Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dan Smoot, Conservative Activist (1913-2003)
The New American / self ^ | March 7, 1994 / July 28, 2003 | Jane H. Ingraham/ Walalce T. Cosgraves

Posted on 07/28/2003 8:50:58 AM PDT by Wallace T.

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
What this article fails to mention is that Dan Smoot himself never subscribed to the elaborate conspiracy theories for which the John Birch Society was well known. He represented all that was positive about the post-World War II conservative movement: intense individualism, opposition to any attempt to expand government authority, reverence for the original intent of the Constitution, and opposition to the Left, both the overt Marxists in the Communist bloc and the socialistic liberals domestically. Smoot was a man in the cast of John Flynn, Robert Taft, William Knowland, and Barry Goldwater. It is a shame there are so few of his kind today.

From the Dallas Morning News obituary:

SMOOT, HOWARD DAN of Holly Lake Ranch, Texas died Thursday in Tyler at the age of 89. He was born on October 5, 1913 to the late Bernie Smoot and Dora Allbright Smoot. Mr. Smoot was a retired publicist and a member of the Holly Tree Chapel at Holly Lake Ranch. He served nine years with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and was the author of the Dan Smoot Report, a subscription publication that was broadcast on the radio and T.V. He was preceded in death by his wife, Virginia McKnight Smoot on June 1, 1996; sister, Virginia Ruth Smoot and by a brother, Jewell Smoot. Survivors include sons, Larry Smoot of Holly Lake Ranch and Barney Smoot of Dallas; grandchildren, Candice, Janice, Rebecca and Howard. Funeral Services will be held on Monday, July 28, 2003 at 2:00PM at the Holly Tree Chapel in Holly Lake Ranch.

1 posted on 07/28/2003 8:50:58 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
BUMP
2 posted on 07/28/2003 9:41:21 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
BUMP
3 posted on 07/28/2003 10:01:27 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
bttt
4 posted on 07/28/2003 1:59:14 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
bttt
5 posted on 07/28/2003 7:12:17 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All
There is currently national mourning for the death of Bob Hope, a career comedian, that far outweighs the reaction to the passing of his contemproraries, like George Burns, Katherine Hepburn, and Milton Berle. Bob Hope performed a noble service in entertaining American servicemen from World War II to Gulf War I. He should accordingly be honored. However, Dan Smoot's service to his country was one of total dedication, from the time he enlisted in the FBI through several decades of full time conservative activism. It was not an avocation, as was Hope's entertaining the troops.

The memory of Dan Smoot deserves the greater honor, not that of Bob Hope (however much I liked the entertainer and appreciated his services to our soldiers). Yet even the paleo-conservative E-zines and the Birch Society related Web sites make no mention of Smoot's passing. It is a shame.

6 posted on 07/29/2003 10:42:13 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
BUMP!!
7 posted on 07/30/2003 5:34:56 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All
The Web site of The New American has posted an obituary for Dan Smoot.
8 posted on 07/31/2003 5:27:09 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
Self-Made Greatness

Bump for a great patriot.

9 posted on 08/01/2003 4:39:28 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe
Dan Smoot was a great American who will be missed.
10 posted on 08/04/2003 8:42:41 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
See info below pertaining to Dan Smoot. Prior to his retirement from the Bureau, Smoot was the subject of disciplinary action and was not considered desirable for re-instatement.


The John Birch Society has long been our country's premier purveyor of conspiratorial interpretations of past history and current events. This posting is devoted to discussing some details from FBI files which speak to the unreliability and inaccuracy of JBS data and conclusions.

In 1964, FBI Director Hoover stated that he "had little respect for Robert Welch" (founder and leader of the the Birch Society) because of Welch's defamatory comments about President Eisenhower, the Dulles brothers, Chief Justice Warren, and others. He referred to Welch and the Birch Society as "extremist" and "irresponsible".

