Birch Society "Experts"

To inflate their credentials as an organization relying upon carefully documented and factual material, the John Birch Society (JBS) often cites as "experts", persons who have had some connection to the FBI --- either as former Special Agents or as Security Informants.

However, the FBI had very negative evaluations about the post-FBI endeavors of former informants or Agents who subsequently attached themselves to the JBS as members, endorsers, speakers, or authors. Examples include: Dan Smoot, W. Cleon Skousen, Julia Brown, David Gumaer, Gerald W. Kirk, Matt Cvetic, and Karl Prussion.

DAN SMOOT, a former FBI Special Agent, is a unique star in the Birch Society stable of "experts".

However, from the Bureau's perspective, Smoot's post-FBI endeavors wrongly sought to capitalize on his relatively brief FBI career. The Bureau thought Smoot was in the habit of making "unfactual" statements about national and international affairs. According to Bureau memos, shortly before his retirement Smoot was the subject of disciplinary action. One Bureau memo refers to Smoot's "antagonistic attitude and unsavory Bureau record" which made him undesirable for re-instatement.

KARL PRUSSION attempted suicide and claimed he was a target for assassination by Communists. Prussion was terminated as an informant by the FBI because he publicly disclosed his status even though he promised never to do so without prior Bureau approval.

MATT CVETIC was an alcoholic who was dropped by the Bureau for various indiscretions.

DAVID GUMAER became involved with militia-like vigilantes in Arizona as well as illegal arms sales and securities fraud.

JULIA BROWN was divorced 3 times, changed her opinions to conform to Birch dogma so as to derive monetary gain from her Birch-sponsored speaking tours.

The Birch Society routinely inflated the credentials of persons whose views conformed to its own conclusions. JULIA BROWN serves as an interesting case study of a JBS "expert".

The Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the FBI's Cleveland Field Office stated in a memo pertaining to Julia's desire to "go public" about her experiences as an FBI informant that:

(a) she was "financially ambitious" (i.e. prospects for speaking tours, articles for a national publication, or book, etc) and

(b) Julia, with only a 10th grade education, was not intelligent enough to write for publication, as she originally proposed.

In her book "I Testify" (which actually was ghost-written by Carleton Young), Julia gives a fictitious account of her marital history as well as false details concerning joining and leaving the Communist Party.

According to Julia, she married her first husband (Edward Harris) while she was a teenager but he died. Her next mention of marriage is many years later to Curlee Brown of Cleveland.

In reality, however, Julia divorced Ed Harris, then married Jack Latimer and divorced him, then married Fred Brice and divorced him the same year she married him, and then married Curlee Brown but considered divorcing him as well.

Julia's opinions about the civil rights movement, and prominent persons and organizations within it, underwent a stunning reversal after she associated herself with the Birch Society as a paid speaker.

When Carleton Young submitted two chapters of "I Testify" to Julia for review, she initally rejected the material. Julia told the Los Angeles FBI field office that Mr. Young was expressing HIS personal political views rather than her views and she described Young as an adherent of the "lunatic right" which she described as the "Birchers".

In her March 1961 Ebony magazine interview, Julia stated that Communists had "little or no influence" within the NAACP and she concluded that:

"I'm 100 percent with the NAACP and I think they are doing a wonderful job and so does the FBI. They are aware that the NAACP is legal and is working in the American way for first class citizenship for all Americans."

However, AFTER associating with the Birch Society, Julia claimed that the NAACP was "badly infiltrated" by Communists and she routinely denounced the NAACP during her JBS-sponsored speeches.

FBI Headquarters received an advance copy of Julia's Ebony interview which it reviewed for errors. In a January 16, 1961 FBI memo, the Bureau stated that Julia should limit her comments to what she personally observed and experienced in Cleveland because "she is not qualified to assert herself as a spokesman for what is happening in the CP across the country."

There is also a major discrepancy between Julia's public accounts in her book and speeches about how she came to join the Communist Party (CP) versus what she told the FBI when she first contacted them in December 1950.

She told the FBI that she joined the CP in December 1947 because she thought the Party was the answer to racial discrimination. However, in subsequent accounts (including her book) she claims that she did not know she was joining the CP. Instead, she thought she was just joining a civil rights group.

Additional information about this topic may be obtained from me at: Ernie1241@aol.com

B4Ranch:

Not sure what your point is. The Birch Society today recommends reading literature originally published in the 1950's and later decades.

The JBS still claims its assertions from the 1960's are factual and historically accurate. In fact, the JBS has NEVER acknowledged any substantive error or retracted any derogatory evaluation it made of persons or organizations during the 1960's or later.

