In a message dated 2/14/2003 4:40:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes:
> From what I've read, putting Pound away in the mental hospital was a
> compromise, he wasn't in jail but was confined and that suited many.>>
I agree. That's what I mean when I say that the result was rough justice but the means -- declaring him incompetent for trial when he apparently wasn't, under the governing legal standard -- was troubling.
> Something I've read recently on Pound's broadcasts was that he was
> very-pro Mussolini and very anti-Roosevelt and while he may have been
> giving aid and comfort to the enemy he was was not treasonous as such
> (not having read or heard any of the broadcasts I can't really judge
Unless one buys the argument that the US Govt. had betrayed the Const. and Ez was only trying to save it, I don't see how the broadcasts can be defined as anything but treasonous. Even through their general incoherence, the theme that US troops should not be fight, eg, "Jewsevelt's War" (one of the LESS offensive formulations) is plainly treasonous when broadcast over enemy radio at time of war.
>> The same article said that the Italians were thinking for
> awhile to arrest him because his radio broadcasts were so incoherent
> they thought he was sending coded messages to the U.S. military.
> Sorry, but I cannot bring up the slightest detail of the
> article that
> can help anyone find it.
> Rick Parker
I had read the same thing about Italian suspicions based upon Pound's eccentric speech. Perhaps the speeches should have a companion volume, like the Cantos: but their more general circulation could only impair Pound's reputation further.