, once again, that the past is never truly dead. It simply waits to be re-interpreted by each new generation–with some interpretations winding up closer to the truth than others.
Or, in this case, each new Presidential candidate of the Bush family.
1984 NOVEL, ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHRISTMAS, CNN, COMMERCIALISM, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FOX NEWS, GEORGE ORWELL, JESUS, MEGYN KELLY, NBC NEWS, ROMAN EMPIRE, RUPERT MURDOCH, SANTA CLAUS, SATURNALIA, STARBUCK'S, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WAR ON CHRISTMAS
HUCKSTERS AND STUPIDS
In Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 10, 2015 at 10:49 pmIt’s that time of year again–a time of
Christmas is special, so, each year, the executives at Fox News find a new way to stir up emotions by resurrecting the “war on Christmas” slander.
Stirring up false controversies is a daily assignment for the alleged reporters of this company owned by Right-wing patriarch Rupert Murdoch.
In 2013, it fell to Fox hostess Megyn Kelly to carry the ball. And she did so on December 11 on “The Kelly File,” her popular Fox News program.
Referring to an article by Slate writer Aisha Harris on “Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore,” she said:
“When I saw this headline, I kinda laughed and I said, ‘Oh, this is ridiculous. Yet another person claiming it’s racist to have a white Santa.’
“And by the way, for all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white. But this person is maybe just arguing that we should also have a black Santa. But, you know, Santa is what he is, and just so you know, we’re just debating this because someone wrote about it, kids.”
Of course, Santa Claus is a completely fictional character. Arguing about his skin color is as pointless as arguing about his weight.
But Kelly wasn’t content to talk only about Santa. So she turned next to Jesus, a historical figure about whom we have not a single reference to his appearance, let alone a picture.
“Just because it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn’t mean it has to change. You know, I mean, Jesus was a white man, too,” Kelly said.
“He was a historical figure; that’s a verifiable fact–as is Santa, I want you kids watching to know that–but my point is: How do you revise it, in the middle of the legacy of the story, and change Santa from white to black?”
Santa Claus a verifiable historical figure? Not even Charlie Brown, in the annually telecast “Peanuts” special, would make that claim.
Two years later, it’s Donald Trump who has claimed center-stage in “defending” Christmas. And the target of his ire? Starbucks.
In years past, its disposable coffee cups have featured snowflakes, winter scenes, reindeer and Christmas ornaments.
But this year, Starbucks decided to go with a minimalist, all-red design, its only feature being the company’s green and white logo.
This has angered some religious conservatives, who generally care more about symbols than substance.
It’s the old “war on Christmas” mantra all over again. And Trump–who hopes to win evangelical votes in Iowa and South Carolina–is happy to become its biggest cheerleader.
“I guarantee if I become president, we’re going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ at every store,” he promised during a campaign rally in October.
Donald Trump
Fast forward to November 9, and the Starbucks “controversy.” Addressing a crowd of several thousands in Springfield, Illinois, Trump said:
“Did you read about Starbucks? No more Merry Christmas on Starbucks.
“I have one of the most successful Starbucks, in Trump Tower. Maybe we should boycott Starbucks? I don’t know. Seriously, I don’t care. That’s the end of that lease, but who cares?
“If I become president, we’re all going to be saying Merry Christmas again, that I can tell you.”
Trump did not explain how he would coerce non-Christian Americans–such as atheists, Jews and Muslims–to observe a Christian holiday.
Those who insist (whether they believe it or not) that Christmas is an endangered species should consider the following:
In George Orwell’s classic novel, 1984, Oceania is always at war with Eurasia or Eastasia. Its citizens are kept in a constant state of frenzy as they’re directed to search for endless “enemies of the state.”
This, in turn, allows the unseen rulers of Oceania to run their dictatorship without interference.
It’s a lesson well-known to hucksters like Donald Trump and the men who run Fox News.
Share this: