Birch Society "Experts"

Ernie1241@aol.com | 04-11-04 | Enrie1241

[Ernie.cal]

I am NOT opposed to anti-Communism and there is NOTHING whatsoever in anything I have written to suggest that.

Apparently you believe that the JBS cannot be criticized because that, by definition, is being "against anticommunism"? How silly!

My motive? Have you even bothered to read the messages in this thread? I am attempting to correct the historical record.

Obviously, I don't have the resources of the JBS. I don't have millions of dollars, numerous magazines, books, pamphlets, videos, audio cassettes, nor do I have a radio program, a University, nor a Speakers Bureau to disseminate my views.

However, what I DO have is something unique that the JBS has never previously confronted---namely the FBI's evaluation of the JBS and persons associated with the JBS as well as FBI evaluation of numerous persons and organizations which the JBS has described as "Communist" or "pro-Communist" or "Comsymp".

At some point, I expect to produce a 4-column chart.

Column 1 will be an alpha listing of persons and organizations and publications

Column 2 will contain the JBS evaluation from sources such as JBS Bulletin, American Opinion magazine, Review of the News, and the JBS 4-volume Biographical Dictionary on the American Left (edited by Francis X> Gannon).

Column 3 will contain the FBI evaluation of the person, organization, or publication. I will cite FBI memos and reports by file and serial number.

Column 4 will be used as a scoring mechanism. What I anticipate is something that will permit an objective numeric accuracy score. So that, for example, when the chart is completed and has hundreds of items entered, I will be able to state something like this:
* 212 persons are listed and the JBS evaluation is correct
(according to FBI info) (enter percentage) of the
time but wrong (enter %).
* 179 organizations are listed and....(same idea)
* 150 books or publications are listed and (same idea)

[Tribune7]

At some point, I expect to produce a 4-column chart.

Have you thought about just getting a life?

[Ernie.cal]

I guess your comment means that you aren't interested in discovering how often the JBS has been correct -- as compared to FBI investigations?

I can understand why you feel that way.

You certainly don't want a comprehensive look at what might become evidence to support your statement that the JBS has been "grievously wrong about a lot of things"!

Many observers have pointed out how anti-intellectual the JBS is. Your comment just adds more evidence. Research, study, analysis of data --- you obviously have contempt for the entire process.

[Eastbound]

A few horses right here in the midst of the river muddying the waters so no one will drink.

[Smokin' Joe]

In the classic sense, "liberal" meant something very different from today's socialist-hijacked version.

Has government ownership and control of our corporations and businesses increased during that time?

In a word. Yes. Control through the EPA, the ESA, and the courts has increased vastly over private property. Control over children and families has increased through the ever-expanding social services portion of government, and control over thought has increased through government sponsored revisionist history taught in politically corrected schools, brought to you by a judiciary which has cast itself in a deFacto legislative role.

If you control education, thought, custody of children, and the right to use your land and resources as you see fit (not abuse, use), then you control business in its most basic levels.

I remember cutting down dead trees without a permit, dad ordering a shotgun through the mail (without a license), fishing in front of my house without a license (or needing one), being able to spank your child without suffering the Inquisition, and driving vehicles without inspection stickers, because none were required. SO go ahead, tell me how government has gotten smaller, less intrusive, and back within its Constitutional bounds in the last 40 years. I just gotta hear this!

[Tribune7]

I can understand why you feel that way.

Then you know I merely am concerned with your emotional health.

[Ernie.cal]

J.R.:

I copy below something that I forgot to include in my previous reply to you.

I presume you will disagree with the following February 1962 comments on "anti-communism" made by J. Edgar Hoover in a letter to Mrs. W.R. Brown and subsequently to many other persons.

---

"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."

"All this has been accomplished in orderly constitutional fashion and is something of which every American should be proud. We must continue to be alert to these infiltration efforts. I wish to emphasize most strongly that communism is a grave threat to the continued existence of the United States. Because of this, it is doubly imperative that we be calm, rational, and thoroughly accurate in what we say and do in opposing communism. This is no time for rumors, unfounded suspicions, gossip and the hurling of false accusations."

[Ernie.cal]

Thanks Trib---that's very kind of you!

[Tribune7]

This thread is attracting them.

I remember lots of irresponsible clear cutting that led to flash flooding and contaminated groundwater,

Cutting down dead trees led to flash floods? Of course, clear cutting did help prevent forest fires. Are you aware that there are more trees today in this country than there were 100 years ago (and no credit belongs to government.)

every felon in possession of firearms,

That's still the case, although with the increase in concealed carry the good guys have evened things out.

fished out lakes and rivers (their game fish populations decimated),

Conservation is a conservative idea.

kids with marks and bruises who feared their parents (as opposed to respecting them),

They do that today although they are ususally step-parents and "aunts & uncles" which have grown exponentionally in recent years.

and clunky, dangerous pieces of crap driven by uninsured cranks who caused wrecks with little fear of consequence for their own negligence.

Florida got rid of its state-mandated inspections. Nobody seems to want to bring them back.

