MEMBER LOGIN  l  FREE REGISTRATION
The Daily Bell Newswire

Exclusive Interview

Sunday, October 09, 2011

John McManus on the John Birch Society, What It Stands For and Why It's Been Attacked

With Anthony Wile
102

John McManus

The editors of The Daily Bell are pleased to present an interview with John F. McManus, President of the John Birch Society and publisher of the New American.

Introduction: In 1973, John F. McManus accepted an appointment by Robert Welch, the Society's Founder, as the organization's Director of Public Affairs. He later became its president. In this post, he became and remains the Society's chief media representative throughout the nation. He has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus has written and produced numerous audiovisual programs, including the popular DVD Overview of America, which is a moving tribute about America's US Constitutional roots. He has also written several books including Financial Terrorism (1993), Changing Commands: The Betrayal of America's Military (1995), William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment (2002), and The Insiders 5th Edition (2004). In addition to being a regular contributor of articles to The New American magazine, he serves as its publisher. He is also publisher of the Society's member-only monthly Bulletin. Mr. McManus was named president of The John Birch Society in 1991. Born in 1935 in Brooklyn, he served on active duty as a lieutenant in the U.S. Marine Corps for three years. For six years before accepting a staff position with the Society, he was employed as an electronics engineer.

Daily Bell: Thanks for your time. Explain what the John Birch Society is. What is its goal? Where did it get its name?

John McManus: The John Birch Educational organization was formed to preserve the American system, limited government under the US Constitution and independence. It got its name from Captain John Birch, a WWII hero who went to China in 1940 as missionary for his faith, and volunteered for service with the American forces when the war broke out. He actually led Colonel Jimmy Doolittle out of China after Doolittle's famous raid over Tokyo early in 1942, and that's when the American forces discovered him. General Claire Chennault, the head of the famous "Flying Tiger" organization in China, asked him to join their forces and to serve as an intelligence officer out of Chaplin. So he did that and for three years he performed excellent work for them. He should have been given the Congressional Medal of Honor, but he didn't get it. He was murdered ten days after the war ended by Chinese Communists. Robert Welch, the man who founded the John Birch Society, found out about John Birch long before the society was formed, and he wrote a book in 1954 about the life of John Birch, a real American hero. So when the time came Robert Welch formed the educational organization that we are here, he asked the parents if he could use their son's name and they happily said yes and became members right away, right from the beginning. So that's how we became the John Birch Society.

Daily Bell: Why is the society disliked by the mainstream press?

John McManus: Actually, there are two reasons why they don't like us, and the first one is they don't like to be shown as deficient and second is they want to be the leaders of those who are informing the American people. John Birch Society is actually a new medium of information in competition with all of these others. What we say is different than what they say about almost every issue and consequently that's why they don't like us. They'll do whatever they can to make us seem like fools or extreme, or whatever nasty adjective they choose to throw around like candy to children, and that's why we are not liked by the mainstream media. We are, however, quite frequently liked by the local media, newspapers, small town newspapers where our members are busy, and gain a lot of influence but I don't expect to be treated fairly by the New York Times or Time Magazine for a good long while.

Daily Bell: Do insiders exist? Who are they?

John McManus: They certainly do exist and when we say insiders, what we are talking about are people who are leaders, who have drive to bring our country into a one world government and establish world tyranny. The society has always been accused of being anti-communist, which is accurate, and when communism in Russia seemed to implode, there were a few people who said, what will the society do now that communism is dead? The John Birch Society was always opposed to any form of totalitarianism and still believes that the communists who lead Russia are no less determined to build world government. They just don't call themselves communists anymore.

Daily Bell: What do they want? World government? Why?

John McManus: Well, they want world government, the United Nations, which predecessor insiders of this conspiracy helped to bring about. You wonder who some of the people are we call insiders? David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Peter J. Peterson – that's a good start.

Daily Bell: Will they be successful? Are they speeding things up?

John McManus: I don't think they'll be successful because I think the American people, especially, will wake up some day and begin to turn things around. Are they speeding this up? Yes, I think they are, and I think they are because they know that the John Birch Society's influence is growing remarkably.

Daily Bell: Are you basically optimistic or pessimistic about the state of the world?

John McManus: I am always an optimist. I think there are more good people than bad. What we have to do is organize the good people. I frequently have said that what we have to do is get good people off the couch and get them to do some heavy reading and get them to do some understanding. Then they can start to spread their own influence. What we tell people is, "You have influence; use it! And use it for something worthwhile." It is certainly worthwhile for people to use their influence to help others to triumph over the terrible education they got in our schools, and to realize the worth of the US Constitution and that it is not being adhered to. If the government of the United States would obey the US Constitution its cost would be 20% and its size would be 20%. That's very simple.

Daily Bell: What brought you to the society? Why have you spent your professional life with it?

John McManus: Well, what brought me to the society is interesting. Back in the early 1960's I was already a conservative and a devotee of William F. Buckley and his National Review Magazine. All of a sudden, John Birch Society was in the headlines everywhere. 'Secret fascists and and anti-Semitic organization was formed and people better watch out for it.' Unfortunately, I bought into that, and finally Buckley came out with an editorial in which he said there were a lot of good people at the Birch Society and what they ought to do is get rid of Robert Welch. It made sense to me because they had painted Welch as a screwball.

I actually wrote a letter to Buckley's magazine that was published, congratulating them for their attack on Robert Welch. And because of that I was contacted by a local member of the Birch Society who asked me a simple question: Are you basing your attitude on what Welch has said or on what others have said of him? I thought that was a good question and a challenge to me so I asked him to show me some stuff the society has said and I began a torturous re-evaluation. I ended up joining the Birch Society and then joining the staff. I have been a staff member of the Birch Society since 1966, giving much of my adult life to it. No regrets whatsoever.

Daily Bell: What is the opinion of the people you work with and those who support the society?

John McManus: The overall philosophy is very much in line with Robert Welch's plan. He said there were problems in the world. One of them was communism, another was collectivism, which you could call socialism, and then he talked about the loss of faith and the rise of the amoral man, people who would do anything, put aside all concepts of right and wrong just to promote themselves. He said those three problems are very, very real, they exist, and somebody has to do something to combat it so I am offering myself as a leader. Eventually I discovered this was the real Robert Welch, decided this man is correct and I want to help, so joined the society. Then he asked me to join the staff. We have about 75 employees and the people who work for the society agree.  If they didn't they wouldn't work for us.

Daily Bell: In the past, the society has been controversial. Was Dwight Eisenhower a communist, for instance? Is that still the position of the society?

John McManus: Well, the position of the society was that Dwight Eisenhower helped various communist victories come about here and there. Whether or not he was an actual communist, somebody else can decide that. I don't know; we don't. Robert Welch wrote a 300-page book about Eisenhower and anybody who has read that book doesn't condemn Robert Welch. He ended up saying, "Why didn't somebody else say this?" So the society's position regarding Eisenhower hasn't changed. It is that he helped bring the world closer to a communist world. They didn't succeed, of course, but it is a good example of the kind of thing that is happening and continues to happen.

I have recently written a 40-page booklet called The John Birch Society: Reality Versus Myth. I have gone into all the charges against the society, one of which, of course, is we claimed Eisenhower, that great American, was a communist. Well, we didn't. We certainly pointed out many of the things that he did, including forced repatriation of several million people back to communist slavery, who didn't want to go, many of them committing suicide on trains they were being herded into. We also pointed out the betrayal of the Hungarian revolution in 1956. Robert Welch published the fact that Fidel Castro was a communist six months before he took control of Cuba, and Eisenhower was president at the time. If Robert Welch knew he was a communist, then the government of the United States did, and the president was deficient in telling everybody that he was a great man, this is good for Cuba and so on.

One of the interesting things about Eisenhower is that he choose for his ghost writer of his own book, Crusade in Europe, a man named Joseph Fels Barnes, who was an actual communist. So choosing to have his book written by a communist – you can imagine the flavoring it was given. There is a lot about Eisenhower that should be known and we don't back away from criticizing Eisenhower as we don't back away from criticizing anybody. To simply go around and say the John Birch Society is screwball because they said Eisenhower is a communist is wrong. It's playing people as fools.