Consequently, as NEW information becomes available for the first time and from sources like Hoover's FBI (which the JBS has previously considered authoritative and reliable) that new information concerning the inaccuracy of JBS "experts", would seem to be of special interest to an organization which claims to be "educational" and "fighting with facts".

I will be posting more info over the next few months from never-before-released FBI files as well as other sources including correspondence between Robert Welch and JBS National Council members and other parties. Turns out, for example, that Mr. Welch thought that Zionists controlled the Russian Revolution!

Ernie aka Ernie1241@aol.com

Perhaps you would care to tell FR readers just what your credentials are for making judgments about the subject matter I have discussed?

My credentials are as follows:

For more than 20 years I have been pursuing documents from FBI, military intelligence (ONI, OSI, and G-2), Dept of Justice, Dept of State, and other agencies on topics discussed by the Birch Society over the years.

According to the FBI
(1) I, alone, represent 5% of all FOIA requests they receive---their largest requester and
(2) In many instances (probably about 40-50%), I am the FIRST person to receive documents on the subjects I am
pursuing.

In addition, I have acquired photocopies of JBS National Council member private papers---including much correspondence---which reveals, for the first time, some of the internal disputes and controversies within the JBS as well as never-previously-known personal opinions by Mr. Welch and other top JBS officials.

So, Cynicom, what, exactly, are your credentials???

I expect the Birch Society has its share of loonies, just like any other organization. But when we first got involved in politics, in 1972, it was because of the American Party, which stood for constitutional government. When we were licking envelopes for the American Party candidate, one of the people showed us the Bill of Rights, without telling us what it was. Bear in mind that we were products of the public schools.

He asked us what we thought about it, and we said that we thought it was pretty radical. Then he told us what it was.

We subsequently learned that the American Party in Florida at that time was the John Birch Society. We learned a great deal, and as time goes on, I find that the JBS made a lot of sense.

We have not been part of the JBS since that time, but without it, we might never have learned that we have freedoms that are being trampled on.

Carolyn

My father was a member of the JBS. He never talked about it to me so after he died I decided to see what I could learn about them. I bought books and went to their website. After reading a lot of their literature I came to the conclusion that basically they were anticommunists. You have a problem with that? If so, by the looks of what few responders you are getting, I suggest you post it over on D.U. You will get more input to help your ego. By the way, trashing the persons personally is a great left wing tactic.

Carolyn:

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Birchers often chastise me because they seem hypersensitive to any data which contradicts their views or brings the JBS into disrepute.

Many JBS members that I have met over the years have been very fine, honorable, decent, and intelligent people.

However, fine, honorable, decent and intelligent people can nevertheless be misled about important public issues, and/or can write inaccurate and defamatory articles and books.

Ideas have consequences. Mistaken ideas usually have undesirable consequences. My messages are meant to respond to decades of misinformation circulated by the JBS and I attempt to use sources which heretofore even the JBS has considered reliable and authoritative.

Doesn't seem to make much difference though---because even when I cite J. Edgar Hoover, or FBI, or the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, etc. Birchers still engage in ad hominem attacks upon me (and I'm only the messenger!). Perhaps something you should think about when you consider whether or not to support a group that seems to speak for "constitutional government".

Incidentally, I have prepared a detailed 22-page report regarding the FBI evaluation of the JBS. If you're interested in reading it, let me know and I can send you a copy.

Ernie

From your web page:

"What, exactly, did Mr. Welch and the JBS mean when they repeatedly referred to "Communist influence and control"?"

Well, if the question were to be asked today, the answer would be self-evident, unless you in that number who do not recognize that the Democrat party has been the tool for changing our Republic into a liberal, socialistic democracy.

Even back then when the question was asked, it was evident to many. The only difference between then and today is that today the commies in government brag openly of their agenda to socialize the nation -- and one half of the population is more than willing to live the life of a couch potato while allowing government to forcibly make the other half of the population pay for their couches and potatoes.

Fish Hawk:

Not sure I understand your comments. You accuse ME of "trashing" persons. Perhaps you read my posting so quickly that you did not notice that I am not asserting my personal opinions....Instead, I am reporting what is contained in FBI documents. Your argument is with J. Edgar Hoover and top officials of the FBI.

Obviously, from the tone of your remarks, you are NOT interested in ANY data that is unfavorable to the JBS. And I bet you think you have an open mind, right? So tell me something---how do you learn from new information if, simultaneously, you REJECT ALL new info that doesn't conform to your current beliefs?

Ernie

Cynicom:

You are absolutely correct about one matter. You are asserting an "OPINION".

You are NOT challenging anything I have written by using FACTS.

Since you do not explain why my credentials are "phony" -- I cannot respond appropriately. But I notice that you don't specify anything about your own background.

Have you, for example, ever done any research into FBI files?

Or have you ever done research into JBS member private papers archived at various universities?

If, as seems to be the case, you are just angry because you have a favorable opinion of the JBS, I would hope you could simply be honest about that and not engage in ad hominem attacks on me---or anyone else who does the actual research to determine the truth!

Ernie

"I am reporting what is contained in FBI documents."

The FBI, to their credit, does full, carefull, exacting evaluation of anyone whom they are considering for hire. Do you not notice that the men who worked as spies and counter spies for the Bureau can be cast aside as waste when the politics of Washington, D.C. change?

Have you noticed that the growth of the various United Nations ideas sprouted during the mid 1960's? Do you comprehend the intentions of the United Nations? Do you believe they are here to help or hurt the people of the United States.

Eastbound:

Hmmm....you seem to conflate "Communist" with "liberal" and "socialist".

According to J. Edgar Hoover, Communists hated liberals. Do you disagree with his assessment?

Most of the initial reports concerning Soviet repression, murder of opponents, gulags, etc. came from socialists in Europe who despised the Soviet Union. See, for example, the Hoover Institution archives.

Since you seem to think we are being converted into a "liberal socialist democracy", perhaps you could provide some empirical data regarding the percentage of private property ownership in our country today as compared to 1950, 1960, 1970, etc. Has government ownership and control of our corporations and businesses increased during that time?

I would also suggest you consult the annual Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom. The Index compiles numerical scores from 1 (best performance) to 5 (worst) on numerous factors such as property rights, government intervention, monetary policy, wages and prices, regulation, percentage of GDP consumed by government, etc.

According to the Heritage Index, the WORST countries on the planet are: North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Laos, Libya and Belarus.

The BEST "countries" on the planet are: Hong Kong, Singapore, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Ireland, Denmark, Estonia, and the UNITED STATES.

B4:

I think you are a little confused. The FBI did not "cast aside" any of its informants due to Washington, D.C. politics.

The Bureau became aware of the post-FBI activities of some of its Agents and informants and concluded that those persons had become what the Bureau sarcastically referred to as "professional anti-Communists" -- i.e. persons who derive their income from speaking or writing about Communism and Communist activities.

As many memos make clear, former FBI informants would often speak on matters about which they had no knowledge OR where their knowledge was limited to a specific place or time frame. But organizations such as the JBS never bothered to determine what, exactly, such persons did or did not know -- i.e. the extent of their expertise.

In Julia Brown's case, the Bureau was quite concerned that if she "went public" via magazine articles, books, speeches, etc. she would expose as "Communists" local persons in Cleveland she had met who, unknown to her, in reality were FBI security informants within the Communist Party...and thus, end their usefulness to the Bureau.

As reports came into the Bureau of statements made by Julia (or Dan Smoot, Karl Prussion, and others) about various matters---it became apparent that these folks were presenting PERSONAL opinions which were not supported by data in FBI files or from FBI investigations and thus contradicted conclusions reached by the Bureau.

In many cases, those personal opinions were tailored to appeal to audiences who would then buy books, magazines, attend speeches, seminars, anti-Communist schools, etc. all of which generated income for "professional anti-Communists".

As Bureau memos make clear, the FBI thought many of the persons and groups formerly associated with the FBI were exploiting the GENUINE concerns of ordinary citizens about Communism primarily to generate a living for themselves.

In addition to the persons I mentioned previously, the Bureau also referred to Fred Schwarz and Billy James Hargis as "professional anti-Communists".

Ernie

I look forward to reading your research.

The JBS is a dying organization, since it is, as you say, stuck in the 1960s.

You will likely be attacked, as you already have, but you are defending yourself well.

Mr. Robinson has already weeded the kookier JBSers off this site, but there are still a few around, as you'll see.

Often these folks were mentally unstable. A person seduced by Communism or extreme anti-Communism may have a pre-disposition to extremist views because of underlying personality problems rather than from any genuine ideological affinity. Consequently, that problem can easily migrate into their anti-Communist "career".

This doesn't say anything positive about the F.B.I..
As to your credentials, you haven't listed any. Credentials would be degrees, certificates or something indicating a course of study. What you claim as credentials appear to be nothing more than being a full time nuisance.

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.