[Badray]

I'll re-read it, but I didn't see any need for a cleanup or editing in the first go-around. It was great. But I expect that now that I know it's yours.

We don't always agree on strategy, but we've never varied on principle.

[Eastbound]

Bump!

[em2vn]

I will be specific. Our discussion isn't about anyone who choses to take a position on the John Birch Society. Rather, it is about your implied expertness [perfectly good American word]. Nothing in your original post or subsequent postings indicated any level of recognized achievement.
What you posted is opinion based on personal interest in a subject. Without credentials to lend support to your methods of research, one can only accept your statements as opinion, much like what passes for news reporting today.

[Ernie.cal]

OK--thanks for your clarification. It does help me understand the basis for your objections a little better. Actually, I can understand your point. It is true that I cannot produce anything for you in the way of awards, or educational degrees, or even a profile in a newspaper, magazine, or academic journal. (Is that what you're getting at?). The most I can produce is letters from various organizations, authors, newspaper reporters, and scholars who have told me that the materials I have acquired and shared with them, and my answers to their questions, have been helpful to them in their research and has informed their own writings on the subjects they are pursuing. (In fact, I received another one just today!). In recognition of my assistance, several authors have cited me (and the documents I provided to them) in their books or dissertations, etc. Upon reflection, I realized yesterday that many of the persons responding to this current thread are not aware of the detailed Report I posted last year on FR. Subsequently, I revised and expanded the Report to incorporate more topics and more documentation and I posted it yesterday under the title "FBI Report On Birch Society". The reason I bring this up is because if you saw it before this current thread, it might have made a big difference in your judgment about me. My Report consists primarily of extensive quotes from specific FBI documents (and I cite the appropriate bibliographic info). In other words, the documents speak for themselves. I did, however, include narrative to tie certain sections together (for example, I explained the sequence of events which surrounded the 1960-1961 controversy about purported Communist infiltration of our clergy and religious institutions.) I don't believe that my Report can legitimately be characterized as my "opinion" because I am NOT providing MY interpretation. (In fact, I happen to disagree with many statements made in FBI documents!) However, I have methodically audited thousands of pages of material, extracted and quoted those items which most clearly explain the FBI's view (which, again, doesn't always correspond to mine) and I provide the SPECIFIC DETAILS necessary for anyone who wants to obtain those documents (i.e. make a request for the cited FBI file and serial). In addition, I can also send copies of documents to interested parties. Now here's where we may continue to have a disagreement.... I try very hard to make it clear that, in most instances, I am not offering my own "opinion". Instead, I am presenting a summary of what is contained in .... (1) documents I have obtained from government agencies and (2) private papers of key figures involved with the JBS A "fact" is something demonstrable or provable to anyone's satisfaction. For example, I can state as a "fact" that Robert Welch was born December 1, 1899 in Chowan County, North Carolina. That is NOT my "opinion". And I'm sure YOU agree, right?? However, if I quote Mr. Welch's birth information from an FBI document (and cite the file and serial number), does my quotation about his birth info then convert itself, in your judgment, into my personal "opinion" -- because you think my "method of research" comes into play? And that becomes subjective opinion?

[Ernie.cal]

Sorry guys

Don't know why my text ran altogether, instead of paragraphs, in previous message. Looks terrible, I know!

[Eastbound]

Bump!

[Ernie.cal]

I sincerely want to narrow our disagreement so that we can move on to discuss the most important topics, namely,

(1) is the JBS disseminating accurate and reliable information? and,

(2) does material in FBI files support or refute JBS conclusions?

Upon further consideration of your message, I got to wondering if what you really want from me is a statement acknowleding that I should not be considered "expert"?

In other words, you want me to say that I am just offering my "personal opinions" because I cannot provide any specific evidence of my "recognized achievement".

Is that, ultimately, where you are headed?

[em2vn]

Let's settle on this? You are an avid amateur with a zeal for the study of the John Birch Society. Your research is used and cited in some publications. What say you?

[Ernie.cal]

em2vn:

Hope you are sitting down!...I have NO problem whatsoever with your formulation.

But---just for the record, being a genuine "expert" does NOT depend upon "honors", "awards" "educational degrees" or "public recognition".

Again (I'm not disagreeing with the statement you developed to describe me) but I just want to share several dictionary definitions of "expert" with you -- as follows:

1. AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE 4th edition

"A person with high degree of skill in, or knowledge of, a certain subject"

"Having, involving, or demonstrating great skill, dexterity, or knowledge as the result of experience or training."

2. CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH

"A person having a high level of knowledge or skill in a particular subject."

[Ernie.cal]

OK--onward and upward!

Let's see if we can now narrow any disagreement that we may have about the difference between "fact" and "opinion".

I think I have a method which can resolve this very quickly with minimal angst -- if you will bear with me a moment.

How would you characterize the statement appearing below if I used it in one of my posts?

1. Would you consider it "factual" or, alternatively, an "expression of opinion"? and

2. If "opinion" what would be required to move it from opinion to a "fact"?

STATEMENT: Phyllis Schlafly and her husband Fred were members of the John Birch Society.