Daily Bell: Further to your book about debunking memes and such, it is said that the Rockefeller family purchased Robert Welch's business or was otherwise involved with him, and that the Society is part of a manufactured Hegelian dialectic? Is this just slander from enemies of the Society?

John McManus: Yes, it is. There was a man years ago named Eustace Mullins who wrote a book, which was actually about the dangers of vaccinations and that was the cause that he had taken up. And in that book, for some strange reason, there were a couple of pages saying that Rockefeller had bought Welch's Oxford Candy Company, Rockefeller financed it and whenever Robert Welch needed money he went to the Rockefeller banks and got money from them and so on. It was all completely false; there was not a shred of evidence to back up any of that stuff. It never happened. And over the years I tracked people who had said that, answered questions from a member who was told that by somebody, etc. It is totally ridiculous.

Daily Bell: Give us some background on the society and Robert W. Welch, Jr., who founded it.

John McManus: Robert Welch was born in North Carolina and was considered a gifted child. He was admitted to the University of North Carolina at the age of 12. In the fall of 1919, he enrolled in Harvard Law School to learn the free enterprise system. By 1922, he had had enough of the school and launched the Oxford Candy Company. In 1926, he invented the Sugar Daddy candy and sales skyrocketed. He left the company he worked so hard to build after a dispute with management and started again. Eventually he ended up working for his brother at the James O. Welch Company in 1935 until he "retired" in 1956 to found The John Birch Society in 1958. He guided JBS through its first three decades until his passing in 1985.

Daily Bell: Has the society evolved its views? How so?

John McManus: Have we evolved? No, we haven't. We have always been opposed to any form of totalitarianism. We've always been in favor of the US Constitution and what those serving our country have taken an oath to support and stand by. We might have had changes in tactics and so forth. We used to carry around heavy 16mm film projectors and we went to film strip projectors and now we are into the Internet, so we have kept pace with technology. You could call that a bit of an evolution but as far as ideological evolution, no, none of it.

Daily Bell: What has been its greatest impact? Wasn't Ronald Reagan influenced by Birch views?

John McManus: No, we don't think that Ronald Reagan ever listened to the Birch Society. We've actually put out quite a bit of information showing that the reputation of Reagan as being a tremendous conservative and so forth isn't merited. Our greatest impact is awakening millions of people, letting them know that the instruction they got in the schools they went to was not good, was not accurate, was not helpful. I can even remember my own schooling – whenever it came around to talking about the US Constitution, it was time to fall asleep.

Daily Bell: Do you believe your organization has been the target of assassinations via plane crashes and the like?

John McManus: When Robert Welch stepped aside in early in 1983, the leader at the society became Congressman Larry McDonald from Georgia – a Democrat, by the way. Six months later Larry McDonald was aboard a Korean airliner on its way to South Korea when the plane was attacked by a soviet fighter plane, and he and 268 other passengers on that plane disappeared. I guess we could say that one of our leaders was a victim of a Soviet attack, but the answers were given by our government as to what really happened to that plane and the people aboard it are totally deficient. We believe the plane landed on Sakhalin Island, and what happened to the people after that we don't know. Nobody from the Soviet Union has ever come out and talked about it. So the answer to the question is yes, in that instance, our leader, the man who was at the time the head of the John Birch Society, US Congressman Larry McDonald, was taken out.

Daily Bell: What kind of impact has the society had in terms of expanding freedom in America and in the world?

John McManus: Protecting the system is something that we have done and is still there. We've got correspondents and some members in other parts of the world where the English language is spoken, as we only deal with the English language. I have been to Australia, I've been to Switzerland and my colleagues have been to France and to other countries in Western Europe where a lot of people do speak English. We tell them what we are doing, and there have been attempts to start their own similar Birch Society but they haven't succeeded very well.  We are certainly grateful that they even tried.

Daily Bell: You seem to be having a significant impact in the 2000s. Has the Internet helped?

John McManus: Yes. We were a little slow to adapt to the use of the Internet but we are into it heavy now. You can go to JBS.org website and see quite a selection of any issue you want or purchase books. The Internet has been very helpful but we also caution people not to believe everything they read on the Internet. It's sometimes used as a disinformation organ and that should be watched.

Daily Bell: Is your membership growing?

John McManus: Yes, it is growing but not as much as we would like. What is growing dramatically is our influence. As you are probably aware, in the US there have been a lot of new organizations that have sprung up – primarily Tea Party organizations – but there are second Amendment groups, as well. Some of them are fairly old but lots of new ones, too – followers of Glenn Beck, nullification-now organizations have started, Obamacare nullification and so forth, and we are pleased with that. A lot of the people who get involved begin to ask questions and usually there is a member of the Birch Society who has joined the group along with the other people and they start supplying answers. Because of the Birch Society's influence membership continues to expand. We are being invited to speak in front of these groups – I have done it myself and my colleagues. Most of our speakers' bureau activity has been due to a member getting an audience, selling tickets, etc. There are others, not just members, who are doing this and this is a very good sign.

Daily Bell: You have been accused as a society of being racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic. Why?

John McManus: I have always said how much it bothers me when I hear people saying we are a racist or anti-Semitic organization. It bothers me because it's not true, but it bothers our black and Jewish members even more. And yes, we do have members who are black or Jewish. We don't ask people what their skin color is or what their ethnic background is when they want to join the society. It has been a tactic of the Left, and especially the extreme left, to hurl dirty names and we have been accused of anti-Semitism and racism and it is certainly something we are aware of but it has no substance whatsoever.

Daily Bell: Why is the establishment frightened of you?

John McManus: They are mostly frightened of us because of our potential. If the John Birch Society could start a chapter in every community across the United States there would be a revolutionary change in our country, and the revolution would bring us back to what the founding fathers gave us – limited government under the US Constitution and a morally-based citizenship who does things because they are the right thing to do and not just for self-promotion. The potential of JBS has not been reached, only partially, and the great fear of the insiders and the people who want world government, is that our potential will be reached. That's why they fear us.

Daily Bell: Will you see the end of central banking in your lifetime?

John McManus: I can certainly hope so. I think the American dollar is going down and if it goes down there is going to have to be change. So we have taken some steps in alerting people about what needs to be done. We would like to see an end to the Federal Reserve but not overnight; it would be chaotic if it were done overnight. It has to be done incrementally. We would like to see an end to legal tender laws that say only the US dollar is acceptable as payment for debt. That's a bit of tyranny right in itself. We would like to see private mintage; we would like to see people getting back to using gold and silver. There's a bill in the congress right now to do away with the legal tender law, and we are urging members to understand what it is and why, and get their own congressman interested in it.

Daily Bell: How about the military-industrial complex?

John McManus: There has to be a military-industrial complex; you have to have a strong defense. Of course, if you want to have a strong defense you have to have weaponry, but what we want to see instead of the United States going around the world and policing the world, would be to see the troops brought home from Afghanistan and from Iraq and the Philippines and Japan and South Korea, and a couple of hundred other places American troops have been stationed. Our position regarding the military is that it was formed to protect the lives, liberty and property of the American people – period. That's all. Not to police the world or to force people to adopt our ways. If people want to adopt our ways through persuasion that's one thing, but don't force them. So you have to have a military-industrial complex. It would probably be a lot smaller if our government would get back to what we think the military should be instead of spread out all over the world.

Daily Bell: Is the dollar reserve system dead?

John McManus: Not yet. It's on life support. The destruction of the dollar has been brought about by conspiratorial influences. The Federal Reserve was started in 1913 and was largely the work of Edward Mandell House, President Wilson's Chief Advisor, who was a Marxist. He actually wrote a book in which he said he wanted socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx. He had great influence over Wilson, and he had great influence over the people who brought us into the Federal Reserve in 1913. Of course, the Federal Reserve is one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto; plank #2 is progressive income tax, #5 is the Federal Reserve, #10 is education for all children in government schools – and I don't have to tell anybody why the government would want the kids in government schools.

Daily Bell: Is the EU dying?

