Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Radical, Far-Right, Extremists' of the John Birch Society Exonerated by History
Reaganite Republican ^ | 31 January 2013 | Reaganite Republican

Posted on 01/31/2013 2:58:06 AM PST by Reaganite Republican

Once mocked and derided -as conservatives are today-
JBS warnings now appear to have been prescient...


The John Birch Society was founded in 1958 by Robert Welch, a retired candy manufacturer who saw collectivism as the main threat to western civilization. What he feared and intended to fight on the home-front were useful-idiot-type liberals serving as what he called 'secret communist traitors'- these fellow Americans were providing cover for a move towards one-world socialist government (stuff that used to sound kind of crazy at most any point in time prior to the bizarre Obammunist era).

The organization took its name from an American Baptist missionary (and US intelligence officer) who was shot dead by Red Chinese forces in August 1945, therefore it was that 
John Birch
 was honored as 'first fatality of the Cold War'. 

The JBS agenda was -and is- pro-family, pro-Christian,
anti-communist, anti-UN, and anti-big government,
while treating the principles of the US Constitution/Bill of Rights as sacrosanct

The patriotic group's charter was based on efforts to oppose plans of what they said were a small group of 'Insiders' working surreptitiously both in and outside of government to bring the this country's free-market enterprise system to it's knees while incrementally stripping America's sovereignty and inflicting a socialist society upon our people- sound familiar?

But they also felt both the USSR and US governments were under the influence of the same international cabal, one keen to bring about a collectivist 'New World Order'... all orchestrated from behind the scenes and by-hook-or-by-crook (same as Obama's M.O.)

Naturally such conspiracy theory brought massive derision 
-particularly from those it exposed- and the John Birch Society was disregarded by many as paranoid and delusional, among other things. Yet in our time, it's already become more than apparent they knew what hey were talking about:

Agenda of the NWO socialists:

  • surrender of American sovereignty to UN
    and other international organizations
  • greatly expanded government spending... 
    'as wastefully as possible'
  • higher (and then much higher) taxes
  • increasingly unbalanced budget-
    despite tax increases
  • wild inflation of our currency and
    destruction of our savings
  • greatly increased socialistic controls over every operation of our economy... and every activity
    of our daily lives
  • correspondingly huge increases in federal bureaucracy, and both cost and reach of government 
  • far more centralization of power in Washington
    (and gradual erosion of states' power)
  • creeping federalization of education system
  • anti-war propaganda, "peace" at all costs...
    thus inevitably on enemy terms (of course)
     

Just listen to what the man had to say back in the 70s -most of this quoted from their 1958 charter- and you tell me he's not talking about the internationalist-socialist Soro-bama regime that's currently ripping this country a new one...

Video/more at Reaganite Republican...

_______________________________________________________________________________
John Birch Society   RightWingAmerica   Wikipedia   PropagandaCritic


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; History; Politics
KEYWORDS: 113th; agenda; bho44; birch; communism; jbs; nwo; radicalleft
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

1 posted on 01/31/2013 2:58:15 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AdvisorB; ken5050; sten; paythefiddler; gattaca; bayliving; narses

*** PING ***

Any who’d like to be added to the RR ping-list,
pls FReepmail me at ‘Reaganite Republican’ -TIA


2 posted on 01/31/2013 3:01:48 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Birchers like Welch might have been right in general, but calling Eisenhower “a dedicated... agent of the communist conspiracy” or anyone who supported flouridated water a communist was nutzo. And it helped the left portray all conservatives as nutzo. Even W.F. Buckley and other big-name conservatives considered Welch a lunatic.


3 posted on 01/31/2013 3:08:41 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

I`m too sleepy this morning, read this to fast. I thought it was from our HQ. I am a member of the Birch John Society. We are a group dedicated to the preservation of wooden toilet seats.


4 posted on 01/31/2013 3:16:25 AM PST by Einherjar (What are they gonna do, cut my hair off and send me to Nam ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Defending groups like this, which history has pretty irrevocably labelled nutso is a no-win situation. First because you must begin by saying they were wrong, at least in certain circumstances. Butchers way overplayed the communism card, even if our descent into socialism bears them out. Environmentalists every day make far more insane claims than that water flouridation was inspired by communism, though I’m not sure they went so far as calling it a Russian conspiracy.

The one thing that really bugs me about McCarthy is how he made the case for George Marshall as an objective communist, if not a paid agent. And I don’t even particularly like Marshall. Butchers made a similar claim with Eisenhower, and it’s stuff like that which forever marginalizes them.

Opposing such overstatements is the long history of libs being wrong about everything, especially about stuff that mattered like tens of millions of people dying. But you won’t hear about it, except for a few of the more out there groups. Textbooks talk about fools like Walter Duranty not only without mentioning their lies and/or gross incompetent, but without properly identifying them as having any political bent whatsoever.

Meanwhile conservatism STILL gets associated with McCarthyism and Bircherism despite our movement very publicly repudiating them. And it’s supposed to be a bad thing despite both being quite a bit more right than various other trusted sources.


