Wednesday, December 28, 2005


LATimes (hat tip Jonah at NRO, and GANDALIN):
The last paragraph [of the newly discovered letter written by socialist and novelist Upton Sinclair] got the Newport Beach attorney's attention.

"This letter is for yourself alone," it read. "Stick it away in your safe, and some time in the far distant future the world may know the real truth about the matter. I am here trying to make plain my own part in the story."

The story was "Boston," Sinclair's 1920s novelized condemnation of the trial and execution of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, Italian immigrants accused of killing two men in the robbery of a Massachusetts shoe factory.
Prosecutors characterized the anarchists as ruthless killers who had used the money to bankroll antigovernment bombings and deserved to die. Sinclair thought the pair were innocent and being railroaded because of their political views.

Upton Beall Sinclair was a giant of the nation's Progressive Era, a crusading writer and socialist who championed the downtrodden and persecuted. President Theodore Roosevelt, who pushed through the nation's first food-purity laws in response to "The Jungle," coined the name for Sinclair's craft: muckraker. Sinclair wasn't alone in believing Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent when he began researching the book that fictionalized their case. On Aug. 23, 1927, the day they were executed, 25,000 protested in Boston.

But the fearless Sinclair was left a conflicted man by what Sacco and Vanzetti's lawyer — and later others in the anarchist movement — told him. Soon Sinclair would learn something that filled him with doubt. During his research for "Boston," Sinclair met with Fred Moore, the men's attorney, in a Denver motel room. Moore "sent me into a panic," Sinclair wrote in the typed letter that Hegness found at the auction a decade ago.

"Alone in a hotel room with Fred, I begged him to tell me the full truth," Sinclair wrote. " … He then told me that the men were guilty, and he told me in every detail how he had framed a set of alibis for them."

"I faced the most difficult ethical problem of my life at that point," he wrote to his attorney. "I had come to Boston with the announcement that I was going to write the truth about the case."

Other letters tucked away in the Indiana archive illuminate why one of America's most strident truth tellers kept his reservations to himself.

"My wife is absolutely certain that if I tell what I believe, I will be called a traitor to the movement and may not live to finish the book," Sinclair wrote Robert Minor, a confidant at the Socialist Daily Worker in New York, in 1927.

"Of course," he added, "the next big case may be a frame-up, and my telling the truth about the Sacco-Vanzetti case will make things harder for the victims."

[Reliapundit: DESPITE THE TRUTH - AND SINCLAIR'S LIES]... The men have been viewed as martyrs by the American left ever since. ... On the 50th anniversary of their execution, Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis all but pardoned the pair, urging that "any disgrace should be forever removed from their names."
This sounds exactly like Dan Rather on the fake Bush TANG documents, and Teddy Jo Kennedy on The Little Red Book Hoax; KENNEDY SPOKEMAN:

Laura Capps, a Kennedy spokeswoman, said last night that the senator cited ''public reports" in his opinion piece. Even if the assertion was a hoax, she said, it did not detract from Kennedy's broader point that the Bush administration has gone too far in engaging in surveillance.

The Left - or the er um, so-called "progressives" if you prefer, THEN AND NOW - blithely say: "So what if my charges are FALSE and the facts are not on my side; my larger point speaks to a higher truth and a greater good." YEAH RIGHT! THE LEFT: their amoral tactics never change. That's why they're scum.

1 comment:

Always On Watch said...

I have a bit of interest in criminology, so this article caught my eye.

Long ago, I did a bit of research on Sacco and Vanzetti. I don't recall all the details of my research, but I got the impression they were guilty.

My father, born in 1911, followed the case closely and always believed S and V were guilty. He was pissed that Dukakis all but pardoned them, posthumously. My father chalked it up to Dukakis's being a stupid Dem.