John McManus: It is certainly in trouble. I would like to see it die. We are great believers in sovereignty and independence of nations. We even site the Holy Scripture on the subject. Nationhood began at the tower of Babel when some people tried to build a world government and challenge God. God confused the tongues and people who could speak with each other went over here and formed a nation, and people went to the other side and formed a nation and so forth. Nationhood was founded by God almighty, and therefore it is good. World government, which is the destruction of nationhood, is not good. So we are in favor of that. We believe that the European Union has captured the sovereignty of 27 nations. And the history of how they did it, lying and misleading people along the way as to what their real intentions were, is very serious. Plus, when Gorbachev came out and said that the European Union is the new Soviet, that kind of said a lot.

Daily Bell: Is China beginning to fail?

John McManus: No, I don't think so; I think it's doing quite well. China's now calling the tune in America. We are so heavily indebted to China right now, a trillion dollars or more, and China has said they are going to rethink buying any more United States debt. So if we want China to buy more of our debt, we have to do what China wants done so that China is in the ascendancy and the United States is in the decline. It never had to happen but it has happened, and so when things happen you can bet somebody wanted it to happen.

Daily Bell: Are we headed toward a real worldwide depression? Is it a managed one?

John McManus: Yes to both. I think we are headed to a worldwide depression. I think the dollar is sinking; it's under attack from within, the depression is about to be brought about, absolutely. It's very easy to look at the situation and to say, "Well, a dollar that is as sick as the US dollar is – the government ought to be doing a few things that would help to strengthen it and cease it's decline." I asked a fourth grader recently, "Do you think somebody who is heavily in debt should give away money?" And the fourth grader said, "NO, of course not." Well, we have a foreign aid program, the United States government, that admits to going into debt by a trillion and a half dollars year after year after year, yet gives away money. Ridiculous? Well, it's one way of looking at it but the other way to look at it is it's the deliberate way to destroy the dollar.

Daily Bell: Should people buy gold and silver even at current prices?

John McManus: Why not? If nothing else, gold and silver is a store of value and it might turn out it will be the only thing you can use to engage in commerce. I think the current prices are certainly higher than they were a year or two ago but they are still going higher. But I don't give financial advice. I have people call me up and ask, "What should I do with my portfolio?" I say, "Go get yourself a financial advisor."

Daily Bell: What do Americans have to do to return their country to freedom?

John McManus: They have to wake up and get off the couch and stop watching television. They have to realize that they have lived in the most free society that the world has ever known, and they did nothing at all to earn that. But what they have to do is to pass it on to their children and their grandchildren and for generations who are yet to come. That's what they have to do.

So what do Americans have to do to return their country to freedom? Get involved. Make sure you get involved in something worthwhile. There are organizations that have been formed in our country to lead people down a primrose path. That's a mistaken way to go about it, and we warn people not to get involved in organizations that are counter-productive.

Daily Bell: Are you worried about a military takeover?

John McManus: No. I am worried about a takeover in America that might then be enforced by the military. I don't think that the military takeover would come first.

Daily Bell: Who runs the US? Are the people known to Americans?

John McManus: Well, the insiders, certainly. We target the Council on Foreign Relations, a private organization headquartered in New York City. Each administration for the last several dozen years has reached out to hundreds of Council on Foreign Relations members; many of our presidents past have been members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Council on Foreign Relations was formed to form world government. It actually was the work of the same man who was influential in forming the Federal Reserve, Edward Mandell House. When the US Senate said no to the League of Nations in 1919, its conferees built the Council on Foreign Relations, and they have developed major influence within the government of the United States, within the media, within the clergy. There are only 4,500 members, but it reads like the Who's Who in America.

Daily Bell: Are Americans apathetic or do they realize the increasing danger they face from their own government?

John McManus: Most of them are apathetic but fewer of them are today. There are a lot of people in this county who are concerned. They realize that indebtedness is a very serious problem. They realize that we shouldn't be a decade in a war in Afghanistan without victory and we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place without the required declaration of war that the US Constitution calls for. They are concerned about the poor education that their children are getting in the schools and so forth. So there are a lot of people who are less apathetic than they used to be and of course, we try to stimulate people to get away from apathy and get involved.

Daily Bell: What is the biggest challenge to freedom today?

John McManus: I think the destruction of the dollar. The dollar destroyed would lead to world currency under the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank – something related to the United Nations, to which those two organizations are related. That would be the end of sovereignty, which would be the end of the independence of the United States. There are many ways to destroy our country and the least likely way to invade it with military force. That isn't going to happen but you can destroy the United States economically, and you can destroy it ideologically and I think that is what is going on. So I think the destruction of the dollar is the greatest threat to freedom today and the build-up of the government of the United States and continued subservient nations.

You know, the last time the United States declared war was on December 8, 1941, the day after Pearl Harbor. We went to war in Korea under the United Nations. We went to war in Vietnam under NATO, a treaty organization, a United Nations subsidiary. We went to war in Desert Storm, the first attack on Iraq, under a United Nations resolution. We are still there under United Nations resolutions in Iraq, and the leader in Afghanistan is NATO, another United Nations subsidiary. So our military is doing the will of the United Nations and most of the people in the military have absolutely no idea that that is going on. Nor did I when I served as in the United States Marine Corps in the 1950s. I didn't realize it then, but I do now.

Daily Bell: Are the elite banking families and their enablers growing scared?

John McManus: I think they might be. We've got a candidate here named Ron Paul from Texas, who is probably as good a student about the economic side of the treachery going on as anybody, and the treatment he gets by the major media indicates that they are afraid of him. And if they are afraid of him, then they are a little bit scared. They are scared that their Federal Reserve is going to be replaced. They are scared that the constant bailing out of big industry by the Federal Reserve printing more money is going to stop, They are afraid of that. I want to point out, however, that Ron Paul isn't endorsed by JBS.

Daily Bell: They seem to try to run the world through fear-based propaganda. Is this failing?

John McManus: No, it hasn't been failing; I think it's quite accurate; it's been quite effective. I think it's less likely to fail now. See, Robert Welch, who formed the society, always said that the day would come when the situation developed would be so bad and so obviously bad that a lot of people would turn towards something that could right the ship. I think we are getting close to that point. Others have said it came and went, but I don't believe that. I think that the government of the United States is in deep disregard by the American people, and I hate to say it, but I think that's good.

Daily Bell: Is the world running out of oil?

John McManus: No, just the opposite. In fact, Canada and the United States have had some recent new discoveries and developed recent new technology about extracting oil from the ground. The United States could be totally independent of foreign oil in less than ten years if the government would get out of the way. There are tremendous oil reserves in North Dakota, which I think is the same that stretches over into Canada and goes into Montana, called Bakken. New technology for natural gas and petroleum – I have been reading articles just this week about the fact that we can be independent if the government would simply get out of the way. The discoveries that have been found within the borders of the United States are greater than the discoveries north of Alaska. So I don't think we are running out of oil; I think we have too much government.

Daily Bell: Is the world facing disastrous global warming?

John McManus: Oh, no, that's fallacy. There are over 19,000 scientists who signed a statement put together in the state of Oregon and they are combating the propaganda being spread by Al Gore and several others. We might be in a position where the temperature is a little higher several decades ago, which is probably brought about naturally, by sun spots, etc. But to say that the serious condition of global warming is brought about by human activity is completely bonkers – absolutely nuts. Happily, a lot of people have begun to see through this.

Daily Bell: Should people be taxed to create carbon sinks? Should the UN be in charge of such a tax?

John McManus: Of course not. It was proposed at the Copenhagen Environmental meetings a year or two ago. It wasn't just the United States that said no.

Daily Bell: Should the UN exist at all? Why does it exist?

John McManus: It exists as a challenge to independent nationhood. I can certainly see where one nation can have a relationship with others. Some ask, "If we get rid of the United Nations how are we going to know what is going on in other countries?" By golly, we have Ambassadors in every country, why not rely on them? And those Ambassadors are welcome. And the Ambassadors in other nations should know they are there and just there to explain why the US is doing this or that and so forth. World government, to me – I am opposed to it politically, economically and I'm opposed to it religiously.

Daily Bell: How about the World Bank and IMF? What's your opinion on these entities? Are they weaker or stronger in the Internet era?