Also see Hoover's testimony (copied below) before the Warren Commission (Volume V, page 97) when he was asked about an article on JFK's assassination that was published in the JBS magazine, American Opinion:

"Mr. Hoover:
I have read that piece. My comment on it is this in general: I think the extreme right is just as much a danger to the freedom of this country as the extreme left. There are groups, organizations, and individuals on the extreme right who make these very violent statements, allegations that General Eisenhower was a Communist, disparaging references to the Chief Justice and at the other end of the spectrum you have these leftists who make wild statements charging almost anybody with being a Fascist or belonging to some of these so-called extreme right societies. Now, I have felt, and I have said publicly in speeches, that they are just as much a danger, at either end of the spectrum. They don't deal with facts. Anybody who will allege that General Eisenhower was a Communist agent, has something wrong with him. A lot of people read such allegations because I get some of the weirdest letters wanting to know whether we have inquired to find out whether that is true. I have known General Eisenhower quite well myself and I have found him to be a sound, level-headed man."

Bureau documents make it clear that, on numerous matters, the FBI thought that the Birch Society was not only wrong on substance, it also injured our society by its reckless and venomous attacks.

Here is one example:

Robert Welch and the JBS referred to author Harry A. Overstreet as a Communist sympathizer or dupe and they denounced Harry's 1958 book "What We Must Know About Communism" as being designed to insure that we did nothing effective against the Communist conspiracy. (See October 1959 Edward Janisch article in Birch magazine American Opinion which was entitled, "What We Must Know About Overstreet" for an example of how the JBS attacked and vilified a loyal American.)

In subsequent years, Welch described his campaign against Harry Overstreet as one of the Birch Society's greatest accomplishments.

What Welch did not know however, is that the FBI assisted Overstreet in writing this book! In fact, internal FBI documents refer to the book as being a useful supplement to J. Edgar Hoover's book "Masters of Deceit" and the FBI asked the American Legion to add the Overstreet book to its recommended reading list (which it did). In a letter to the Director of the Americanism Commission of the Legion, FBI Assistant Director C.D. DeLoach said: "We agree that it is a good one and would you please put it on your approved list."

In October 1958 the Bureau prepared a formal review of the Overstreet book. It was described as a welcome "new aid" in combatting the Communist menace. Quoting from the review memo:

"This new book presents cogent advice to the thinking public. It reflects ideas common to the thinking which has gone on in the Bureau for many years."

FBI Director Hoover told the Attorney General that it "would be a good idea (to) encourage everyone in the Justice Department to read it" and he remarked that he was disappointed that reviews of the book had been cool.

The controversy over Overstreet and his book continued for years due, largely, to the JBS smear campaign against him which took the form of attempting to get Harry's speaking engagements around the country cancelled due to his alleged pro-Communist sympathies or planting hostile questioners in his audiences.

At one point Harry's wife Bonaro wrote to their primary contact within the Bureau (Lou Nichols) to express their frustration and anger at being attacked in Texas by American Legion representatives. Nichols and the Bureau's liaison to the Legion (Asst Director C.D. DeLoach) contacted officials of the American Legion to set the record straight about Harry and his wife, whereupon attacks by Legioneers stopped.

In February 1961 J. Edgar Hoover responded to an inquiry about the Overstreet book. The Bureau file copy has the following notation: "We have had cordial relations with Dr. and Mrs. Harry Allen Overstreet and have furnished them considerable assistance in connection with their books."

The Bureau subsequently assisted Harry with other books that he wrote, including: "The Strange Tactics of Extremism" (1964) and "The FBI In Our Open Society" (1969). In "Strange Tactics" Harry devoted a chapter to former FBI agent (and Birch supporter) Dan Smoot. Harry dissected falsehoods that Smoot published in his newsletter, Dan Smoot Reports.

FBI Assistant Director DeLoach prepared a review of "Strange Tactics" and he specifically applauded Harry's discussion of Smoot because the Bureau thought Smoot was propagating extreme rightwing viewpoints and was wrongly capitalizing on his former association with the Bureau to inflate his credibility. Smoot, along with Fred Schwarz (Christian Anti-Communism Crusade), Billy James Hargis (Christian Crusade), and Edgar Bundy (Church League of America), were often described sarcastically in Bureau memos as "professional anti-Communists."

Incidentally, Harry Overstreet probably belongs in the Guiness Book of Records since he would be the only alleged Communist sympathizer ever to author a highly commendatory review of J. Edgar Hoover's 1958 book "Masters of Deceit" which appeared in the June 1958 issue of National Parent-Teacher (national PTA magazine). Upon learning about it, J. Edgar Hoover sent Harry a thank-you note.

When Harry died in 1970, Hoover sent a condolence telegram to his wife, Bonaro. It praised Harry's "many contributions" to the fight against Communism and offered deepest sympathies from "his many friends at the Bureau".

Robert Morris, the former Chief Counsel of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, had a close personal relationship with the Overstreets. Morris wrote to me in March 1989 about the Overstreets. Here is an excerpt:

"I did know Harry and Bonaro Overstreet in the late 1950s and 1960s. They were introduced to me by Louis Nichols when he was Assistant Director of the FBI. They were most helpful to me in my capacity of Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Internal Security Subcommittee...They became my friends and I am still grateful for their friendship."

Former FBI Security Informant Herbert Philbrick of "I Led 3 Lives" fame, and the California Senate Factfinding Subcommittee on UnAmerican Activities both referred to Harry Overstreet as an expert with extensive knowledge about how to fight Communism.

This is merely one example of how the Birch Society did enormous damage to our country by impugning the integrity and loyalty of Americans who did not share their warped viewpoints.

Anyone interested in further details about Overstreet or the FBI's negative evaluations about Robert Welch and The John Birch Society, feel free to contact me at: ernieinps@aol.com
11 posted on 08/26/2003 8:58:24 AM PDT by Ernie.cal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
Wallace T. writes:

What this article fails to mention is that Dan Smoot himself never subscribed to the elaborate conspiracy theories for which the John Birch Society was well known.

Well known to whom, readers of The Daily Worker? What "elaborate" conspiracy theories? That Eisenhower was a communist? Have you ever read Smoot's Invisible Government? Smoot mentions memoirs by British Field-Marshall Alanbrooke:

"...Eisenhower was often in direct communication with Stalin, reporting his decisions and actions to the Soviet dictator before Eisenhower’s own military superiors knew what was going on."

Sure, no conspiracy going on there! Oh, and by the way--Welch and Smoot, they were real "enemies!" Here, read this; from the final issue of The Dan Smoot Report dated March 1, 1971:

But now I am forced to make a change--or I will be forced to quit. The unrelenting weekly deadlines have taken their toll. I have been plagued with bad health of late.

Robert Welch, head of the John Birch Society, has generously offered to incorporate The Dan Smoot Report into The Review of the News, [Published by Welch] and, with that splendid weekly magazine, to fulfill my obligations to you whose subscriptions have not expired.

After rest and recuperation, I will resume writing and speaking as much as possible, but without the weekly deadlines. As frequently as I am able, I will write a Dan Smoot Report. It will be published as a distinct section of The Review of the News. So, you who want my writing will get it--plus a great deal more.

I hope you will give The Review of the News the same loyalty and support you have given my Report.

Thanks, and may God bless you.


"Education is our total strategy, the truth our only weapon."
12 posted on 06/06/2004 11:21:38 PM PDT by w6ai5q37b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: w6ai5q37b
Nowhere did I say that the late Dan Smoot did not subscribe to any conspiracy theory. However, it is also clear Smoot never endorsed the "Insiders" conspiracy theory developed primarily by Gary Allen and Robert Welch from 1964 through 1970, roughly the period from Welch's "More Stately Mansions" speech to Allen's mass market paperback, None Dare Call It Conspiracy. Dan Smoot certainly recognized the existence of a power elite controlling much of American foreign and domestic policy, as witnessed by his 1962 book, The Invisible Government. He may even have believed that Eisenhower was a Soviet agent or dupe, as Welch did. But even were this so, that does not prove that Smoot subscribed to Insiders theory, which is the existence of an elite, made up of men of different ethnic, religious, and national backgrounds, who controlled both the Western democracies and international Communism.

If you were to review Smoot's writings in the predecessor publications to The New American, you would find little reference to the Insiders theory. OTOH, Gary Allen, along with, to varying degrees, Susan Huck, Alan Stang, and Medford Evans, supported the theory, as evidenced by their writings. I don't believe Robert Welch demanded 100% conformity with his views in either his publications or his employees. However, he did expect that they at least not contradict Birch Society beliefs in their public statements. Revilo Oliver made no secret of his severe anti-Semitism and white supremacies, especially after the early 1960s. Oliver was dismissed from the Birch Society and its publications. In contrast, Gary Allen kept his atheist and libertarian views under wraps in his public writings. Allen was not exiled.

