Charles Funk in his book, “A Hog on Ice,” observes that when someone says a speaker using this expression is referring to someone they wouldn’t recognize. Perhaps they once knew the person, but have now forgotten. He speculates the expression originated over arguments about painters depicting both Adam and Eve with navels while critics insisted they did not have them. A Sherlock Holmes fan proposed in 1944 that when Holmes died and went to Heaven he was assigned to solve the mystery of what happened to Adam and Eve. “He alone knew all others from Adam, and could speedily pick out the missing pair, for he alone…knew that they would be the only two without navels.”
Perjury, The Hiss Chambers Case
By Allen Weinstein, 1978
This review pertains directly to the “Witness” review, but it also provides insight into the allignment of forces against Elizabeth Bentley. The American Civil Liberties Union helped Weinstein obtain FBI files about the Hiss case for use in a lawsuit, and the author began his investigations believing Hiss had been unfairly convicted. Those on the political left were absolutely convinced that Chambers was wrong about Hiss and, that Hiss was unfairly convicted of perjury. The book presents a very detailed description of the five years of research that led to the author’s conclusion, much to the dismay of Hiss supporters, that Hiss had indeed been guiltiy of perjury. The book also confirms the magnitude of Soviet espionage in the United State. ….Nadya Ulanovskaya has confirmed the substance of Chamber’s account of his underground activities from his recruitment up to the time when Ulrich…returned to Russia in 1934. Nadya Ulanovskaya, who confirmed the substance of Chamber’s accounts of his Communist activities in the 1930s “scoffed at the dangers involved in conducting an espionage in the United States.” Nadya said: “If you wore a sign saying ‘I am a spy,’ you might still not get arrested in America when we were there.”
Early parts of the book describe the depths reached by Hiss and his supporters to discredit Chambers. There were unproven allegations of homosexuality (which would have been called “homophobic” today), insanity (the term “psychopathic personality” was used by one of their psychiatrist in testimony), imposture, and criminal behavior. There is no question that Chambers had a checkered personal life. He did come from dysfunctional family life as a child, and his father abandoned the family to move in with a male lover. There also is no dispute that Chambers served as a dedicated Communist courier for Soviet espionage rings. There is also the practical matter that he was dowdy and rumpled in appearance while his was handsome and always presented himself in well-tailored fashions. Continue reading
FBI Spy Plane Video
The Energy Employees Claims Assistance Project had sent out a link to the video of the spy plane night time flyover of Rocky Flats that the FBI thought proved the Building 771 incinerator was operating illegally. I provided the link in the book about Rocky Flats on this site at the end of Chapter 14. The link is no longer active, and I’m asking for anyone who has an active link to email it to me at fdsmhobbs@aol.com.
For those who have not yet read the book, there was no proof found to support the allegations of illegal incineration, and it was not mentioned in plea bargain with Rockwell. An expert reviewing the video told the investigators the heat from the stack was probably from the building heating systems. The video is an important part of the story about the infamous raid on Rocky Flats, and I hope to find a copy to post.
Which President Lied About Weapons of Mass Destruction
President George W. Bush is quoted as saying in his January 2003 State of the Union Address that “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” CIA Director George Tenet said even though officials of his agency had concurred that the text was factually correct, those “16 words should never have been included in the text written for the President.” The controversy about whether “Bush lied” in exaggerating or inventing that Iraq had, or had planned to make, weapons of mass destruction consumed American politics and news reports for years.
Iraq did have a history of interest in development of nuclear weapons. A BBC report describes how an air attack by Israel destroyed a French-built nuclear reactor near Baghdad, “saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.” The reactor “…was near completion but had not been stocked with nuclear fuel…” Iraq also had more than a theoretical interest in chemical weapons. A Department of Defense report details use of chemical agents numerous times against Iranian forces in the1980s and again in 1988 in attacks that killed thousands of Kurds in Hussein’s own country.
With that history it isn’t a surprise that President Bush and leaders of both political parties almost universally believed that Saddam Hussein probably had retained chemical agents and was willing to use them. But now we arrive at the really interesting part about who lied. There are numerous articles on the Internet about the interrogation of Saddam Hussein by George L. Piro, but I will focus on a “60 Minute” report.
It took five months of interrogation for Piro to gain the trust and respect of Hussein before he admitted why he had led the world to believe Iraq had chemical weapons while the United States was threatening invasion. Hussein admitted he miscalculated President Bush. He expected an air campaign that he could survive. He believed that Iraq’s major enemy was Iran, and that eventually there could be a security agreement with the United States that would prevent the Iranians from annexing southern Iraq. He also believed that he could not survive an inevitable attack from Iran “without the perception that he had weapons of mass destruction.” He told his generals that he would order the use of chemical weapons if Iraq was attacked, and he did that to hold Iran at bay. Saddam Hussein lied, and Bush and his advisors believed the lie.
Pearls Before Swine
A reader inquired about this expression and I’m once again relying on the Phrase Finder for the origin. It means “items of quality offered to those who aren’t cultured enough to appreciate them.” The expression may have originated in France in the early 1400s. In appeared in Matthew 7:6 of Tyndale’s Bible, in 1526, “Nether caste ye youre pearles before swyne.” “The biblical text is generally interpreted to be a warning by Jesus to his followers that they should not offer biblical doctrine to those who were unable to value and appreciate it.”
What is the Origin of “Tempest in a Teapot”?
I was recently asked about this expression. Wikipedia lists several versions of the term used around the world; nine countries use “storm in a glass of water.” The expression is used to describe a small event exaggerated out of proportion, or making a fuss over a trivial matter. The Phrase Finder proposes that the phrase probably derives from the writing of Cicero in about 52 BC, “He was stirring up billows in a ladle. “The Duke of Ormond’s wrote in a letter in 1678, “Our skirmish seems to be come to a period, and compared with the great things now on foot, is but a storm in a cream bowl.” The Gentleman’s Magazine in 1830 included the description, “Each campaign, compared with those of Europe, has been only…, a storm in a wash-hand basin.” The American “tempest in a teapot” is used in very few other countries, but apparently has a Scottish origin. Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine in 1825 demeaned a poet by writing, “What is the tempest raging o’er the realms of Ice? A tempest in a teapot!”