John McManus: Well, the World Bank and the IMF are both United Nations subsidiaries. The World Bank and the IMF were put together back at the Bretton Woods agreement even before the UN was formed, and the architect of it was a guy named Harry Dexter White, who was a communist. Most of the leaders of those organizations right from the start were communists. That's my opinion about them. The Bank of International Settlements in Switzerland is a fledgling world bank and I think we ought to be careful of it, leery of it. Anything that leads to world government we should be on guard against.

Daily Bell: We like to report on an Internet Reformation similar to the one that occurred after the invention of the Gutenberg Press. We expect radical change, possibly in societies around the world. Do you?

John McManus: No, I don't think you are going to have radical changes, but the Internet is a valuable tool, and it's valuable for both sides. As I said before, there's a lot of junk on it but there is also a lot of good on it. The Internet has turned out to be a good thing for us to be able to spread our influence, and to give people the idea that there are alternative points of view. But I don't see it changing societies around. You are talking about changing human nature and I don't think it's going to do that.

Daily Bell: Where do you see the John Birch Society in ten years? What are your biggest challenges today and how are you meeting them?

John McManus: Our biggest challenge is to build our organization, to build a chapter of the society in their community. We say if there are 500 members of the JBS in any congressional district, Congress will elect a US Constitutionalist. It's been done, it's been shown that it will be done and we need to get more people to take on that responsibility. There are people who don't want to get involved – they're too busy, they're trying to make a living, raise their family – but if the nation were attacked militarily they would be willing to volunteer, they would be willing to go and pick up a rifle or whatever. But the nation is being attacked. It's not by a military force but by people from within, who have gained power and lorded over everyone.

Daily Bell: Any other points you want to make?

John McManus: My closing comments are we have a great country here, and the Constitution of the United States has been lauded by many students of freedom. I can point to somebody who studied the US Constitution and said it's one of the greatest pieces of work that was ever put together by the mind of men. It's a document to govern the governor, govern the people. The John Birch Society says, our motto is, less government, more responsibility and with God's help, a better world. Less government? How much less? Get back to the US Constitution and as I said before, if the US Constitution was fully enforced, the government would be 20% its size and 20% it's cost. How about the Ten Commandments? Most of them are being completely ignored or violated, so the combination of the US Constitution to control the government and a freely accepted moral code like the Ten Commandments to govern the people, would, we believe with God's help, bring about a better world.

Daily Bell: Any reading material you want to suggest to people? Websites? Books?

John McManus: Come to JBS.org and you'll see more material than you can believe. I just recently gave a speech in New Jersey, and I had a woman come up to me and say, "I am completely blown away." I asked why. She said, "I taught school for 30 years and am now retired and I always told my students how good the UN was and how bad the JBS was. Now I see I was completely off base. Thank you so much for coming here today. Your speech was wonderful." That kind of thing happens, and if people would give us an honest look at what we say and our history, we will win.

Daily Bell: Thank you for your time. Good luck.

John McManus: Thank you. It's been a pleasure.

We've followed JBS and the New American magazine for decades because the Society and its publications helped pioneer the kind of history that seems plausible to us – directed history – in which a handful of wealthy banking families and enablers ("insiders," in JBS lingo) conspire to create one-world government through a series of false-flag events, wars and political control. As a result, it's come in for its fair share of abuse from both the Left and Right. It's been called anti-Semitic, racist, homophobic – and those are just the polite criticisms.

The Birch Society puts a lot more emphasis on communism than we might, but that's been its hallmark since its inception – and in the mid-20th century the Cold War was a big deal. Regardless of its emphasis on communism (which is only one part of directed history in our view) there's no mistake that the Birch Society and its seminal books have had an impact on several generations of free-market thinkers.

The Society's initial heyday was in the mid-20th century when it was relentlessly attacked, but it has obviously stood the test of time and many of its predictions and points of view have been validated by current events. It's been more accurate than Western mainstream media about underlying socio-political and economic trends, that's for sure.

Nonetheless, perhaps because of its success, the attacks keep coming. And a surprising one came from alternative-journalist Eustace Mullins, a friend of the great poet Ezra Pound, who wrote some of the most scathing and intriguing books about the power elite that you'll ever read. Mullins, in our view, had a habit of making mind-bending assertions that may be valid but are not very provable.

That's apparently because he used a lot of information derived from the circles he ran with and the private conversations he had; logically, he may have had some trouble footnoting such perspectives. It did lead to fairly inflammatory allegations. 

Anyway, we went looking for the allegation by Mullins and found it in a Rense article entitled, "An Afternoon With Eustace Mullins by James Dyer," posted at Rense in 2003. Here's the pertinent text:

JBS was setup by Nelson Rockefeller. I knew two people at the original meeting. They needed a right-wing, anti-communist organization. NR decided that Robert Welch was the man to run JBS, so he arranged for the sale of Welch's Candy Co. (where Robert Welch had been working for his brother John) to Nabisco (which was a Rockefeller controlled company) at a highly inflated price and Welch was given an income to run the John Birch Society.

Revilo Oliver was a good friend of mine and he was one of the founders of the JBS. He and I were sitting in his living room once and he told me that he knew Nelson Rockefeller ran the Birch Society because he had a revolving fund at Chase Manhattan Bank, and whenever Welch needed a quarter million dollars to meet the payroll, he'd go to CMB and withdraw the money.

We thought at the time the allegation was a little "far out" and thus we're happy to have provided Mr. McManus the opportunity to rebut it. It's an especially pertinent issue given that as the Internet Reformation continues to expand, the Hegelian divide-and-conquer tactics of the power elite come under more exposure and sustained attack.

We've been struggling this past week, for instance, to cover what seems to be an obvious attempt by the power elite to infiltrate and influence the sprawling Occupy Wall Street movement – to turn it into a controlled opposition of sorts. In fact, some allege it was founded with this in mind.

Over the next week, we'll try to concentrate on the libertarian elements of movement, as it is a great deal more difficult to maintain a controlled opposition in the 21st century than in the 20th. People know a lot more thanks to the Internet, which has thoroughly exposed the plans for a One World Order for those who care to look and read. Of course, JBS was exposing Western elites in the 20th century, long before the Internet. Historically, its membership has fought for freedom and against what can be called Money Power.

Followup: We went looking for other information regarding Eustace Mullins's statement regarding JBS and Welch. We found this statement from alternative journo Kelliegh Nelson, in an article entitled "The Tea Parties, Part 3," posted August 2011 over at NewsWithViews:

Third and of special importance is a correction that needs to be made from the first article. I don't know of a journalist or a researcher that doesn't make mistakes from time to time, but I pride myself on targeting the truth and on correcting errors. This time, I made an error by believing an old and vicious rumor that I should have checked more thoroughly before I linked to it. The link was in regards to the John Birch Society founder, Robert Welch.

The link stated that Welch's candy company was purchased by a Rockefeller holding at a large sum of money in order that Welch head up the new John Birch Society. Now it is well known that Rockefeller monies have funded other large organizations, but the JBS through Welch's candy company is not one of them. Robert's candy company had failed and he went to work for his brother's candy company until 1956.

I believe it was in 1958 that he started the John Birch Society. It wasn't until the early 60s that James Welch sold his candy company to Nabisco. Whether Nabisco was owned in part or in whole by any Rockefeller entity is of no importance inasmuch as funds from the sale of James' candy company were not instrumental in funding Robert's new Society.




Anthony Wile:   View Bio  l  View Site Contributions
John McManus:   View Bio  l  View Site Contributions
Latest Daily Bell Articles
SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits.
Want to learn more? click here
 
NOT A MEMBER YET?
Join The Daily Bell and take full advantage of the benefits TODAY:
MEMBER LOGIN:
USERNAME:
PASSWORD:
REMEMBER ME
LOST YOUR PASSWORD / USERNAME?
Showing 21 - 40 of 102 - Newest on top - Reorder Feedback
  Posted by peri1224 on 10/11/11 08:36 AM

Enough said. We have been there before. No need to go around in circles. Maybe I could discuss this further with someone who shows good faith. But that's not you. All you want is to win an argument. And when challenges threaten to overwhelm you, you become bitchy and play dirty pool. I'm out of here.