5 posted on 01/31/2013 3:16:25 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Interesting article

The attacks on the John Birch Society by the Wm F Buckley types always bugged me....because if you were truly conservative...you sure would not try to disavow the JBS

Of course, all the cheerleaders for Wm F Buckley (who was actually a NeoLiberal Globalist) sure have piped down as his son has shown the true Buckley family liberal colors


6 posted on 01/31/2013 3:17:10 AM PST by SeminoleCounty (GOP = Greenlighting Obama's Programs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

I agree on the Eisenhower part. That’s a silly way to argue against people in general. The flouridation thing is way overblown, though. Mass medication is socialistic, as is state control of the ware supply. Also, there aren’t really any benefits to it, so it’s pointless socialism.

Even if pretending it’s a communist plot, if that’s what they did, is bad politics, I do so hate it when one side steamrolls a debate by painting all opposition as nuts. Sometimes, very seldom, all opposition is nuts. But forced dozing through the water supply is not so common sense as it now seems.

The very fact that we remember the Bircher position on flouridation, seems to me, is evidence that there was an opposition to discredit. Otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered discrediting them.


7 posted on 01/31/2013 3:25:38 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Meanwhile conservatism STILL gets associated with McCarthyism and Bircherism despite our movement very publicly repudiating them. And it’s supposed to be a bad thing despite both being quite a bit more right than various other trusted sources.


I would rather be compared to McCarthy or John Birch than compared to Obama or Clinton

If you look at today’s “conservatives”, many of them share the same international views as Obama (especially Free Trade and Globalism), share the same views on Illegal Aliens (Rubio-Obama Amnesty), and supported Obama over those challenging his eligibility to be President.

Unfortunately, too many people who claim to be conservative think that conservatism is only Fox News, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh. I can still remember when many Democrats were more conservative than the FNC/Hannity/Limbaugh troika that passes as “conservative” today


8 posted on 01/31/2013 3:25:52 AM PST by SeminoleCounty (GOP = Greenlighting Obama's Programs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Man is not perfect.

That's the bottom line.

NO man says all the right things all the time, nor does all the right things all the time.


(Easy now, I'm a born again Chridtian .. these comments are from a man's point of view)


We'd do well to remember that we're fallible and that our views and opinions often change with varying circumstances during life ... while living it.


I was an idealistic hippy once.

9 posted on 01/31/2013 3:27:06 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

You can’t visit the sins of the son upon the father, necessarily. Old Bill wouldn’t ever have voted Obama, methinks. I don’t know what you mean by “neoliberal,” exactly, whether it goes back to people like Bastiat, or maybe is some clever attempt at parodying “neocon.” By “globalist” I’m going to assume you mean free trader, and therefore unreconstructed Jeffersonianism it is.

It may amuse you to know libertarians repudiate him just as strongly. I’ve heard him accused of being a CIA mouthpiece. A funny book, “The Probability Broach,” posits an alternate timeline wherein the Whiskey Rebellion succeeded in overthrowing the constitutional government, and things end up much better. Hamiltonians get to be the Big Bads, but special mention goes to followers of, if I recall correctly, Buckley F. Williams and his followers, who want what the Hamiltonians want, only a little less.

He had some of those tendencies you might call “neoliberal,” such as opposition to the Drug War and shortly before his death opposition to the Iraq War (despite his magazine’s position). But I place him as more of a statist than myself.


10 posted on 01/31/2013 3:42:05 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Some are more fallible than others. It angers me that Duranty is in the history books as a first class journalist and Lord Keynes is considered the greatest economist of the twentieth century, but Birchers are crazy. Where’s the justice?

Then again, everyone still thinks Nero fiddled while Rome burned, Marie Antoinette said “Let them eat cake,” and FDR got us out of the Great Depression. Probably most of what I know is BS, too. Why would expect any kind of justice?


11 posted on 01/31/2013 3:47:41 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Say whatcha want, but I read The New American (have for about 15 years now), and they have been right far more often than wrong, and on the latter, often the jury is still out.

When we live in a time where the best defense the enemies of this Republic have is to commit such outrageous acts against our laws and Constitution that they read like "conspiracy theories", I am not so willing to label anyone a "nutcase" who believes our Liberty should be jealously guarded.

Odd that the same people who ignored Romney's far more recent liberal acts would reach back to Ike's administration for ammo against the JBS.

12 posted on 01/31/2013 3:56:46 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: knarf
I grew up with JBS parents - that was what turned me onto politics.
Some stuff was a bit wacky, but in general they were pretty spot on with their analysis.

Read "The Polititian" - JBS tome on Eisenhower (still have an original printing) - didn't agree with most of the suppositions - but they were right on a lot of things.

WFB and Goldwater were not perfect Conservatives (by far) - everyone has "stuff" (log in own eye....).

13 posted on 01/31/2013 3:59:33 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

If memory serves me, I believe that John Wayne was a member of the John Birch Society.
If The Duke believed in it, it had to be as American as apple pie.


14 posted on 01/31/2013 4:03:20 AM PST by BuffaloJack (Children, pets, and slaves get taken care of. Free Men take care of themselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
If they want to reach back they should look to George Romney and his stomping off the stage vowing to help the democrats beat Goldwater.

Photobucket
15 posted on 01/31/2013 4:09:15 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

I don’t repudiate McCarthy, because he was far more right than wrong (the Marshall smear being an exception) and actually did the country a great service. Because there were a lot of commies in the government, and he made them run for cover. Although I’m sure that most Birchers were patriotic Americans, prominent Birch leaders making absurd claims about Eisenhower and others made things worse.