Conspiracy theory, whether about the Insiders, the theorists who point to the Masons, Jews, or Jesuits as a worldwide cabal, the Marxist view of ruling class conspiracy, LaRouche's theories about bankers and old European royal families, or any other variant or combination of the above, is valid insofar as it accurately explains past events and can predict future events. As such, these conspiracy theories (or for that matter the belief that most human events occur by accident) must undergo the same tests that Einstein's theory of relativity, Darwin's theory of evolution, Mandel's theory of heredity, or Keynes' theory of deficit spending in times of recession do. If the theory works and comports with the known facts, it is a valid supposition; if it doesn't so work or agree, it should be rejected.

No one, not the Birchers, the LaRouchians, the leftists, etc., can claim that "The Bible says it, I believe it, the matter is settled," or, "Rome has spoken, the matter is ended."

13 posted on 06/09/2004 6:22:24 PM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: w6ai5q37b; hellinahandcart

Took you 10 months to compose that reply, did it?


14 posted on 06/09/2004 6:23:58 PM PDT by Xenalyte (It's not often you see Johnny Mathis in the wild.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

Sometimes you have to really search for the right words. Like Livingstone searching for the source of the Nile. LOL


15 posted on 06/09/2004 7:01:53 PM PDT by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.

For a FACTUAL discussion about Dan Smoot based, primarily, upon first-time released FBI files and documents, see:

http://dan-smoot.blogspot.com/

Smoot's alleged expertise about communism and internal security matters certainly must be considered suspect based upon the FBI documents discussed above.

More info available from: Ernie1241@aol.com


16 posted on 04/27/2006 5:28:18 AM PDT by factfinder200
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: factfinder200
It appears from the FBI records that Dan Smoot exaggerated the importance of his career with that agency. We have his side of the story relative to the reason for his censure, but not that of his superior. As the superior is probably dead, finding the reason for the dispute may be impossible, unless the FBI files contain specifics relative to the matter or the superior kept a diary or log. Personnel disputes can occur even when people are in overall political or philosophical agreement. In fact, while working for Facts Forum, Smoot fired Medford Evans, an academic and polemicist who would later write for the Birch Society publications in the same period (1960s and 1970s) that Smoot did.

Another interesting avenue of pursuit would be the verification of Dan Smoot's claim of a strong academic record in the Dallas public schools, Southern Methodist, and Harvard.

J. Edgar Hoover was by all accounts a conservative Republican. Starting in 1961, William Buckley and his entourage of writers at National Review like James Burnham and Russell Kirk started distancing themselves from Robert Welch and the Birch Society for the same reasons that Hoover criticized them. The denunciations of the Birch Society and of Welch, Smoot, et. al., by Buckley and his associates and Hoover and his staff mainly occurred in the pre-Insiders era (1960-65) when Welch and his associates were claiming that President Eisenhower and his brother, Milton, George C. Marshall, Dean Acheson, etc., were Communist sympathizers or dupes. It was the extensive and unbelievable range of these claims, which far exceeded anything Joseph McCarthy and the House Committee on Un-American Activities alleged in the 1950s, which led Welch and his associates to the "Insider" theory.

Additionally, Hoover was a consummate "behind the scenes" operator, having served as FBI chief under eight presidents. It was in his own self-interest to be nonpartisan, working with Democrats and Republicans in the White House over the years. While he amassed much power, Hoover also realized that hubris on his part would carry a price, as it did for General MacArthur during the Korean War and General McClellan during the Civil War. In the end, the head of the FBI serves at the pleasure of the President and the Attorney General, and Hoover recognized this reality.

It is also interesting that while the Birch Society "returned fire" on the attacks from Buckley and his associates, calling him an "Insider", they never did so to Hoover. Rather, they often expressed their respect for the FBI and its chief. This was at a time when even liberals were cautious about attacking the FBI chief publicly. The allegations of Hoover's homosexuality, compromise by the Mafia, and partial black ancestry were circulated well after his death and the retirement and departure of the Hoover-era hierarchy at the FBI. One has to wonder if the FBI may have had compromising information on Welch, et. al., as they had on Martin Luther King and the Kennedys.