Reply from The Daily Bell

We play dirty pool? Because you can't answer some simple questions? So you take your ball and go home like Memehunter? Too bad. We'd have enjoyed reading your responses.

As for playing dirty pool - you believe you are some sort of diplomat? ...

"Peri1224: DB still has a problem with Jews. And all the weasel words in the world will not help them."

"Peri1224: Jewish bakers and carpenters? What is this, slapstick? It's obvious YOU want to take this down some rabbit or rathole, because you can't stay on the level. You play dirty pool and should clean up your act."

"Peri1224: More slapstick. Seems you need these rabbit holes."

  Posted by peri1224 on 10/11/11 07:11 AM

DB: These families and those who came before them may in fact LEAD Jewish factions, historically, but to imply that because some Jews are involved in implementing a new world order, all Jews are involved, is a logical fallacy.

Can you finally stop this? It's getting ridiculous and outrageous. Nobody has ever said all Jews are involved. In fact I have taken pains to make it clear that regular Jews are NOT involved. So why do you keep hacking around that non-point as if somebody was insisting on it?

Seems you have to branch out into these rabbit holes because your main theory is full of holes. The Rothschilds were Jews when they received the Balfour Declaration. They were Jews when they financed the new Jerusalem Supreme Court building. Your constant attempts to make them into something else don't have any solid basis. The world's problem ARE Jews, although not all Jews, I grant you that. But that doesn't make the Rothschild problem any less Jewish.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Ah, now the truth. So here are our questions:

1. Are Rothschilds Khazars?

2. Are Khazars Jews?

3. The Rothschilds like to use Illuminati symbolism. Does the Jewish religion allow Satanism? Does it have room for Illuminism?

4. The great families are said to practice another religion entirely, in fact. Is this true? If it is, can the Rothschilds et al. be said to be "Jewish."

5. If the Rothschilds are Jewish, why have they evidently and obviously participated in activities that are anti-Jewish, including fanning the flames of anti-semitism? (See Reed)

6. The Rothschilds et al. apparently control tens of trillions via central banking. How then do they compare to the average Jew? Are they not in a sense "other?"

7. What about all the "enablers" -including, apparently, the Vatican. Is the Pope Jewish too? Along with Rockefeller.

8. What difference does it make? Are you not inciting further hatred and misunderstanding by claiming the New World order is primarily a Jewish invention - promoted primarily by Jews?. Is Merkel a Jew? Clinton? Blair? Buffet? On and on...

The rabbit hole looms for you, not for us.

  Posted by lewfalo on 10/11/11 06:52 AM

To me it's clear that "Zionism" and the State of Israel are pawns of the West; not the other way around. They accomplish several goals for the ruling Elite, exactly as DB has explained -- A stabilizing presence (at least as far as the Elite is concerned) in the Middle East, and a perfect scapegoat to provide cover for the true culprits.

It's very sad that when that usefulness runs out, many innocents will get thrown to the curb... or even much, much worse.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"To me it's clear that "Zionism" and the State of Israel are pawns of the West; not the other way around. They accomplish several goals for the ruling Elite, exactly as DB has explained -- A stabilizing presence (at least as far as the Elite is concerned) in the Middle East, and a perfect scapegoat to provide cover for the true culprits."


Thank you! Sometimes we feel (collectively of course) like the proverbial salmon swimming upstream, with a bear waiting at the other end of the rapids!

  Posted by Abu Aardvark on 10/11/11 06:51 AM

"@ Abu Aardvark:

Well, I'm not sure that is what you intended, given that you seem to be suggesting that I'm sick, but I find that the two websites you linked mostly support my contentions. "

---------------

Well, maybe you should read a little more closely before you announce a verdict regarding the support of your contentions ...

"Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Vol. 1 - 3" by Alan Hart:

Click to view link

Click to view link

Click to view link


"The Wandering Who?" by Gilad Atzmon:

Click to view link

Greetings

  Posted by lewfalo on 10/11/11 06:08 AM

I completely agree with you DB. I think perhaps memehunter just wants a "solution" to what ills humanity as we all do. I don't think he/she has found one, though. However, I can tell by the amount of research done, that memehunter has indeed found something to grab on to that seems plausible. So in that regard, the most I can do perhaps is offer counter ones, like you have. Once again, I think your conclusions are much closer to the truth.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Memehunter is intelligent and well-read. But blaming groups of people, generically, for the woes of the world is an incitement to misunderstanding, anger and frustration. Focus on the PROBLEM. Is the underlying problem Jewish? Is it Zionism? Or is it a group of intergenerational central banking families and their enablers who obviously have a religion, but one we would argue is hardly Jewish. Unless part of the Jewish religion includes a Satanical element and Illuminism.

  Posted by lewfalo on 10/11/11 05:43 AM

You can't "win" being labeled with these - Anti-Semite, Racist, Misogynist, etc. Most people will make an extra effort to "prove" they aren't one.

So I do commend your bravery for standing up for your opinions (which you've obviously researched very thoroughly). I don't believe you are any of those mentioned, but I also don't blame others for not wanting to be labeled as one.

Plus, I'm not so sure that the "problem" is what you are suggesting. Rather it is group identity and the willingness to abandon individual ethics when being a part of a group (or society in general). This is all due to evolution, I believe. This mindset not a very pleasant part of evolution, however; simply because this "group-think" mindset goes against reason. As a species, we have a lot of evolving to do.

Reply from The Daily Bell

1. For the record, DB never labeled memehunter an anti-semite.

2. Declaring or implying that a group (or even a movement such as Zionism) is responsible for the problems of the world today is a wonderful kind of misdirection and makes one a useful purveyor of power elite memes.

3. Not all Italians are in the mafia, even if the mafia is made up of Italians. Not all Jews are part of the familial power elite even if the power elite is "Jewish" - whatever that means.

4. The power elite set up a movement called Zionism. The power elite set up a country called Israel. Zionism, anti-semitism, these are tools used by the globalists, developed to entrap and ensnare those who wish to explain the REAL conversation . Those who focus on the Jewishness of the one-world order are playing right into the hands of those who are fomenting it.

  Posted by peri1224 on 10/11/11 04:39 AM

DB: And what is the problem, Peri1224? Why don't you explain it?
You too believe Jewish bakers and carpenters are behind the New World Order?

Peri1224: Jewish bakers and carpenters? What is this, slapstick? It's obvious YOU want to take this down some rabbit or rathole, because you can't stay on the level. You play dirty pool and should clean up your act.

DB: Ah ... we remember. You spent a lot of time emailing us information a few months ago that David Rockefeller was a crypto Jew.

Peri1224: If you can't find and research the origin of the Rockefeller name, Roggenfelder, from Germany, well then I guess you can't or don't want. Can't force you.

DB: Who else is a crypto Jew? Bill Clinton? it's been mentioned that along with Hitler, he was a Rothschild illegitimate child. And down the rabbit hole we go.

Peri1224: More slapstick. Seems you need these rabbit holes.

DB: Are you sure it is DB that has the problem with "Jews?"

Peri1224: You are making it more obvious with each post.

Reply from The Daily Bell

It is very simple. You apparently believe the "Jews," or even Zionists, are the source of the world's problems, which is exactly what the power elite hopes you will believe. This gives then opportunity to use the anti-semitism meme that has been carefully planted over the past century.

We believe that a intergenerational, familial conspiracy, mostly
"Jewish," along with non-Jewish enablers, has adapted, adopted and otherwise taken shelter behind the Jewish nomenclature and its traditions.

These families and those who came before them may in fact LEAD Jewish factions, historically, but to imply that because some Jews are involved in implementing a new world order, all Jews are involved, is a logical fallacy.

US leadership is involved in five or six wars now, but not all Americans are warmongers. You call it slapstick, but then, apparently, you would.

  Posted by memehunter on 10/11/11 03:24 AM

DB: 'some of our elves have Jewish backgrounds
'
In "Anti-Semitism, Douglas Reed and Zion":

Click to view link

DB: 'Alexsemen, we are not "affiliated with Jews" whatever that means.'
In a reply to a comment posted by Alexsemen on this thread on 10/09/11 09:49 AM.

So, which is it? Why do we get two different answers?