16 posted on 01/31/2013 4:19:34 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

I don’t know what a “perfect conservative” is supposed to be. Since the intellectual recrudescence of the postwar era, there have been three interlocking but independent tendancies fighting for turf in the conservative mind (in no particular order):

1). Libertarianism, best exemplified by books like “The Road to Serfdom”
2). Traditionalism, best exemplified by books like “The Conservative Mind” and “Natural Right and History”
3). Anticommunism, best exemplified by books like “Witness”

Birchers were way, way over on the anticommunist side. Buckley was more on the libertarian side when he was younger, and to my mind grew more traditionalist as time went by. Anticommunism is tricky, given that communism no longer dominates foreign policy. Some former anticommunists today think like neocons, others shrunk back into isolationism.

Free trade has always been a wedge issue. Obviously libertarians are all-in. We follow them when it’s the two of us contra socialism. However, some of us fear communist China most of all, and therefore anticomminism dictates protectionism.

Russell Kirk thought libertarians might as well be socialists for being utilitarians, and as such drummed them out of the movement in his head. Libertarians notice the fellow feeling of traditionalists and socialists in personalities like Henry Adams and Hillaire Belloc, or contemporary progressive Pubs like Juan, Mitt, and Newt. So the two can act like they are mutually exclusive.

Goldwater today sounds like a lib on a lot of issues. Reagan was both too far to the right and left, simultaneously, to win Pub nomination today.

It’s all very confusing.


17 posted on 01/31/2013 4:26:41 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

It all depends upon who writes the history. The MSM has written the history of the conservative/progressive debate for the past 100 years.

So why aren’t we busy creating our own media system, instead of pelting the MSM with spitballs, which has absolutely no effect on them? All we ever do is react.

We cannot win that way.


18 posted on 01/31/2013 4:29:27 AM PST by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

Goldwater was a pioneer of true civil rights. He supported limited time and scope affirmative action in government but vehemently opposed forcing it on the private sector.

Looking at the world today its a little hard to deny that he was correct when government has increasingly heavy control of private business. After all, we now have government dictating that a photographer must photograph a gay wedding party despite his opposition to gay marriage.


19 posted on 01/31/2013 4:42:01 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

I don’t repudiate him, either. It’s a losing effort, is all. Not that it should matter to a conservative, since we’re always losing. But I prefer to defend more worthwhile losers.

The story is out on our creeping socialism and the abominable history of communist infiltration of government and direction of policy in the twentieth century. Do we have to salvage Birchers and McCarthy too, specifically? I won’t waste much time trying.


20 posted on 01/31/2013 4:46:37 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

I visited a JBS bookstore as a kid, and I was familiar with their message. They were absolutely over the top, the Lyndon Larouche of their day. Everyone was a communist, especially Eisenhower, and they had a map showing the old south had been promised to the blacks as a separate country called the “Union of Soviet Socialist Negro Republics” or USSNR.

I swear the guy working the store looked and sounded like Lee Harvey Oswald. (It wasn’t).


21 posted on 01/31/2013 4:53:13 AM PST by Andrei Bulba (No Obama, no way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

Even W.F. Buckley and other big-name conservatives considered Welch a lunatic.

History has proven Buckley to be wrong in general and helped the left succeed. Big government types like Eisenhower are what brought us to the place we are today.


22 posted on 01/31/2013 4:57:42 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeminoleCounty

I would rather be compared to McCarthy or John Birch than compared to Obama or Clinton or any of the Bushes.


23 posted on 01/31/2013 5:00:09 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Anticommunism is tricky, given that communism no longer dominates foreign policy.

You’re right. Now communism is a domestic enemy.


24 posted on 01/31/2013 5:03:32 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: driftless2
Because there were are a lot of commies in the government,

Fixed

I'm a Bircher btw.

FMCDH(BITS)

25 posted on 01/31/2013 5:07:22 AM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican
I grew up in a Birch Society family.

In retrospect, all of the "extremist" things they said came true.

In 1966, the JBS did not call MLK a Communist, but did describe him as 'pink', after studying his actual statements.

This was heresy at the time. Rank racism and all that.

But it is accepted reality now.

As for some of the more incendiary things said by some people in the JBS, well, so what. Smearing the Right when they are right is an old tactic of the Bolshevik Left. And that pretty much describes the Democratic Party now.

The Birchers were and are right. The Statist gangbangers - because that's all they are - still march on the Long March to their "Communist Paradise". The fact that it turned out to be Hell on Earth in Russia and China deters them not.

26 posted on 01/31/2013 5:18:11 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Andrei Bulba

The assassination of JFK was one of the few big events that was purely communist engineered. Solely by the one guy, Oswald, who was personally a communist, though it’s not clear he did it for that reason in particular. Funny enough, JFK conspiracy theorists, who are sufficiently loopy to leave Birchers in the dust, Oswald’s acting alone on the advice of his own ideologically addled mind is the one theory they won’t pursue.


27 posted on 01/31/2013 5:39:55 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

http://www.thenewamerican.com/


28 posted on 01/31/2013 5:46:24 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

They overlook the obvious...