Note that Dr. King also seldom criticized the agency in public even as Hoover publicly called him the most notorious liar in America. While Hoover did not believe the civil rights movement was Communist led or inspired or that it served Communist purposes, he was also reluctant to have his agency involved in investigating violations of law by civil rights opponents in the South. He also was reluctant to hire African-Americans as FBI Special Agents, though he used them as informers in many instances.

Neither Hoover and his senior FBI staff nor Robert Welch, Dan Smoot, and their co-thinkers were entirely driven by a zeal for the truth. All were human and prone to their own particular conceits. Hoover may have been more realistic relative to the threat posed by the Communist Party, USA, and its network of sympathizers than was Welch. However, as former New Leftists turned conservatives like David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh have pointed out, the influence of Marxists in American society was not so much a case of robotic dupes taking orders from CPUSA headquarters or Moscow (or from some shadowy organization) but of well educated people with an agenda to transform society to their worldview successfully insinuating themselves into academia, the arts, etc., through networks of like minded people. Men like Horowitz and Radosh better understood the development of left wing influence than did Welch, Smoot, Hoover, Buckley, et. al.

Neither Hoover nor Welch successfully understood the nature of the problem. Hoover ignored this pattern probably because nothing the Left did in slowly taking over newspapers, colleges, or foundations violated any law. Keep in mind that he also was blindsided by the dominance of the Mafia in organized crime. Welch and his associates attempted to explain this pattern at first by an extremely extensive Communist conspiracy and then the "super-conspiracy" of the Insiders. However, they had no "smoking gun" or "deep throat" from the putative conspiracy, at least a strong enough one to refute their accusers. Additionally, their technique of using circumstantial evidence to "prove" their Insider conspiracy hypothesis was also adopted by leftist, anti-Semitic, and LaRouchian conspiracy theorists.

Going back to Dan Smoot, he may have agreed with the theory of a superextended Communist conspiracy in the 1950s and early 1960s. He did not, however, evolve into a believer of the Insider theory that Robert Welch and Gary Allen developed after 1965. Smoot's later writings appear to have been what we would now call paleo-conservative rather than conspiratorialist. Additionally, Smoot may not have been aware of the contradictory statements of Julia Brown and others regarding the supposed Communist ties of several civil rights leaders. Smoot may have been careless or gullible in such matters. However, Hoover was not infallible, nor for that matter are William Buckley or David Horowitz. Well-respected journalists, historians, scientists, and philosophers can and do err.

Smoot's exaggeration of his FBI record and his errors in accepting certain information sources that were less than reliable indicate that he was not entirely honest nor a superior researcher. However, these personal flaws cannot be conflated to presuming him a huckster or a patriot for profit.

17 posted on 04/27/2006 9:48:57 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.

Wallace:

Contrary to your second sentence, we DO have the story by Smoot's superior concerning the reason for the dispute (i.e. his SAC and the Inspector Gearty's 50+ page report). I summarized it in my Dan Smoot blog report. It is also available in exhaustive detail from Smoot's Personnel File.
Originally, I intended to copy extensive excerpts into my blog but I subsequently decided that it would be too boring to recount all the details....The bottom-line, however, is that Smoot lied about his status and he inflated his credentials so that his admirers would consider him as some sort of "expert" in internal security matters.

Yes, Smoot fired Medford Evans -- but not for any political or philosophical disagreements. Evans was fired for "financial irregularities". Evans had a history of being fired from his jobs. Sometimes for alcohol related problems. Prior to becoming a paid employee for the Birch Society and the Citizens Councils of America, Robert Welch suggested that Birchers form a front group to protest the firing of Evans. According to Welch, Evans was fired exclusively because of his "anti-communist" convictions. This, too, was a lie -- which even fellow Birch members acknowledged in private conversations.

With respect to this portion of your comments:

"Neither Hoover and his senior FBI staff nor Robert Welch, Dan Smoot, and their co-thinkers were entirely driven by a zeal for the truth. All were human and prone to their own particular conceits. Hoover may have been more realistic relative to the threat posed by the Communist Party, USA, and its network of sympathizers than was Welch. However, as former New Leftists turned conservatives like David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh have pointed out, the influence of Marxists in American society was not so much a case of robotic dupes taking orders from CPUSA headquarters or Moscow (or from some shadowy organization) but of well educated people with an agenda to transform society to their worldview successfully insinuating themselves into academia, the arts, etc., through networks of like minded people" ...

