Replies

Smokin: You are overlaying your personal political opinions, beliefs, assumptions, and preferences over factual information which can be ascertained from historical records.

Here is the way this works:

1. You have a personal subjective OPINION.
2. You then artfully select any bit of “evidence” which seems to conform to your personal opinion
3. Then, that “evidence” becomes a “fact” which controls all of your subsequent analysis and conclusions

This is precisely what the Birch Society did.

1. The JBS arrived at horrific subjective personal opinions about the character, integrity, and loyalty of many prominent Americans.

2. It based its judgments and evaluations upon its unproven predicates and subjective assumptions.

3. Many of its judgments, evaluations, predicates, and assumptions were FACTUALLY FALSE — but, nevertheless, they controlled all subsequent JBS discussions about the matters under scrutiny.

4. As a result, JBS founder Robert Welch declared that most of our Presidents and prominent political figures in the 20th century were Communist traitors or Communist “agents” — simply because those individuals expressed viewpoints or adopted policies which did not conform to the personal preferences of Robert Welch.

5. Robert Welch would then make his argument based upon the premise that “By their fruits ye shall know them” -— and he (and the JBS) would immediately discard, de-value, or dismiss any contradictory evidence.

As the famous philosopher of science (Karl Popper) observed, in the universe of available data one can ALWAYS find “confirmations” for whatever ideas one wants to believe. However, factual truth can only be discovered by acknowledging and falsifying CONTRADICTORY evidence.

Your approach to this subject matter is entirely consistent with how the Birch Society arrived at its conclusions. It is, therefore, VERY significant that when the JBS (and its surrogates) were put into a courtroom environment (as a result of defamation lawsuits), they almost always LOST — because in the courtroom, subjective opinions, hearsay, gossip, rumor, unproven predicates, derogatory assumptions, and rank speculation are NOT permissible.

The most famous example of your (and JBS) methodology was revealed in the historic precedent-setting libel lawsuit brought by Chicago lawyer Elmer Gertz whom the JBS described in an article it published in its monthly magazine as “a Communist fronter” and a “Leninist” engaged in a “conspiracy” against Chicago police.

The JBS employed your “By their fruits ye shall know them” methodology and your “accident or design” arguments against Gertz.

After 14 years of litigation, including 2 different jury trials, numerous appeals, and review by the U.S. Supreme Court, the JBS paid Gertz $100,000 in compensatory damages and $300,000 in punitive damages for malice. As you may know, punitive damages are only allowed when “malice” can be shown. Malice, in legalese, refers to “reckless disregard for truth” arising from evil intent and a desire to inflict injury, harm, or suffering.

As one Appeals Court commented about the JBS article on Gertz observed:

“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].

BOTTOM-LINE

1. The Negro Soviet Republic strategy of the Communist Party NEVER appealed to any significant number of black Americans (not even black Communist Party members) because black Americans did not want a separate black entity inside the U.S. Instead, they wanted full participation and integration INTO the United States.

2. The Communist Party was never able to attract any significant number of black Americans into its ranks.

The FBI “Security Index” was created to track all suspected or known Communist Party members, Party sympathizers, Party financial contributors, as well as any radicals whom the FBI concluded might be a potential danger to our national security. EVEN WHEN an individual was “cleared” via administrative proceedings by the Loyalty Review Board or Subversive Activities Control Board — the FBI continued to list those individuals on its Security Index!

The Security Index had a column which identified the race of the persons listed. At its peak, there were less than 1800 black Americans on the Security Index and the overwhelming majority of those individuals lived in just 4 states.

3. The “Negro Commission” of the CPUSA frequently lamented how much difficulty the Party had in trying to recruit black Americans and in trying to infiltrate civil rights organizations.

4. In July 1963, J. Edgar Hoover sent a memo to all FBI field offices which advised them of the creation of a new HQ file (100-3-116) which was to be used to capture information regarding “Communist Influence In Racial Matters” as a consequence of the Party’s renewed interest in exploiting opportunities presented by the civil rights movement.

Hoover’s memo portrayed the CPUSA as outsiders seeking to exert influence within legitimate civil rights organizations and it quoted comments by CP leaders lamenting the lack of CP involvement within the civil rights movement. One pertinent excerpt of Hoover’s memo follows:

“In recent weeks functionaries of the CPUSA have made statements which indicate their concern over the lack of Party participation in the current Negro movement. Benjamin J. Davis Jr. remarked on 6/19/63 while attending a meeting of leading CPUSA functionaries...

‘We are witnessing a revolutionary movement in our country, but we are just not in it…’

Irving Potash, on this same date, remarked that ‘we’ are not coming forward. Not writing and not giving leadership. The leadership of the Party, according to Potash, should explore all ways and means for the purpose of playing a bigger role in the struggle.” [Chicago 100-46624, #1; 7/18/63 J. Edgar Hoover memo to all Special Agents in Charge of FBI field offices.]

A few days later, the Chicago FBI field office sent its first report to headquarters on the status of CPUSA efforts at infiltrating civil rights groups. Chicago reported that one CP member had infiltrated NAACP’s Illinois state headquarters, “however he has not influenced the organization in any specific direction as far as Party policy is concerned.” [Chicago 100-46624, #2, 7/24/63 SAC Chicago memo to J. Edgar Hoover]

On February 13-14, 1960, there was a meeting of senior Communist Party officials in the midwest.

Twenty five Party officials representing Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Missouri, and Wisconsin attended this closed meeting. Claude Lightfoot, Vice-Chairman of the Illinois CPUSA, chaired the meeting.

Each representative present gave a summary of their attempts to infiltrate the NAACP. The following comments are from an FBI informant who attended the meeting and he may have tape recorded it. The page numbers shown below reflect the page numbers of the FBI summary memo where the comments cited are made. Although this pertains to the NAACP it reflects what FBI files show about the failure of Party members to influence or control our civil rights organizations generally:

Pg.9, Cleveland rep:
“He referred to a period of the late 40’s and said at that time the CP had five members on the Executive Board of the NAACP. Now the CP has no members on the Executive Board of the NAACP in Cleveland.” Rep also referred to the “constant red-baiting of local NAACP leaders.”

Page 11: Chicago rep:
“The problem confronting the CP is how to work now in an organization in which it is very difficult to get on a committee and in which the committees do not function.”

Page 11-12: Detroit rep:
“He said it is hard to work in the NAACP in Detroit...He stated that the big problem as far as he is concerned is that the CP says that members should work in the NAACP, but how do you do it? Every time we make a move, we are stopped and stifled. As a result, we are demoralized...In regard to the role of the CP in the NAACP (name deleted) feels that it is correct to work in the NAACP, but it is necessary to do so from a position of strength. But the CP does not have strength at the present time.”

Page 13: St. Louis rep:
“He stated that the CP has no one consistently working in the NAACP in St. Louis.” (NYC 100-80640, unrecorded; 2/17/60 SAC Chicago to J. Edgar Hoover re: 2/13-14/60 CP meeting).