29 posted on 01/31/2013 5:53:21 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (In the game of life, there are no betting limits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
Bump to your post.

FMCDH(BITS)

30 posted on 01/31/2013 6:11:15 AM PST by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

Glad to hear it from somebody who knows more than I

Thx Regulator


31 posted on 01/31/2013 6:54:43 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

It amazes me that people don’t read and do their own analysis in terms of verifying whether facts are true or false.

I just keep asking simple questions.

Who were the founders of the Fed ?

Who were the founders of the Council on Foreign Relations ?

Did those same people purchase positions in the leading newspapers and obtain directorships in them ?

Did these same people finance Bolshevism and Nazism ?

Did these same people set up non-profit, tax-free foundations to manage their influences, and just how much influence do those foundations have ?

Why does the press hide the CFR ? Why does the press hide the foundations ?

Let me list out every Presidential advisor on foreign policy in the 20th century, see how influential they were, and were they a member of CFR or not.

There are several connections with 20th century Presidential advisors that would utterly SHOCK most people. But since it’s not taught in schools and kept secret by the press, the public remains ignorant.

In order to control a government, all one needs to do is be advisor to the people at the top. In order to control public opinion, one only needs to control the press. And if you control education, after one generation you can rewrite history, since basically no one reads old news articles.

Etc.

It doesn’t take long to arrive at conclusions that are pretty horrifying, or that would perhaps make a patriotic American who lost loved ones in wars not so happy. There is absolutely no valid reason for bankers to be interested in foreign relations to the point of advising heads of governments. There is absolutely no need for a central bank, when a government Treasury can create money. If the Treasury had simply created $17 trillion dollars over the years, we’d still have the same amount of money in the money supply, we just would not have $17 trillion in debt. You’ve got to ask yourself - how much profit is made off of $17 trillion in debt ? Who is making that profit ?

Most people just never take the time to really learn some very simple dynamics of control. For example, getting two people to fight against each other, supporting both of them without the other knowing, enables you to control both people - and have them owe you for supporting them.

Also, you can keep people totally unaware of what’s really going on by simply leaving out one or more parts of a story. This works well regarding the backstories for financial panics and wars.

Also, the best way to have a conspiracy and have it never be discovered - is float the conspiracy theory yourself of exactly what you are doing, simply without a few key facts. After that, anyone pointing out what you’re doing is branded a wacko conspiracy theorist by everyone, and your game can continue with virtual immunity from suspicion.

Not too long ago I was decidedly against any “conspiracy theory” about the Fed.

Just keep asking questions folks, research the facts.

If you can’t verify a fact, file it away for later, don’t assume it’s completely true.

Even discounting what’s not verifiable, once I started digging, it changed my whole perception of the 20th century, and I became disgusted by it. Even with most things being unverifiable, many events fail the smell test miserably.

I’m not a member of JBS, I’m just looking for the facts and I do my own analysis. JBS is by no means the only organzation against the international banking cartel.

If the American people all knew what was behind much of what went on in the 20th century, they’d understand the problem and be able to start thinking about how to fix it. The government (they are only minions) wants to protect their secrets at all costs, so be warned (keep family and friends close and fully aware and keep copies of key documents preserved); DHS/CIA/etc. is all over everyone on this stuff so you need to stay 100% legal in all that you do. This is about information and nothing else - what is needed is to shine the light of the truth on what is going on.


32 posted on 01/31/2013 7:12:28 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

Well, as someone who grew up in an ultra, ultra liberal home in an ultra liberal community with a parent who worked for the U.N.- and was taught to mock and deride the JBS - guess what - when I began to read history closely, I discovered to my great surprise that Robert Welch was right about communism and right about Eisenhower.
It was under Eisenhower’s watch that both Tibet and Cuba were taken over by communism. When the U.S. ambassador to Cuba went to D.C. in 1957 to warn Eisenhower that Castro was a Red, Eisenhower responded by firing the ambassador.
Buckley was a pretentious patrician fool who dumped on the JBS for reasons of class, not politics.


33 posted on 01/31/2013 7:30:03 AM PST by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

What annoys me is that while some things are intentionally kept secret, like the Jekyll Island meeting, others are out there in the open for everyone to see. For instance, whatever its origins and whoever its sponsors the Fed bill explicitly sought to grant monopoly powers over the banking industry to a cartel in order to bail oit rich guys when the markets dip. This was no secret.

Why couldn’t the people prevent its passage, and what would knowing about the Morgans, Rockefellers, Warbugs, Rothschilds, or Medicis matter. As if we didn’t know who was going to run it—what, were they gonna take ads out in the yellow pages?—and benefit—hmmm, let’s see, should we save the economy by injecting capital into a mom and pop store in Bumwad, Mississippi, or US Steel? People are stupid and lazy, I know. But here’s the point: tgey’ll be that way with or without the evidence in the open. Add to that the very public and very obvious boondoggles that are all the leftist supranational organizations, from the UN to IMF, WB, WTO, etc. Who lacks for barbs to throw at them?

So I ask, firstly, why do conspiracy theorist expend so much energy digging up what’s hidden? Not that it’s fruitless, but it can lead to a lot of unfounded speculation. I could spend the rest of my life reading about outrages that happen before our eyes. Secondly, why don’t we talk more about the outrages before our eyes? Because evil bankers controlling in secret the tool that was obviously made to be used by evil bankers, or Eisenhower secretly being a communist is a more seductive argument than Eisenhower’s policies benefitting communism by accident.