It's a legitimate question, no, regardless of how many insults I am going to receive for daring to ask this clarification?

Reply from The Daily Bell

Wait a minute. So if one has Jewish ancestry, one is necessarily tainted for life and must announce an "affiliation" with the Jewish race or religion? If one's family is Lutheran or Protestant, but one no longer practices that religion, one is still said to be "affiliated" with these belief systems. Is that the position you're taking?

  Posted by memehunter on 10/11/11 12:52 AM

@ Abu Aardvark:

Well, I'm not sure that is what you intended, given that you seem to be suggesting that I'm sick, but I find that the two websites you linked mostly support my contentions.

I wonder why DB never mentions the whole question of Washington's unflinching support of Israel's policies, as well as their recent refusal to vote in favor of the resolution for the independence of Palestine. Is this due to "central banking" as well?

-----------------------------------
@Lewfalo:

I get accused of clogging the thread, but you will notice that DB replied to practically all of my comments on this thread, most of the time asking questions or begging me to react due to their comments.

Then, they blame me for note having discussed the Khazars (which is a lie, no matter how you turn it, moniker or no moniker, on this thread or three months ago), while accusing me of clogging the thread. No matter what I do, I am to blame. I am supposed, in one thread, to define Judaism, Zionism, explain the mystery of the Khazars, and so on, simply because I brought up the Zionist question. Of course, this is clearly a rhetorical tactic from DB, to make me appear as the villain.

There is one simple answer: never, ever, bring up the Zionist question if you want to be friends with DB.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Sure, Washington supports Israel's policies. And what difference does that make? Israel is a problem, obviously, but the larger problem is the installation of GLOBAL GOVERNMENT. They are two entirely different issues. Go ahead and conflate them. This is what the PE hopes you will do.

----

You wrote: "There is one simple answer: never, ever, bring up the Zionist question if you want to be friends with DB."

That is not what you began with. You started off at the top of this thread by virtually accusing us of covering up the perfidious nature of JBS, its stance as the controlled opposition and its affiliation with nefarious Jewish elements. You are welcome to bring up any questions you wish. But a question (or statement) and an accusation are two different things.

  Posted by Abu Aardvark on 10/10/11 05:52 PM

"but in your beloved Germany to become Hitler's willing executioners , it took for the German tribe only few month until 1-2 years to be 'perfect civilization's destroyers' and mass murdering criminals.

That is the proven history of ' born to be killers' as it is German tribe, always the trustfully perfect servant and devoted slave of the POWER whatsoever that could be !"

-------------------

From Wiki:

"HITLER'S WILLING EXECUTIONERS Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (1996) is a book by American writer Daniel Goldhagen that argues that the vast majority of ordinary Germans were as the title indicates "willing executioners" in the Holocaust because of a unique and virulent "eliminationist antisemitism" in the German identity, which had developed in the preceding centuries. Goldhagen argued that this "eliminationist antisemitism" was the cornerstone of German national identitiy, that this type of antisemitism was unique to Germany and because "eliminationist antisemitism", ordinary Germans killed Jews willingly and happily. Goldhagen asserted that this special mentality grew out of medieval attitudes from a religious basis, but was eventually secularized."

Apart from your apparent endorsment of Goldhagens flawed and thoroughly debunked approach you obviously have a bone (or two) to pick with this old tribe, which is about 80 million heads strong.

God luck with that ...

  Posted by Abu Aardvark on 10/10/11 05:33 PM

Sorry for coming late to the discussion, memehunter. The two links below lead to the websites of two gentlemen very close to the subject and may help ease acute rhetorical diarrhea. Or is it the moon?

Anyway, get well soon!

Click to view link

Click to view link

  Posted by lewfalo on 10/10/11 05:28 PM

DB: "We have written NO lies about you. You are not even you. You are a pseudonym. You are setting some kind of record for sensitivity, having accused us of slander (when you meant libel) and now claiming we are making up lies about you. No one even knows who you are."

This is great, isn't it?? Your moniker "insulted" his moniker. LOL I'm sure he/she is on the phone right now with the "authorities" and/or an attorney... LMAO

  Posted by playbes on 10/10/11 02:35 PM

Don't know much about the JBS but found this about a year ago and am impressed with what they saw coming so long ago...

Click to view link

  Posted by memehunter on 10/10/11 02:28 PM

Wow... Nice to see the real DB coming out! Thanks, this was entertaining.

Anyway, I think I knew what I needed to know as soon as I saw this half-hearted attempt to defend the John Birch Society in the afterthoughts after the interview, which is exactly why I worked hard yesterday to let
readers see things differently.

Since I am "clogging the thread", I will try to make it short. I have no interest in continuing this discussion anyway.

I would just like to point out two LIES that the Daily Bell has written about me, since it does concern this discussion:

DB: 'You want to avoid the issues of whether Jews are actually Khazars (which makes all these arguments even more ridiculous) go ahead.'

LIE #1: See this thread where I go into a lengthy discussion about the Khazars, with numerous references and citations to back up my arguments (DB actually even thanked me at the end of the discussion for the information I brought):

Real Danger to Eu Lies With German Judges:

Click to view link

Note that this article is dated Thursday, July 7, 2011.

DB: 'we coined the term Pharisee to define the great putatively Jewish families that are involved in the one-world conspiracy including the Rothschilds.'

LIE #2: In the thread cited above, I use the term 'Pharisaic' (and I would never claim to have invented that term, by the way).

In the same thread, I also mention Douglas Reed's book 'The Controversy of Zion' which, as far as I know, I was the first to mention here on Daily Bell (DB's article on this book is dated July 18, 2011).

I thought we were having an animated but still civilized discussion. Now everything goes, it seems.

Well, that's it for me. I don't argue with liars. Period.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Wow... Nice to see the real DB coming out! Thanks, this was entertaining.

DB: You bombarded this thread and then you are offended when we answer back emphatically. Anyway you were not having a discussion. You launched something like TWENTY TWO POSTS on this issue inside of 24 hours. That's a record on this site, except for one other individual that we can recall.

----

Anyway, I think I knew what I needed to know as soon as I saw this half-hearted attempt to defend the John Birch Society in the afterthoughts after the interview, which is exactly why I worked hard yesterday to let
readers see things differently.

DB: As we pointed out numerous times now, we weren't defending JBS. We gave them a chance to rebut a specific allegation and they did. You accuse us of lying but then repeat this weary accusation over and over.

----

Since I am "clogging the thread", I will try to make it short. I have no interest in continuing this discussion anyway. I would just like to point out two LIES that the Daily Bell has written about me, since it does concern this discussion.

DB: We have written NO lies about you. You are not even you. You are a pseudonym. You are setting some kind of record for sensitivity, having accused us of slander (when you meant libel) and now claiming we are making up lies about you. No one even knows who you are.

----

LIE #1: See this thread where I go into a lengthy discussion about the Khazars, with numerous references and citations to back up my arguments (DB actually even thanked me at the end of the discussion for the information I brought):

Real Danger to Eu Lies With German Judges:

Click to view link

Note that this article is dated Thursday, July 7, 2011.

DB: Isn't is obvious we were referring to TODAY'S THREAD. Not something that happened about three months ago.
----

DB: 'we coined the term Pharisee to define the great putatively Jewish families that are involved in the one-world conspiracy including the Rothschilds.' LIE #2: In the thread cited above, I use the term 'Pharisaic' (and I would never claim to have invented that term, by the way).

DB: We "coined a term" within the CONTEXT of our dialogue We never wrote that we owned the term or no one else had ever used it. That would be ridiculous.

----

In the same thread, I also mention Douglas Reed's book 'The Controversy of Zion' which, as far as I know, I was the first to mention here on Daily Bell (DB's article on this book is dated July 18, 2011).

DB: Glad you did. if we thanked you for the mention, it was doubtless sincere.

----

I thought we were having an animated but still civilized discussion. Now everything goes, it seems. Well, that's it for me. I don't argue with liars. Period.

DB: Taking your ball home?

  Posted by peri1224 on 10/10/11 12:48 PM

Memehunter : 1, DB: 0. Bigtime.

DB still has a problem with Jews. And all the weasel words in the world will not help them.