What most partisans don't seem to recognize is that Hoover's personal opinions, as recorded in handwritten comments on FBI memos, (while often colorful and caustic) were, nevertheless, largely irrelevant because the FBI functioned as a fact-finding INSTITUTION which received data from a huge assortment of independent sources --- including hundreds of informants located within subversive and legitimate organizations as well as local and state law enforcement agencies, state and national legislative committees, Army, Navy and Air Force intelligence, CIA, IRS, veterans organizations, friendly media, etc. etc.

With respect to McCarthy: Hoover initially ordered his subordinates to provide covert assistance to McCarthy but later rescinded this instruction because he thought McCarthy was reckless. In this regard, Hoover came to the same conclusion as Whittaker Chambers, whose letter to conservative book publisher Henry Regnery 1/14/54 summarized his concerns as follows:

"All of us, to one degree or another, have slowly come to question his judgment and to fear acutely that his flair for the sensational, his inaccuracies and distortions, his tendency to sacrifice the greater objective for the momentary effect, will lead him and us into trouble. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that we live in terror that Senator McCarthy will one day make some irreparable blunder which will play directly into the hands of our common enemy and discredit the whole anti-Communist effort for a long while to come."

FBI security informant Herbert Philbrick told a Boston newspaper reporter that:

"He [McCarthy] harmed the cause of anti-communism more than anybody I know."

And in 1952, Philbrick observed:

"According to the Communist leaders, McCarthy has helped them a great deal. McCarthy's kind of attacks add greatly to the confusion, putting up a smokescreen for the Party and making it more difficult than ever for people to discern who is a communist and who is not."

FBI Supervisor, Robert J. Lamphere, supervised the investigations of some of the biggest espionage cases of the cold war, including those of the Rosenbergs, Klaus Fuchs and Kim Philby plus he was intimately involved, in conjunction with Meredith Knox Gardner of the Army Security Agency, in using deciphered Soviet cables to build espionage cases.

Lamphere wrote in his personal memoir that:

"McCarthy's approach and tactics hurt the anti-Communist cause and turned many liberals against legitimate efforts to curtail Communist activities in the United States, particularly in regard to government employment of known Communists."

He also said: "McCarthy's star chamber proceedings, his lies and overstatements hurt our counterintelligence efforts."

With respect to your closing comment about Dan Smoot:

"However, these personal flaws cannot be conflated to presuming him a huckster or a patriot for profit."

As pointed out in my Smoot report, the Bureau concluded that Dan WAS a "professional anti-Communist" whose motives were self-promotion and lurid, sensational accounts of communist infiltration into government as a means of earning a living.




18 posted on 04/28/2006 8:39:25 AM PDT by factfinder200
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: factfinder200

I need to correct one portion of my message which wasn't properly phrased.

Welch's proposal to form a JBS front group to protest the firing of Medford Evans was not related to his being fired by Dan Smoot at Facts Forum.

Welch was referring to Evans being fired in June 1959 from his position at Northwestern State College of Louisiana in Natchitoches.


19 posted on 04/28/2006 8:43:43 AM PDT by factfinder200
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: factfinder200
With regard to the FBI in the J. Edgar Hoover era, the agency was far more monolithic in his era than now, and there was a great deal of micromanaging that took place, even down to whether the agents would wear hats. The FBI did have a wide network of informants and many analysts, but you can be sure that whatever was produced reflected the director's outlook even if he personally did not read the analysis. As much as Ted Turner was CNN and Henry Ford was Ford Motors, J. Edgar Hoover was the FBI.

Hoover was a mainstream conservative and rejected the Birchers as much as William Buckley, Whittaker Chambers, James Burnham, Russell Kirk, et. al., did, for the same reason: their unprovable and seemingly incredible charges of Communist infiltration did a disservice to the overall conservative cause. In other words, Hoover had an agenda. I am sure Presidents Kennedy and Johnson and their Attorneys General knew the agenda, but then again, liberal Democrats were not displeased at Hoover or Buckley going after the Birchers. Hoover also did not mince words about his enemies, from John Dillinger to Abbie Hoffman. If he was harsh about Welch and his associates and co-thinkers, such harshness was not uncharacteristic of the public pronouncements of the longtime FBI chief.

20 posted on 04/29/2006 8:35:03 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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