34 posted on 01/31/2013 7:30:35 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

Agree !!!!


35 posted on 01/31/2013 7:34:33 AM PST by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

Welch was WRONG!!!! about Eisenhower, and you’re wrong about Buckley. Buckley (and Goldwater’s) biggest sin was opposing the Civil Rights movement which cost the Republican Party a great percentage of the Black vote. But in his day Buckley was practically the only media voice opposing the march of socialism in the U.S. He opposed Robert Welch because he was nut who did great harm to the conservative movement by calling everything that moved communist. Welch and people like the anti-Semitic Willis Carto of the Liberty Lobby were two people/orgs. regular conservatives were well rid of.


36 posted on 01/31/2013 8:02:04 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
"history had proven Buckley to be wrong in general"

Really? Other than being wrong on the Civil Rights issues of the sixties (which he later admitted to being wrong), how has history proved him wrong?

37 posted on 01/31/2013 8:05:47 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane

Lefties couldn’t face the fact that a Commie killed JFK....if you go back and watch the coverage of the assassination as it happened, over and over again Cronkite, and the other commentators talked about how right wingers hated Kennedy, and even noted that Adlai Stevenson was attacked in Dallas a few weeks before by “right wingers”.....They so wanted it to be a right wing conspiracy that killed Kennedy.


38 posted on 01/31/2013 8:09:23 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: abb

Good point, we do need some good people to step up right about now... Jim Robinson and Andrew Breitbart have done it right, and myself trying my small part as a blogger...


39 posted on 01/31/2013 9:11:34 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
"In 1966, the JBS did not call MLK a Communist,..."

MLK spent a lot of time with Communists and sympathizers - some Bircher's thought he was being used by the commies, others thought he was using the commies.

But I never heard a Bircher trash King (I think MLK cleverly used the Reds to achieve a worthy goal).

40 posted on 01/31/2013 9:18:56 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Very strange that “Reaganite Republican” associates himself with the John Birch Society since the official JBS position on Reagan is that he was a “phony conservative”.

In fact, Marian Welch (the wife of JBS founder Robert Welch) terminated her JBS membership because of the way that the new leadership of the JBS after her husband died, savaged Reagan in the pages of the JBS magazine, The New American.

With respect to RR’s claim that history has “exonerated” the JBS -— nothing could be further from reality.

For example:

The Birch Society is on record upon numerous occasions emphatically declaring that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were our nation’s most knowledgeable, authoritative, and reliable source of factual information about internal security matters generally, and about the communist movement in particular — as well as on what constituted effective anti-communism.

However, more often than not, FBI investigative files falsify every premise and conclusion which the JBS has disseminated over the pst 50 years. And there are numerous FBI memos which reveal the utter contempt which senior FBI officials within the Domestic Intelligence Division had for Robert Welch and the JBS.

FBI FILES ON BIRCH SOCIETY AND ITS ASSERTIONS:
This 204-page report explains why J. Edgar Hoover and senior FBI officials within the Bureau’s Domestic Intelligence Division concluded in FBI memos that the JBS was “extremist”, “irrational” and “irresponsible”
http://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/jbs-1

CONSERVATIVE CRITICS OF ROBERT WELCH and BIRCH SOCIETY:
Contrary to claims made by the Birch Society about the alleged “left-wing” origins of JBS criticism, the most potent adverse comments about the JBS have always originated from the right-side of the political spectrum. This report presents a representative sample of such comments.
http://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/jbs-4

Critics have included such prominent Americans as: Sen. Barry Goldwater, Cong. Walter Judd, Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer, Russell Kirk, Eugene Lyons, Willmoore Kendall, James Burnham, Robert Bork, J. Edgar Hoover, Herbert Philbrick, Frank S. Meyer, Cong. Gordon H. Scherer, William F. Buckley Jr., Patrick Buchanan, Fred Schwarz, Lee Edwards, the editors of the conservative newspaper, Human Events, George Sokolsky, Roy Cohn, Anthony Bouscaren, plus even many former Birchers such as: Alan Stang, Gary Allen, Milorad Draskovich, John Rees, William Norman Grigg, Mrs. Robert Welch -— and many many more.

DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY:
This report presents documents which, generally, have never been previously publicly available — including private correspondence between Robert Welch and numerous individuals and correspondence by JBS National Council members during the formative years of the Birch Society. This report is a work-in-progress and considerable new material will be added over the next few months.

JBS 9-1 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241/
JBS 9-2 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241a/
JBS 9-3 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241b/


41 posted on 01/31/2013 9:22:31 AM PST by searching123 (BirchSociety, CleonSkousen, GlennBeck, FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

Very strange that “Reaganite Republican” associates himself with the John Birch Society since the official JBS position on Reagan is that he was a “phony conservative”.

In fact, Marian Welch (the wife of JBS founder Robert Welch) terminated her JBS membership because she was so angry at the way which the new leadership of the JBS savaged Reagan in the pages of the JBS magazine, The New American, after her husband died. [The current JBS President, John McManus, once said that if the GOP nominated Reagan for President, it would be evidence that Reagan must be “a lackey” of the Communists!]. It should also be noted that Ronald Reagan denounced Robert Welch’s contentions about Eisenhower and other matters.