Reply from The Daily Bell

And what is the problem, Peri1224? Why don't you explain it?

You too believe Jewish bakers and carpenters are behind the New World Order?

Ah ... we remember. You spent a lot of time emailing us information a few months ago that David Rockefeller was a crypto Jew.

Who else is a crypto Jew? Bill Clinton? it's been mentioned that along with Hitler, he was a Rothschild illegitimate child.

And down the rabbit hole we go.

Are you sure it is DB that has the problem with "Jews?"

  Posted by R on 10/10/11 12:04 PM

In the busy turmoil of work, family, and dealing with other "external" issues, I had forgotten some of the new information I learned that contradict the indoctrination attempts I have heard over the years about the JBS. I really enjoyed your informative interview.

Of course the JBS was focused on "Communism" during the mid-20th century as that was the greatest perceived active foe of freedom and liberty at the time. But it appears wrong for others to state that they were not aware of other similar threats.

Whether you call it Communism, Marxism, Collectivism or modern day Liberalism, it is all a variation of the same oppressive Evil.

Those who wish to constantly revisit, agonize and finger point over the often twisted versions of the history regarding the creation of Israel need to quickly gain some real and useful perspective.

As you have correctly pointed out, the types of oppression with which we are dealing have been around long before the Rothschilds although they (the Rothschilds) are no less onerous. The current situation and involved "entities" "are what they are and have always been" and we have to learn how to effectively deal with them, expose them and Defeat them!

Thanks again!

  Posted by ernie1241 on 10/10/11 11:25 AM

Johnny-Justice:

As Dr. John Earl Haynes pointed out in his article about Sen. Joseph McCarthy and Venona documents, the Communists regarded zionism as "an ideological attribute not merely distrusted but hated by Soviet intelligence" and, in fact, "The expressive KGB cryptonym for Zionists was 'Rats' "

However, more interesting to me is your argument about "Soviet Russia was the result of Jewish influence" and "Communism is a Jewish invention".

One of the things I've never understood about Jew-haters who, like yourself, insist that

(a) 'Jews' were the predominant actors within the Bolshevik Revolution and

(b) U.S./European 'Jews' (like Jacob Schiff) "financed" the Bolshevik Revolution and

(c) 'Jews' controlled the Soviet Union

…is why Jew-haters never apply their exact same criteria and their 'logic' to interpreting the history of the Ku Klux Klan or neo-nazi movements in the U.S.?

Consider the following:

(1) Many of the 'Jews' who were Bolsheviks had rejected their religious heritage. Most of them were NOT 'secular Jews' (as is often claimed by Jew-haters). Most of the 'Jews' involved in the Russian Revolution were atheists who were hostile toward both Judaism and Zionism!

(2) But here is the more important point.

When these folks became Bolsheviks and worked for the success of the Revolution, they DID NOT do so because they thought to themselves 'this is how a religious Jew should think and behave.'

(3) In other words, they didn't perceive their revolutionary ardor as an outgrowth of their religious beliefs, nor did they attribute that ardor to their understanding of Talmud or their reverence for Torah, nor did they work toward a Communist state as a means to defend or promote their religion - because, in almost every case, they had no religious beliefs whatsoever.

(4) See: House Select Committee To Investigate Communist Aggression and the Forced Incorporation of the Baltic States Into the USSR, Special Report #2, December 31, 1954 entitled: 'Treatment of Jews Under Communism'

The following comments about the Bolshevik attitude toward Jews/Zionists appears on page 3:

'The Bolsheviks had always opposed national-cultural autonomy for doctrinal reasons. They had not recognized the Jewish people as a 'nationality', had opposed the Jewish religion as 'reactionary'…'

'From the very beginning, the Communists set themselves the goal of gaining control and then destroying all the institutions of Jewish communal life…To be sure, men of Jewish origin were to be found among the members of the Bolshevik Party as well as among the Socialists, the Democrats, and the Liberals and some of them achieved positions of prominence in the first years of the Bolshevik Revolution. But they were men who had broken not only with the Jewish religion but also with Jewish traditions and with the Jewish community; they hardly considered themselves Jews in any other sense than ethnic origin and they were not interested in Jewish communal affairs. Therefore, they were without influence in the Jewish community.'

'There was such a lack of Communists able to work among the Jews that the first executive secretary of the Communist Commissariat for Jewish National Affairs was a man who did not understand Yiddish and it was almost impossible to assemble a Yiddish-writing staff for the first Communist newspaper in that language. '

'Jewish political life in 1917 was dominated by middle-class groups of Zionist or Orthodox character; by the Social Democratic Bund which favored democratic socialism and Jewish national-cultural autonomy and by modern Labor Zionist groupings. These parties became the first targets of the Communist drive for…political extermination.'

BY CONTRAST:

1. 99.9% of KKK and neo-nazi leaders in our country have been white Anglo-Saxon Protestants.
2. 99.9% of KKK and neo-nazi members plus their supporters came from white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant homes.
3. KKK and neo-nazi groups in our country (such as National Renaissance Party and National States Rights Party)- have a history of excluding Catholics and Jews from joining their movement.
4. KKK leaders and their adherents explicitly declared that they were an instrument for preserving Protestant Christianity, and preserving Protestant Christian civilization, and preserving Protestant Christian values. See their membership applications, Constitutions, and platforms for confirming details.
5. KKK adherents further claimed (and they used pamphlets, booklets, and speeches by Protestant Christian pastors and ordained ministers) that 'God's word' as revealed in the Bible required segregation of the races. For example, see publications by: Rev. Carey Daniels (Vice Chairman, Texas Citizens Council aka White Citizens Council of Dallas and Pastor, First Baptist Church of West Dallas) who wrote 'God The Original Segregationist' and Rev. Henry W. Fancher Sr. who wrote 'Segregation: God's Plan and God's Purpose' and Rev. G.T. Gillespie who wrote 'A Christian View on Segregation'. In fact, many local chapters of the White Citizens' Councils were led by Protestant clergymen!

Shall we, therefore, use the sick logic of Jew-haters to infer from this indisputable factual data that Protestant Christianity is essentially a religion of racist bigots, by racist bigots, and for racist bigots?

Furthermore, shall we also conclude that all of the murders, attempted murders, castrations, bombings, lynchings, arsons, robberies, acts of intimidation and harassment, and assorted other illegal activities committed by KKK members/supporters, NSRP members/supporters, plus adherents of neo-nazi beliefs - should be attributed to their Protestant Christian RELIGIOUS beliefs and background?

Not even Jew-hating bigots claim that 99.9% of the Bolshevik leadership OR 99.9% of Bolshevik adherents consisted of persons from Jewish homes.

Nevertheless, Jew-hating bigots insist that we focus our attention exclusively upon the purported RELIGIOUS background of those Bolsheviks who were born to Jewish parents.

SO……
(1) WHY don't we focus our attention upon the RELIGIOUS background of the 99.9% of the KKK/neo-nazi leaders and supporters in our country who are or were, indisputably, white Protestant Christians and who explicitly declared that their RELIGIOUS beliefs informed and motivated their behavior?

(2) Why is their RELIGIOUS background not considered to be the single most compelling dispositive data which requires our attention?

(3) The answer to these questions is as simple as it is obvious:

It is because bigots cheerfully and enthusiastically accept and disseminate all of the customary bigoted assumptions and stereotypes about Jews.

'Jews' have utterly no redeeming qualities. But apostate Jews and Jews who convert to other religions might be ok.

If there is ambiguous data about some matter involving one or more Jews and we need to choose between a negative, a positive, or a neutral interpretation and conclusion - then Jew-haters prefer that we always accept the most negative, derogatory option available.

If there is some Jewish religious text from thousands of years ago which, superficially, seems to express primitive tribal hostility toward non-believers - then that becomes indisputable further 'proof' to 'justify' the 'reasonableness' of contemporary derogatory judgments about Jews.

However-if the SAME type of adverse evidence is discovered about the current and life-long beliefs and associations of somebody whom Jew-haters admire (such as Eustace Mullins) - then we can dismiss all of that inconvenient data by paying lip service in one sentence to how 'regrettable' or supposedly unrepresentative that commentary was - so that his admirers can then continue to lionize Mullins!

