Sacco and Vanzetti Revisionism

[RightinNYC]

Anyone remember Sacco and Vanzetti?

They were two Italian immigrants who were charged with armed robbery and murder, stealing tens of thousands of dollars that prosecutors claimed were used to fund anti-government extremist actions such as the bombing of government office. They were convicted and executed to worldwide outrage at what was perceived to be politically motivated murders. The claim made by the left was that they were innocent immigrants who were murdered solely for being Italian anarchists. When they were executed, 25,000 people rioted in Boston alone. Former Gov. Michael Dukakis retroactively pardoned them in the 80's, saying that they were innocent of their crimes. They are to this day immortalized as martyrs by socialists and anarchists worldwide, and were the subject of an Upton Sinclair novel called "Boston" that detailed their supposed unfair execution.

As it turns out, Sinclair knew they were guilty as sin. A letter was just recently discovered that he had mailed to his lawyer, stating that he had met with their lawyer and found out that they were unequivocally guilty of the murder. Yet he proceeded to write his book and crusade under the pretense that they were innocent. Why?

"Alone in a hotel room with [their lawyer], 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."

"It is much better copy as a naïve defense of Sacco and Vanzetti because this is what all my foreign readers expect, and they are 90% of my public,"

So, after discovering the truth of the matter, Sinclair continued to write his novel preaching the innocence of these men, in order to further the cause of socialism and sell his books. And people wonder why it's hard to believe the claims of the extreme left? From this, to Dan Rather's "The documents are fake but true," there seems to be an epidemic of "Proving our "truth" by whatever means necessary" that is visible over and over again in the claims of the left.

"Ideale Gambera, whose father was a Boston anarchist in the 1920s, said he could empathize with Sinclair's angst about revealing his doubts.

Gambera, 80, said there was a strict code of silence to protect the group and hide the nature of their activities. He said his father, Giovanni Gambera, a member of the Sacco-Vanzetti Defense Committee, told him before he died in 1982 that Sacco was one of the killers.

"They all lied," said Gambera, a retired English professor living in San Rafael. "They did it for the cause."

Guess truth isn't really important as long as the claims further your own personal agendas, right? No matter that because of the riots spurred by these peoples knowingly fallacious claims, people died and property was destroyed, at least the "truth" was spread. Upton Sinclair: muckraker, reformer, hypocrite.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/s...dec24,1,5561727,full.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

 

[Billo_Really]

That's not the way I see it. From what I understand, someone else admitted to the killings.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Yeah. Bankrupt morals and fabricated truths only come from the left. You win, I'm a conservative now. :roll:

Interesting news though, in spite of the infantile partisan bullshit.

From what I understand, someone else admitted to the killings.

I couldn't find anything about that on wikipedia, are you sure?

 

[RightinNYC]

That's not the way I see it. From what I understand, someone else admitted to the killings.

Then why did Sacco and Vanzetti tell their lawyer they were guilty?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by RightatNYU:
Then why did Sacco and Vanzetti tell their lawyer they were guilty?

I don't know. I'm just beginning my research on this subject.