With respect to Reaganite Republican’s claim that history has “exonerated” the JBS -— nothing could be further from reality.

For example:

The Birch Society (and JBS founder Robert Welch) on numerous occasions emphatically declared that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were our nation’s most knowledgeable, authoritative, and reliable source of factual information about internal security matters generally, and about the communist movement in particular — as well as about what constituted effective anti-communism.

However, more often than not, FBI investigative files falsify every premise and conclusion which the JBS has disseminated over the past 50 years. And there are numerous FBI memos which reveal the utter contempt which senior FBI officials within the Domestic Intelligence Division had for Robert Welch and the JBS. See report below.

FBI FILES ON BIRCH SOCIETY AND ITS ASSERTIONS:
This 204-page report explains why J. Edgar Hoover and senior FBI officials within the Bureau’s Domestic Intelligence Division concluded in FBI memos that the JBS was “extremist”, “irrational” and “irresponsible”
http://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/jbs-1

CONSERVATIVE CRITICS OF ROBERT WELCH and BIRCH SOCIETY:
Contrary to claims made by the Birch Society about the alleged “left-wing” origins of JBS criticism, the most potent adverse comments about the JBS have always originated from the right-side of the political spectrum. This report presents a representative sample of such comments.
http://sites.google.com/site/ernie124102/jbs-4

Critics have included such prominent Americans as: Sen. Barry Goldwater, Cong. Walter Judd, Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer, Russell Kirk, Eugene Lyons, Willmoore Kendall, James Burnham, Robert Bork, J. Edgar Hoover, Herbert Philbrick, Frank S. Meyer, Cong. Gordon H. Scherer, William F. Buckley Jr., Patrick Buchanan, Fred Schwarz, Lee Edwards, the editors of the conservative newspaper, Human Events, George Sokolsky, Roy Cohn, Anthony Bouscaren, plus even many former Birchers such as: Alan Stang, Gary Allen, Milorad Draskovich, John Rees, William Norman Grigg, Mrs. Robert Welch -— and many many more.

DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY:
This report presents documents which, generally, have never been previously publicly available — including private correspondence between Robert Welch and numerous individuals and correspondence by JBS National Council members during the formative years of the Birch Society. This report is a work-in-progress and considerable new material will be added over the next few months.

JBS 9-1 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241/
JBS 9-2 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241a/
JBS 9-3 https://sites.google.com/site/ernie1241b/


42 posted on 01/31/2013 9:27:05 AM PST by searching123 (BirchSociety, CleonSkousen, GlennBeck, FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: searching123

Whoah

Need some time to chew on this, searching123...

Thank you


43 posted on 01/31/2013 9:27:54 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: searching123

BTW, has nothing to do with what anybody thinks of Reagan

All I’m saying as they were mocked not worth listening to -like the TEA Party today- and 75% of the predictions came true already, that’s all


44 posted on 01/31/2013 9:29:10 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack

John Wayne was never a JBS member


45 posted on 01/31/2013 9:29:45 AM PST by searching123 (BirchSociety, CleonSkousen, GlennBeck, FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
Fed bill explicitly sought to grant monopoly powers over the banking industry to a cartel in order to bail oit rich guys when the markets dip. This was no secret.

Based on how public school, college and press propaganda have hidden it to the point where most either don't know or don't care, I'd say it's virtually a secret.

Why couldn’t the people prevent its passage

Proper research would reveal how it was passed. Remember, the press controls public opinion. If you and I stage a coup in a banana republic, take over its press so we control the press and propagandize the people, then we support and oppose politicians until we control its legislative body, when we cause a law to be passed, like say requiring that everyone register their guns, would you say that a) we bear no guilt of forcing this law on the people and b) the people are guilty of being uninvolved and that's why the law passed ?

should we save the economy by injecting capital into a mom and pop store in Bumwad, Mississippi, or US Stee.

Well, if we start at the beginning... why is the U.S. government "injecting" (through outright grant, debt financing or equity finanancing (huh?)) money into the private sector ? Where does the government ultimately have to get every one of its dollars from ? Taxes. Why is it using money it took from me in tax to lend to U.S. Steel ? Is not U.S. Steel a profitable enterprise ? If yes, then it can raise its own capital, float its own bonds - they can be 75 year bonds if necessary. Answer, because the banker wants the taxpayer on the hook because they can collect money at the point of a gun, where U.S. Steel can't. The government can always simply take the loss on U.S. Steel, passing it along to the taxpayer.

If the government spent less than it takes in, it would build a cash reserves. It would never need to borrow. If it needed extra money to fight a war, it could simply create the money and spend it on war goods, which would have the exact same economic effect with regard to the spending. The spending on so-called social programs could still be a problem - it's up to Congress to not do that spending. But what we have is lenders who want the government to borrow, so they selectively support and oppose politicians behind the scenes until they get a group that will do their bidding - government spending. And then the spending will drive borrowing from the lenders.

So I ask, firstly, why do conspiracy theorist expend so much energy digging up what’s hidden? Not that it’s fruitless, but it can lead to a lot of unfounded speculation

Without identifying the root of the problem, the symptoms of the problem will continue and the lender's plans will come to fruition.