  Posted by ernie1241 on 10/10/11 10:52 AM

There is not space here to address all of the whoppers in this interview of John McManus. However, let me briefly address his contention that "the mainstream media" has always been hostile to the JBS and has created the false idea that the JBS is "extreme".

1. First of all, even Robert Welch acknowledged to his National Council that the JBS avoided media contacts during its formative period and, in fact, it often excluded media from its events.

2. Second, membership in the JBS was by invitation and JBS members rarely acknowledged their membership. Consequently, the media often had to speculate about matters for a self-described "educational" organization which, normally, would be easily obtainable facts.

3. Third, the JBS has never permitted outside independent scholars or researchers to have access to JBS archives for research purposes. And with two minor exceptions during the 1960's it has never allowed scholars and researchers to have access to its membership through anonymous questionnaires so that a factual understanding could be developed about their members.

So whatever false impressions were created about the JBS, especialy during its formative period, it has only itself to blame.

Lastly:

(1) The JBS believes in the Soviet-style of history-telling. Only data which the JBS considers favorable to itself and its purposes is acknowledged. All other data is ignored, suppressed, or de-valued --- particularly if JBS deficiencies might be revealed.

(2) In its 53 years of existence, the JBS (the "educational organization"??) has never acknowledged substantive error about any matter of material importance --- such as by retracting an unkind, untrue, derogatory description of a person, organization, or other entity--even when it lost an historic precedent-setting libel lawsuit and paid $100,000 in compensatory damages and $300,000 in punitive damages for "malice".

In short, the JBS believes it is infallible.

Education, by definition, means being open to and welcoming to new data. The JBS is exactly opposite---it shields its membership from anything that might cause them to acknowledge its own serious errors. Instead, the JBS thinks it already possesses an Ultimate Final Truth (UFT) -- so like all political extremist groups (left or right) it sees its function as disseminating that UFT. In short, like the CPUSA, the JBS is a propaganda dispenser---not an educational group.

For example: the JBS has always described FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI under his direction as our nation's most knowledgeable, authoritative and reliable source of factual information about the communist movement as well as internal security matters generally.

In fact, on several occasions, representatives of the JBS sought Hoover's permission to publish a book which would be a compilation of his statements regarding communism. Also see the 10/66 article in the JBS magazine, American Opinion, entitled "The Wisdom and Warning of J. Edgar Hoover"

However, the JBS never told its members that both Hoover and senior FBI officials in the Bureau's Domestic Intelligence Division described Robert Welch and the JBS as "extremist", "irrational", and "irresponsible" -- even after both Robert Welch and JBS National Public Relations Director John Rousselot both wrote to Hoover and received Hoover's reply which confirmed the accuracy of media reports concerning Hoover's derogatory statements about Robert Welch and the assertions made by Welch.

For more details--see this 129-page Report on the JBS and its assertions which is based, primarily, upon first-time-released FBI investigative files:

Click to view link

(4) Virtually the entire anti-communist and conservative movement in our country has rejected the JBS as poisonous to genuine conservatism and effective anti-communism. Even Mrs. Robert Welch terminated her membership in the JBS with a blast at the new management---which was triggered by its savage attacks upon Ronald Reagan.

(5) One final word: McManus's claims about the JBS position regarding President Eisenhower are falsehoods.

I recommend that interested parties read the first part of my JBS Report to discover the truth about the matter.

Included in my Report are scanned copies of pages from the original Welch "private letter" [The Politician] where Welch makes his position very clear.

Also scanned is one example of a letter which Welch wrote to a prospective JBS member in 1959 which makes it clear that he used his then-unpublished "private letter" to recruit members into the JBS based upon their acceptance of the themes, evidence, arguments and conclusions presented in his "private letter" manuscript. There is further evidence from an Office of Naval Intelligence Report which refers to a JBS National Council member in Chicago.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Well, you know a lot about JBS obviously. Thanks for the insights. However, we would rebut your comment about whoppers if aimed at us. We asked McManus questions and he answered. You are entitled your opinion of his answers. Our interviews, on the whole, are not hostile ones. We seek out people who have contributed to knowledge about freedom.

Now is JBS a perfect institution? Were we aware of controversies surrounding them? Well ... that's why we mentioned the Rockefeller story. We didn't have to bring it up. But we wanted to make readers aware of some of the controversy about JBS. Should we have asked McManus directly about JBS being a "controlled opposition?" Would he admit to it even if JBS was?

Our elves learned a good deal from Birch literature pre-Internet at a time when there was little in the way of ANY information on these issues.

  Posted by Jeanna on 10/10/11 08:20 AM

After many years, beginning somewhere in early 1800's, the Zionist movement was successful in lobbying Great Britain for reestablishment of the traditional "homeland" for the Hebrews (Jews). It received official recognition in 1917 through the Balfour Declaration, and Palestine was put under British Mandate until 1948.

The inhabitants of Palestine were forcefully removed from their homes, and land for which they held legal title, in favor of "Jews" re-occupying the new State of Israel. An occupying force that removes a group of people from an established territory is an Act of War. It was not called an act of war because it had the support of Great Britain, the US, and the USSR. Little Palestine was out of favor.

The Zionists reasoned that they deserved what they believed to be their original "promised land". They then invited all "Jews" to return to Israel. As they could not recreate the records of their lineage, having been destroyed when the temple fell in the destruction of Jerusalem, they accepted anyone who stated they were Jews. Many believe that Khazaks decided to become Jews and moved into the new "Israel."

The Zionist Movement was a useful tool for the Elite, the International Bankers. In order to gain the world's cooperation, they had to manufacture support, and they chose to do so through propaganda spread through the Scofield Bible. The Scofield Bible was published through the Oxford University Press in 1909, and revised in 1917, offering commentary along side the KJV, which commentary perverted the scriptures by introducing and promoting dispensationalism and the supposed need to reestablish the temple in Jerusalem so that Christ could come again. (None of which is found in the scriptures.) This text was calling for all Christians to support the State of Israel before Israel was a state.

This propaganda succeeded in aligning Christians with Zionists to gather the support the Elites needed to establish the State of Israel. The Christian-Zionists today do not have a proper understanding of the source of the Scofield Bible, nor its purpose. (See the slide on C.I. Scofield in the left margin at We Hold These Truths, Click to view link.)

So, the Elites followed their typical pattern of manipulating others to gain what they wanted, a foothold in the Middle East. The Middle East has been at war ever since.

I find it ironic that in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948 that the signers stated "Placing our trust in the 'Rock of Israel', we afix... ." They evidently did not, and still do not know that the in the Bible the Rock of Israel is Jesus Christ.

  Posted by lewfalo on 10/10/11 07:23 AM

DB: "You need to post endless calibrations of blame in order to indict a race of people that have been foully used. Why you do so is not something for us know."

I have my own ideas about this. Jewish people have been an easy target over the millenia because of their own culture. It IS one rooted in separatism, after all. The superstition states that God chose a people and set them apart from others to exclusively bless them; and ultimately they will become a blessing to the rest of humanity. This is basically telling them that "others" are inferior and are not to associated with; though it is permissible to live among them. It's the whole "us vs. them" mentality than all culture and tradition fosters and suffers from.

So if you have a minority of folks like this living among larger populations, it's very easy for the ruling elite to make them scapegoats for all kinds trouble that may arise. Jewish folks also by tradition don't conform (at least for the most part). The practitioners take their superstition very, very seriously. That led to those who abandoned all the superstitious nonsense to try and remove all identity connected to the superstitious whole. That also raises suspicion among the larger population of non-Jews. "What have they got to hide?" -- comes to mind.

Superstition had always been the origin of this sort of nonsense; but ever since the Enlightenment a new superstition - government - has (or more specifically "democracy"). Once again, group identity is the evil.

Back 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next


ABOUT US ARCHIVE THINKTANK   MEMBER ZONE
Editor's Message
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Contact
News & Analysis
Editorials
Exclusive Interviews
Videos
Special Reports
Polls
Biographies
Glossary
Links
Books
MEMBER LOGIN
© Copyright 2008 - 2013 All Rights Reserved.
The Daily Bell is published by High Alert Capital Partners Inc.