Carlson just spit out hate and divides the country. I am tired of news people, on both sides, just bitching all the time. I remember in 50, 60, part of the 70: they would do the news and at the end, some AW would bitch about something.

AW?

Anglin mentions later in the article a man named Charles Schenk. He was arrested for printing pamphlets opposed to the U.S. entering WW I.

If memory serves, one of the reasons the U.S. entered that war was the sinking of the Lusitania by a German sub.

We are not familiar with the content of Schenk's pamphlets. But it is obvious that speaking against the government at that time was a serious offense.

As the Germans would say, "Das est verboten." ;)

Carlson is bringing out more truth on "network" tv than anyone else, period. I'm amazed that he's still on air.

If memory serves, one of the reasons the U.S. entered that war was the sinking of the Lusitania by a German sub.

Lusitania was a legitimate war target as she was carrying munitions.

Lusitania was a legitimate war target because she was carrying munitions.

Maybe so, but she was also a passenger liner.;)

To call it a fault is like calling Ted Bundy a great romantic. (I'm agreeing with you.) More flaunting of its contempt for humanity by the UK govt.

wikid: "The Royal Navy had blockaded Germany at the start of the First World War; the UK had declared the North Sea a war zone in the autumn of 1914 and mined the approaches. In the spring of 1915, all food imports for Germany were declared contraband.[4] RMS Lusitania left New York for Britain on 1 May 1915 when German submarine warfare was intensifying in the Atlantic. Germany had declared the seas around the United Kingdom a war zone, and the German embassy in the United States had placed fifty newspaper advertisements warning people of the dangers of sailing on Lusitania.... The German government justified treating Lusitania as a naval vessel because she was carrying 173 tons of war munitions and ammunition, making her a legitimate military target, and they argued that British merchant ships had violated the cruiser rules from the very beginning of the war."

The passengers were warned but chose to ignore.

Days before Lusitania was scheduled to leave New York for Liverpool in early May 1915, the Imperial German Embassy in Washington D.C. placed ads in American newspapers reminding Americans that Britain and Germany were at war. They warned potential travelers that “vessels flying the flag of Great Britain or of any of her allies are liable to destruction” and should be avoided.

U.S. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan's 13 May 1915 letter to the German government after the sinking of RMS Lusitania: ht tp://www.firstworldwar.com/source/bryanlusitaniaprotest.htm

"...Manifestly, submarines cannot be used against merchantmen, as the last few weeks have shown, without an inevitable violation of many sacred principles of justice and humanity."

Germany's response from Foreign Minister Gottlieb von Jagow on 28 May 1915: http://www.firstworldwar.com/sou...itania_germanresponse.htm

"...Lastly, the Imperial Government must specially point out that on her last trip the Lusitania, as on earlier occasions, had Canadian troops and munitions on board, including no less than 5,400 cases of ammunition destined for the destruction of brave German soldiers who are fulfilling with self-sacrifice and devotion their duty in the service of the Fatherland.

The German Government believes that it acts in just self-defence when it seeks to protect the lives of its soldiers by destroying ammunition destined for the enemy with the means of war at its command. The English steamship company must have been aware of the dangers to which passengers on board the Lusitania were exposed under the circumstances.

In taking them on board in spite of this the company quite deliberately tried to use the lives of American citizens as protection for the ammunition carried, and violated the clear provisions of American laws which expressly prohibit, and provide punishment for, the carrying of passengers on ships which have explosives on board. The company thereby wantonly caused the death of so many passengers.

According to the express report of the submarine commander concerned, which is further confirmed by all other reports, there can be no doubt that the rapid sinking of the Lusitania was primarily due to the explosion of the cargo of ammunition caused by the torpedo. Otherwise, in all human probability, the passengers would have been saved."

Bryan resigned in protest when Wilson went to war against Germany. If Bryan had been president, the US would almost certainly would not have entered the war.

If Bryan had been president, the US would almost certainly would not have entered the war.

WW went to war to get himself a place at the peace table. He shouldn't have bothered wasting his time.

Extremely interesting. I've always wondered what to think of WJB and kind of wanted to respect him.

Contrast the calmly reasoned response of the Reich with the frenzied hysteria of the Allied effort from the start. Newsmedia, politicians, celebs, movies, even animated cartoons were turned over to magnifying the Hitler caricature and hyping the troops as childishly and cretinously as possible.

Lately it's struck me how heavily ameriKan and British cinema were turned over to the propaganda. Even ppl who agreed with these countries' involvement in WW2 should have been appalled at such POLITICIZATION of the CULTURE, as sane folks should be today in retrospect -- but of course all voices of moderation were shouted down at the time.

Oops, we're talking about WW1 -- but the exact same applies:

en.wi kipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_I_films

They're STILL MAKING WORLD WAR ONE MOVIES! I know you're not a movie person, but ya got me goin' -- and they are a massively major socio- political reality.

PS I just checked wikid for any indication that the fabulously successful W. J. Bryan-pillorying Broadway play Inherit The Wind was any extent aimed at WJB's opposition to entering WW1 -- 'isolationism' as it's stupidly called now. Just as bad if not worse, 'The story fictionalizes the 1925 Scopes "Monkey" Trial as a means to discuss the then-contemporary McCarthy trials'!

the fault lay with the wildly reckless government authority who authorized smuggling arms into Great Britain on a passenger liner.

Did the Germans perhaps find out about the smuggling of arms on a passenger liner?

You know that espionage also works against civilians as well as governments. And especially if the two are combined in some way. ;)