Eisenhower secretly being a communist is a more seductive argument than Eisenhower’s policies benefitting communism by accident.

Here's a question regarding the Eisenhower era: what about the influence of Allen Dulles, first civilian head of the CIA. Where did he come from ? He was with the Council on Foreign relations at its founding. Where did he spend the 1920's and 1930's ? I'm poking around a little, but it does not look good. It's the preponderance of people all tying back to international bankers that does not look good, to say the least.

This "monopolist establishment" is pictured as "big capital" in the U.S., which is taught to us as being "right wing", "conservative", etc. So there is no need for the establishment to hide the connection between big capital the Republican or conservative "brand". That is the "brand" that this "establishment" uses when it wants to have "capitalism" bashed in the public mind. The Rockefeller-types are the last ones I would ever imagine would be anything but capitalist.

The other brand is the left, the Democratic party, communism, etc. That's the brand where the "monopolist establishment" up until recently was able to largely hide its connections it from the public. See, the "monopolist establishment", i.e., international bankers, can then set up these two political parties as the main actors in the political theatre that the public sees. Nowadays the public can more easily get at the information that "big capital" supports Democrats even more than Republicans. But if you'll watch the "big capital"-controlled media (notice I did not say Democrat) you'll see that the media continues pushing the myth, 24x7, in both news and entertainment, that Democrats are not supported by "big capital". Somehow the propaganda machine, schools and universties keep that idea going - the big, evil, rich guy - and come election time the masses come out to vote against him.

Meanwhile, for the few people out there who see what they think is a "communist" or Democrat-controlled media, they come out and vote Republican, not realizing that the international bankers have such influence in that party that they control its nomination process as well.

So either vote is a vote for international bankers, it's just which flavor do you like, conservative or liberal.

See, if you're a bona fide conservative (according to the myth), you must be of course be supportive of old-time big capital institutions like Wall Street firms, the Federal Reserve, and all the various economists and leaders of business.

Left and right can fight each other all day and at the end of the day the Treasury keeps borrowing from international bankers. The bankers seize every opportunity to have governments borrow from their syndicate. We actually think their syndicate is our "financial system".
46 posted on 01/31/2013 9:31:00 AM PST by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nothingnew

According to the FBI file which contained statistical information about the number of known and suspected Communist Party members and sympathizers in the U.S., your statement regarding Communist infiltration of our government is false.

As J. Edgar Hoover observed in 1962:

“The Communist Party in this country has attempted to infiltrate and subvert every segment of our society, but its continuing efforts have not achieved success of any substance. Too many self-styled experts on communism, without valid credentials and without any access whatsoever to classified factual data regarding the inner workings of the conspiracy, have engaged in rumor-mongering and hurling false and wholly unsubstantiated allegations against persons whose views differ from their own. This is dangerous business. It is divisive and unintelligent, and makes more difficult the task of the professional investigator.” [Hoover statement in February 5, 1962 letter to Mrs. W.R. Brown of Bountiful Utah [FBI HQ file 94-1-369, serial #1676]; also published as letter-to-editor in Tri-Cities Daily newspaper of Sheffield, Alabama on Sunday March 31, 1963.]


47 posted on 01/31/2013 9:35:37 AM PST by searching123 (BirchSociety, CleonSkousen, GlennBeck, FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Reaganite Republican

In my experience, the folks who are the greatest admirers of the JBS and who post messages online claiming that the JBS has been “exonerated by history” — have never done much significant independent research into JBS assertions, conclusions, and JBS history.

See, for example, the historic, precedent-setting defamation lawsuit against Robert Welch Inc. (the publishing arm of the Birch Society) by Chicago lawyer Elmer Gertz.

After 14 years of litigation, including two jury trials, and numerous appeals, plus review by the U.S. Supreme Court — the Birch Society paid Gertz $100,000 in compensatory damages and $300,000 in punitive damages.

Punitive damages are only allowed when “malice” can be shown — which in legalese is “reckless disregard for the truth” arising from evil intent and a desire to inflict injury, harm, or suffering.

The 1982 Appeals Court decision in the Gertz defamation lawsuit made the following observation:

“There was more than enough evidence for the jury to conclude that this article was published with utter disregard for the truth or falsity of the statements contained in the article about Gertz.” [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, No. 81-2483, Elmer Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 6/16/82, page 20].

On 6/25/74, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell delivered the U.S. Supreme Court decision [docket number 72-617] which pertained to the appeal of the first Gertz trial verdict.

Justice Powell stated that this case “involves a libel action by a reputable attorney against a magazine that falsely libeled him a Leninist and a Communist-fronter.”

Lastly, I quote verbatim (below) from comments made by Birch Society founder Robert Welch to the first meeting of the JBS National Council. Does anyone seriously contend that these conclusions represent any sort of reputable or reliable political opinion in the United States?

A scanned copy of the minutes of this National Council meeting are available for review in my reports about the JBS (links given in previous message posted here). Page numbers shown refer to page number of the original minutes.

ROBERT WELCH:
“Today, gentlemen, I can assure you, without the slightest doubt in my own mind that the takeover at the top is, for all practical purposes, virtually complete. Whether you like it or not, or whether you believe it or not, our Federal Government is already, literally in the hands of the Communists.” [page 2]

“In our two states with the largest population, New York and California...already the two present Governors are almost certainly actual Communists...Our Congress now contains a number of men like Adam Clayton Powell of New York and Charles Porter of Oregon, who are certainly actual Communists, and plenty more who are sympathetic to Communist purposes for either ideological or opportunistic reasons.” [page 7] [Note: the reference to Governors refers to Edmund G. Brown of California and Nelson Rockefeller of New York.]

“In the Senate, there are men like Stephen Young of Ohio, and Wayne Morse of Oregon, McNamara of Michigan, and Clifford Case of New Jersey and Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota and Estes Kefauver of Tennessee and John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts, whom it is utter folly to think of as just liberals. Every one of those men is either an actual Communist or so completely a Communist sympathizer or agent that it makes no practical difference...” [page 8]

“Our Supreme Court, dominated by Earl Warren and Felix Frankfurter and Hugo Black, is so visibly pro-Communist that no argument is even needed…And our federal courts below that level…are in many cases just as bad.” [page 8]

“Our State Department is loaded with Communists from top to bottom, to the extent that our roll call of Ambassadors almost sounds like a list somebody has put together to start a Communist front.” ... [page 8]

“It is estimated from many reliable sources that from 70% to 90% of the responsible personnel in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare are Communists. Our Central Intelligence Agency under Allen Dulles is nothing more or less than an agency to promote Communism throughout the world...Almost all the other Departments are loaded with Communists and Communist sympathizers. And this generalization most specifically does include our whole Defense Department.” [page 8]

Incidentally, with respect to Welch’s comments about U.S. Senators (quoted above), I recently received the FBI file on former Sen. Estes Kefauver whom Welch described as either an “actual Communist or so completely a Communist sympathizer or agent that it makes no practical difference”.

Below, I copy the text of the telegram which J. Edgar Hoover sent to Mrs. Kefauver when her husband died:

“Please accept my deepest sympathy in the passing of your husband. This is a great shock to me and to his many friends throughout the nation and the world. While words are most inadequate on such an occasion, I hope you may gain some consolation from knowing that his outstanding contributions to the welfare of his country and his deep concern for his fellow man will long serve as a memorial to him. His achievements and devotion to duty as a public servant are a special tribute to his statesmanship. His passing creates a void which our nation can ill afford and is a great loss to all mankind. If there is anything I can do to help, please let me know. J. Edgar Hoover” [HQ 62-77208, #108, 8/10/63 Hoover telegram to Mrs. Estes Kefauver, Washington DC]

A notation on the Bureau file copy of the telegram is as follows:

“Senator Kefauver was a very close friend of the Director and the FBI. He was on the Special Correspondents’ List on a first-name basis.”

This type of ignorant, malicious, and vicious assault by Robert Welch upon virtually our entire national political leadership is what led J. Edgar Hoover to remark at a press conference in 1964 that:

“Personally, I have little respect for the head of the John Birch Society since he linked the names of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the late John Foster Dulles, and former CIA Director Allen Dulles with communism.”

Over the past 30+ years, I have obtained hundreds of thousands of pages of FBI investigative files. I specifically requested (and received) FBI files on numerous individuals and organizations defamed by Robert Welch and the JBS. FBI files routinely FALSIFY the accusations made by Welch and the JBS.

Of particular interest are the FBI files which pertain to the Communist Party USA because they so clearly reveal how incredibly irresponsible and totally ignorant Robert Welch (and the JBS) have been:

For example: according to Robert Welch in July 1961:

“…we believe that there are not more than 300,000 to 500,000 Communists in our country (or about ¼ of 1% of our population) and not more than a million allies, dupes, and sympathizers whom they can count on for any conscious support…” [JBS Bulletin, July 1961, page 14]

Thus, in total, Welch thought there were about 1.3 to 1.5 million Communists, Communist dupes, Communist sympathizers and Communist allies in the United States as of July 1961.

By contrast, the actual number of CP members in the United States according to the FBI was 5262 — i.e. nothing remotely close to Welch’s perception of 300,000 to 500,000! [See FBI New York field file 100-80638, serial #1882, which is a 6/30/61 FBI Chart of CPUSA Membership, by state, by FBI field divisions and by CPUSA Districts. The first page of that summary is copied below].

More significantly, the FBI’s Security Index was designed to track all persons considered actually or potentially dangerous to U.S. internal security. It included known and suspected Communist Party members plus Communist sympathizers, leaders in Communist fronts, and anyone whom the Bureau considered a potential security risk.

At the time Welch made his statement in July 1961, the FBI’s July 1961 Security Index report listed a total of 11,833 persons of which 9899 were in the “Communist” category—which included known or suspected Party members or sympathizers. Thus, while Welch perceived more than a million Communist operatives or sympathizers, the FBI concluded that only 9899 Americans were a potential security concern. [HQ file 100-358086, #2939].


48 posted on 01/31/2013 10:05:18 AM PST by searching123 (BirchSociety, CleonSkousen, GlennBeck, FBI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

That’s only because he was.


49 posted on 01/31/2013 10:07:59 AM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Actually, their syndicate is our monetary system, out of which finance grows.


50 posted on 01/31/2013 10:29:40 AM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson