WGBH Roundtable; Extremists Movements: Another View

Good evening ladies and gentleman. Several months ago I participated in a conversation on this station with Gordon Hall an expert on extremist movements in the United States. That program elicited a good deal of response and among the responses were several several rather strenuous disclaimers from representatives of right wing organizations in America one of those representatives is seated opposite me this evening and I think it might be best for us to begin by asking you Dr. Waite precisely what your definition of extremism would be. All right I would say that the extremism is. It is a relative term as we both know and understand. And it has to do with a departure radically from another position its opposite. I believe that it would be wrong for example to identify such a group as the John Birch Society as either an extremist group or a fanatical group

or certainly never. Is it correct in referring to it as a right wing group although I know that many do by a rule of thumb. The right being of course the group which based upon the Constitution and its interpretation historically and the center of the spectrum and the right wing being those who would favor a less governmental controls than specified in the Constitution being in their right wing or moving over to the extreme right which would be anarchy. The left wing of saying that the Constitution should increase federal power state power governmental power at all levels and being over into the left wing with you communists your fascist your Socialist your other groups which call for more power than the Constitution give to government. I see that on this spectrum you see the John Birch Society is the center position the constitutional position without any variance. Neither extreme right or extreme last night is true that the constitutional position espoused by the John Birch Society

certainly is by definition more to the right of what the left would be the extreme left and of course if this is what you mean then that would be but certainly we're not anarchists which historically has always been taken to mean the extreme right. I see that. Is there any group in America today that you would say occupies the right of the John Birch is the center. Well I would say that the anarchists would occupy the right. What mall pockets of anarchy I'm sure of that Gordon hall in his right travels and in his various lectures has mentioned some of these and these groups of course would be right in the extreme of the right. If this concept is taken out if you mean that. We're different from other people you see. That's another thing. But there are right wing extreme right wing the thing about that I object to as a member of the John Birch Society and as a pastor of Faith Baptist Church also is the wrongness of first of all linking the Nazi

party like the American Nazi Party of George Lincoln Rockwell which I would like to get into a little bit later on in the program again and labeling that as an extreme right position where one actually would place that plane over to the left being the National Socialist Party of both Germany Nazi Germany and also of course by their own definition in this country. Let me ask you a question about that. Really glad to weigh in on that further. Well I wonder if if you do place the Nazi party over the extreme left why it is that in the 1930s in Germany the Nazis and the Communists fought each other so bitterly and why it was that when the Nazis came to party to power the Communists were the first people whom they destroyed. Well the intrigue that was then developing as never really been ferreted out I suppose historically. And so I wouldn't really be amazed. But what we may find sometime

somewhere or another there was a decided connection between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union espouses and the Nazi ism of Adolf Hitler. Now it is true that originally they had the pact that spoke very favorably one of another and then of course they broke relations and I am not yet willing to part with the view that the Nazi Nazi isn't both of Hitler's Germany and the present American Nazi Party might have some connection with the communist movement in the extreme international communist conspiratorial process of it. Well you're suggesting that the. I'm not dogmatic on this but I I don't I think that they're both equally vicious evil immoral systems. Yes I do. That may be granted. The question that I'm trying to. Follow up now is the degree of relationship ideologically or program magically between them. And if I understand you correctly you're suggesting that we don't have sufficient evidence on

Nazi Germany in the 30s to really state the case firmly that the Nazis were an altar Oblio opposed to communism within Germany during the years immediately preceding and immediately following their rise to power. Is that your position. Yes of course you remember pressure VI and the name for Nazi was the National Socialist Party of Germany and of course as such being a socialist party and a National Socialist Party it wanted power even at the expense of communist power as you know communism is a socialist system as well as the USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and of course we do have the Marxian Communist Manifesto and he switched the name a little bit from socialist to Communist. So they're really these systems are not so much polar and us so much as far apart as we might think at first glance. Now if I understand you correctly you're suggesting that the while the Nazis were in fact close to the Communists ideologically they wanted to take power

away from the communists the Communists wanted to take power away from the Nazis and in other words there was no systematic connection between them and their communism at least in those years was not monolithic. Yes that would be actually nice for example you say that there is a Chinese Communists brand you say that there's a Tito communist brand of course I don't particularly spouses of you I feel on the other hand that communism is communism and if the chips were down and they were called to fight it would be the free people of the world the capitalist nations of free enterprise people call them what you will the non socialist the non communists who would they they would attack. For instance I have here the National Socialist bulletin American Nazi Party. Issue Number four when it first began of course it was called the National Socialist program and of course this with Lincoln Rockwell as the commander in November looking for I don't see a date particularly on it but it of course had that title does not change the Iraq and Nazi Party

right now. I understand you than to hold of the Birch Society completely disavows the program principals actions or behavior of the American Nazi Party. Yes yes the Nazi party being part of the far left quite decidedly we want no part of it and of course that is why some magically we should define our terms and to disassociate the American Nazi Party with anything to do with the of their central constitutionalism or certainly even right wing ism which would be the extreme right being anarchy and no government or very little government. They want government they want strong governmental controls as they did in Nazi Germany they want a central government they want to control it they may give the owners the privilege of taking the title and having and keeping the title to their property. But the thing that they want is the governmental control over the property whereas the communist system as we understand it also has the title as well as the control. This being a very slight difference but there are very

various reasons why we disassociate ourselves from George Lincoln Rockwell as American Nazi Party which we would of course consider to be quite extreme from the standpoint of the Constitution our fulcrum our lever our central. Line of reference in the John Birch Society speak now as an individual member of a band. Not as any official capacity and which I speak this afternoon it's evening but I do think that the folk from the beginning is the Constitution and we feel strongly that there's like Iraq those American Nazi Party for example has nothing whatever to do with constitutional Americanism. And I would be glad to pursue that and you know I think we need to pursue it I think we're going agree on that and I hope we find agreement as easy on the other topics that we're going to cover. Not I'd like to get back for a moment to your position that the John Birch Society occupies the center of American politics. I have here a copy of J Edgar Hoover is masters of deceit and in a chapter

in that book called What can you do. Jagger Hoover has the following pages suggestion that's on page 290 he says. As we have seen identifying communists is not easy. They are trained in deceit and trickery and use every form of camouflage and dishonesty to advance their cause. For this reason we must be absolutely certain that our fight is waged with full regard for the historical liberties of this great nation. This is the fundamental premise of any attack against communism. Too often I have seen cases where loyal and patriotic but misguided Americans I thought they were fighting communism by slapping the label of red or communist on anybody who happened to be different from them or to have ideas with which they did not agree. Smears character assassination and the scattering of irresponsible charges have no place in this nation. They create division suspicion and distrust among loyal Americans. Just what the communists want and hinder rather

than aid the fight against communism. Now I certainly agree with that statement very well put in that you are who you don't regard the John Birch Society as being one of the reference of these remarks by J Edgar Hoover. By no means any more than I regard them as being the reference to Jad Gruber's remarks as Gordon Hall has implied and stated as such in his speech on December 4th of miking 63 which is in the appendix to the rational record appendix December 5th 1963. Page 8 7 4 3 4 and following what he says extremist groups are this are that and of course the garden hall as mistakenly said that dead Hoover says this refers to the John Birch Society may well no reference whatever and I would do it while we're on this topic. That's fine I like to point out that we cannot be irresponsible in our mentioning of those who are Reds or common as I have for example the. Current issue of the dance move report March 23rd 1964 entitled communist

spies in the State Department here well aware Yuri Sankoh and several others of the high ranking of diplomats who defected recently have made brought to light the various parties in the seats of government who are disloyal than Snowden is report page 92. This is dated March 23rd has just to say about the record of communists in government. And he's quoting here from a source I think which you will agree is a reputable source. It's the interlocking subversion in government departments hearings before the US Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 1953 to 55 and 30 fires just happened to be page 2 8 6 old and he says among the under cover communist FISON named by Elizabeth Bentley this is to the FBI and then FBI director or one of the agents and member of twenty seven thousand forty five sent this report to Harry S. Truman who was then president. He said among these others that we're gonna fight Harry Dexter White who was

assistant secretary of the Treasury. These are identified under oath as an undercover cover communist by Harold Glasser. Nathan Gregory silver Master William Taylor these are in the Treasury Department Laughlin Curry administrative assistant of President United States Robert Talbot Miller the third he was in the State Department a George Silbermann War Department U.S. Army Air Force Major William L.. Only he was stationed at the Pentagon. Maurice helped run Julius J Joseph Major Duncan Lee Helen Tani and Donald wheeler and so all of the officers Yeah did you share was in Jeff or in other words the point is there were identified agents and members of the Communist Conspiracy way back in 45 at the present time we have other examples of it from the both the Senate Committee on internal security and also the House committee I think. What I think is one way we would be responsible in leveling charges we would say that such and such a document of the government has identified this one or that one as being agents and of course I

think we've got to be very careful I'm the first one to say let's be careful It's not have five charges that are wild let's not label everyone who disagrees with us as red as well as virtue as either one is going all of that in the question and a question that I don't want to ask is why if these people have been identified before appropriate government organizations and if J Edgar Hoover who is presumably responsible man has a good knowledge of how the Communist Party works why do we need the John Birch Society. Well I'd like to mention something Professor fine that you may not be aware of maybe you are and that is this that the Communist Party USA is not the sum and substance of the communist influence and communism in the United States as its influence operates. Or is it the sum and substance of this. Feeling an influence nationally or internationally. It is one little segment. And if I might say so it is of what I consider to be the very most

Minuit and the very at the very least dangerous of the Communist emphasis in this country. It's not the communist party members the hard core members who many of them are very meager of many of the very poor they're very well educated. These are the things that people in the communist conspiracy used as window dressing. The big boys are those who exert communist influence communist purposes communist plans in our government in various aspects of our government who never carry the American Communist Party USA card. Never hope to never will but they're covert. And what I did in secret and of course his influence is what we are concerned with what evidence do you. This is not the same as others and we stand for less government more individual responsibility and a better world will back to the constitution of our country. And this of course is the main thing. Let me read you just one other brief quotation from J Edgar Hoover in a speech just two months ago. Mr. Hoover is quoted as saying that communism

feeds upon ignorance prejudice and sickness of the mind and so the cause of communism is well served by the hate mongers the lunatic fringe and other rabble who preach a doctrine of malice and intolerance towards their fellow man. These venomous fanatics whether they are extremists of the left or the right are carriers of a highly infectious disease and so on. Invariably these merchants of hate attempt to drape themselves in a cloak of patriotism but their real objective is to profiteer and capitalize upon ignorance prejudice and bigotry while destroying the very ideals which they claim to uphold. Now when Mr. Hoover here refers to the extremists of the right. If the Nazi Party is on the left to whom if not the John Birch Society is he referring to this definition of the Nazi party being on the left is my definition that is a definition historically which could be applied. I'm sure that he is referring to the American Nazi Party. Maybe the national

states rights party other so-called rightist groups at least labeled as such we must understand verifying that we're talking now. Academically we're talking semantics here and when the referent is continuously applied of the John Birch Society or the American Nazi Party or any other association or group in this country as being one thing. This is what is used this is the general definition in the connotation of that term now you were quoting from the speech by J Edgar Hoover before the brotherhood of Washington Hebrew Congregation Washington DC. Quite right quite right. On Wednesday December 4th 1963 entitled faith in freedom this is the one I referred to earlier about history mus. That's why appendix December 5th that a 744 in following out he goes on in this speech oh ever. Lambasting the left as he calls it today he says the communists continue with impunity to breed out lies and distortions against the United States their designs on the American youth revolt and anger of those steeped in our national

ideals of freedom. The peddling of their dishonest doctrine to high minded largely inexperienced and basically eager to believe young people is not unlike the peddling of filth and dope in demoralizing effect. He's speaking to this group of Hebrews of the Jewish faith here at this organization or this meeting here in Washington and he's saying that these hate mongers of the right or of the left whatever it may be are terrible and horribly goes on as you left out some of the things when you quoted that they're responsible for the bombings and so forth and so on. Right we have French is not there and I semitic the American Nazi Party Rabbi Jewish they hate Jews there and I grew they hate negro. There are anti-Catholic some of them in the sense of not just being protestant or against Catholicism as such but Catholic people out of these groups. Read upon the very thing that dad Goober mentioned Can we stop here for one moment Dr. Waverly.

You mention that the American Nazi Party is anti-Catholic and of course there's no sense of you know other groups of course included in addition to the American Nazi Party. Well I wonder whether you wouldn't say that particular group there are groups I should clarify it by saying there are groups in the so-called denominated extremists orientation which would be classified as of the right which are anti-Catholic and of course particularly this group is anti Negro and I'm Jewish and I wonder whether you would clear up one problem that I have here at the national states rights party which runs along with it all right well now if I understand it correctly the faith the faith Baptist Church of which you are the minister is a member of the American Council of Christian churches. Is that right. That is correct. You are not a member were affiliated with affiliated with it no. I have here and I really would like to clarify this point. A publication of the American Council of Christian churches. Which says in a section entitled The peril of Roman Catholicism the menace of Roman Catholicism in our land

is hardly less than that of Godless Communism. What is the role of the mature. Well this is a bulletin entitled The perils shadowing you and your family. Incredible but true. There's a simple it's a lot it's right a number do you have it it is literature item number 1 1 2. Similarly there's another little pamphlet put out by the American Council of Christian churches called on which side are you. This is literature item number 10 in which the perils to America today are listed as godless communism. Roman Catholicism apostate modernism and deceptive cultism. Yes I have that novel right here before now. And am I wrong or does this not mean that Roman anti-Catholicism laps over into one of the areas of your own responsibility. This is of course as I defined it Professor fine anti-Catholicism in the sense of hating Catholic people. The American consulate Christian churches as I pointed out earlier is not a Catholic group it's a Protestant group

and as such it has a responsibility to defend its faith. But nothing can be said of the American consulate Christian churches rightly that is to label it as hating Catholic people certainly I as a member and as a an affiliate and as a church pastor Faith Baptist Church could never be classified as hating Catholic people. And this is the sense in which such people as Gordon Hall and others who defame and decry the American consul of Christian churches use this term anti-Catholicism it talk about hating people just like you are talking about out on a grad I had Jewish not just that you're not Jewish or you're not a Negro it's that you hate them that you despise you want to deport them severs American Nazi Party in the national states rights party. In fact the National Association for the Advancement of White people maybe you saw this life article as far as you did on phage 71 and following just recently came out on the fear mongers and of course among other things that were mentioned here is the William Miller's The National Association of Advancement of White people some of the NAACP

NAAWP And of course this is what I consider to be extreme and certainly not American. Would you want white here imagines that if we can't see. Let me get it here while you're getting it would yes go ahead. Therefore draw this is a grows are out to take over the government I'm quoting here page 71 from This Life magazine article William Miller Cincinnati. He says and he goes out to take over the government the communists are behind it the Jews are behind this. This is horrible. It's a peddling of hate and of course this charge can never be legitimately leveled at either the American consul or Christian churches or the John Birch Society for that matter either. In other words you don't hate people were not jailed OK Smith's negroes and Jews and I was absolutely delighted to hear that this is the image however which men like Gordon hall falsely paint of both the American Council the questions and the John Birch Society and National I'm there tonight are going to defend this position and to that I want the truth.

Right now the question is whether you are therefore drawing a distinction as I understand it you are between a hating Roman Catholicism as an institution which is. Almost as serious as Godless Communism as the American Council of Christian church publication puts it you're drawing a distinction between hating Roman Catholicism and hating Roman Catholics is that it well no it's not oppressive by user told me in their own consecration church leaflet number 10 what you have there called on what site are you that it says anything about hating. I'd be very pleased to read it. Well that means you're not even longer as we don't hate people we love and I the love of God is going abroad led you by the Holy Spirit of God we love the Lord Jesus Christ For God so loved the world. John 3:16 gave His only begotten Son that it was good to believe in Him but you know not perish but have everlasting life. Not I mean we've got people we hate sin we hate evil we're not if we're posed evil but of course go ahead you said about him in the heat it says here.

I'm just reading this and I wish he would clarify the enemy of course is Satan. He better than anyone on earth knows that we are in the last days before the coming of Christ. Therefore he is overflowing or flooding with an all out assault on every front four of which are as follows. The first is Godless Communism in the second is Roman Catholicism which is described as quote a safe tannic system not built on Christ in the Bible but on Peter and Mary and was very hands or drenched in the blood of the martyrs through all the history of the church to this very day. Now that doesn't sound to me like a loving statement. Well this is a statement is it not of history we certainly have our misbehaved people on both sides of the aisle. Protestantism has its fill as well as Roman Catholicism as well as some of the other since I don't think Protestantism listed here. Prostate modernism The third point is Protestantism in all of its arms whether outright denial of spiritual truth or whether the orthodoxy or New Evangelicalism which are actually forms new forms of modernism. Those These all have another gospel another Christ and another salvation from out of the

Bible for it's Protestantism basically deceptive cult ism and all its multiplicity of forms names and practices yet all attempting to rob Christ of his deity the bible of its authority the spirit of his power and over offering man salvation by works of the flesh. And so I would say that there is a distinction given Professor Fein between the Protestant American Council of Christian churches and its non adoption of Roman Catholicism as a system and certainly opposing it we have differences historically and these are well outlined in the Reformation. Well that and having them and accusing them of hating Catholic people and being Catholic haters you see this is not true I work with Roman Catholics every single day Professor fine. I for example and. Do other things that are going to save the Roma guys or some of our best friends. DR KARL McIntyre who is the founder of the American Council Christian churches also is a man who has support by Catholic people and Catholic laymen in his organization but subscribes to the statement that the menace of Roman Catholicism in our land is

hardly less than that of Godless Communism. Is that your position one that he despite the fact that some of his best friends are Roman Catholics as you put it the mare the quarries the menace of Roman Catholicism in our land is hardly less than that of Godless Communism. The reason that these Roman Catholic people are following such great patriots as Dr Karl McIntyre who has built up a station and a program and a listening audience throughout the United States of America from one station within five or six years to where now it is five hundred seventy eight stations. The reason is because he is a man of God who sticks to the scriptures in the Bible and is trying to sound the alarm bringing this country back to Almighty God the author of liberty and bringing them back to the Bible back to the principles of righteousness. And back to our Constitution and against the evil satanic system of communism which of course is out to destroy all of us. Well the set here in Boston let me go on to set here in Boston what is earmarked seven thousand nine hundred sixty three at my request as pastor of Faith Baptist Church. As American

Council representative here in this Boston area and the John Hancock Hall he asked how many here are Presbyterians stand up or razor and how many are Baptists. How many are Methodist Aman are Roman Catholics and the overwhelming percentage of those in the audience are some 300 500 or whatever the paper said in regard to it I don't remember exactly how many were Roman Catholic you said find it's God to see hear and listen he said we're all in this together men and women we're either going to stand and are going to be free or if the communists ever come and take us over and succeed in this none of us will have freedom of our own faith in our own religion. We believe in freedom of speech we believe in freedom of religion the American founded churches stands for it and if you'd read some of the hermeneutical I shouldn't call the apologetic old books of the Roman Catholic Church you would find some trace statements I'm sure about us for the Protestants. Well let's not limit the thing I don't want to see so much presidents historically has been true. We've had Protestants of persecuted and killed and in the name of Christ innocent

people. Service was burned at the stake by John Calvin as a Baptist I don't go along with this guy and the same thing is to do with the Roman Catholics who have purged Protestants and the Inquisition and I don't go along with that and there are many good Roman Catholics don't either and this is the referent of these terms and this is the atmosphere of these terms do you go along with the following statement. Yes or no. The menace of Roman Catholicism in our land is is not wise is hardly less than that of Godless Communism. I personally feel that Godless Communism is the number one menace for anything in this land it's number one over and above Roman Catholicism over and above modernism over and above anything but Roman Catholicism is a serious threat. Well it's a threat to the Protestant faith. It does not a spouse of the Protestant faith that has the various doctrinal distinctives which we do not believe in as Protestants and I believe that this is certainly true. If you want a group that really hates Catholics you'll have to go into the left wing of Protestantism you'll have to go over into the National

Council of Churches wing of it you'll have to go rent an Association an organization known as the. Peel away you Protestants and others united for the separation of church and state. Here you've got the liberals those in the National Council of Churches and connected with the denial of the Bible in the highest echelons of power and organizational system there. They're the ones who really breathe out fightings and slanders and if you think that these statements are bad you should read some of the liberal thinkers in along these lines I'm only an artist when I talk to the liberals I can talk to them about their statements when I talk to you I'd like to talk to you about the statements with which you're associated. I have not been associated with that statement that you read I don't. I didn't put that out and I mean as fuck and conflagration churches people are not responsible or do not rather give credence and give blanket endorsement everything that appears in our literature. I'm glad to hear that I'm glad to see it when it's there speaks the truth. Let me ask you if I can. Let me ask you a somewhat related question. American opinion

as I understand it is not an official publication of the John Birch Society although it is true that Robert Welch is the publisher and editor of the American opinion magazine as well as the president of the John Birch Society is that right. Well that's right let me make a little more clear so that you'll have it Mr. Welch's own words in the March issue 1964 and the inside of the front cover it says Done the dear Reader column he says skipping dies as Mark Twain said the difference of opinion is what makes horse races it is also what makes magazines. If we do not as a great many people my things have no point in publishing American opinion right. Well if we didn't agree disagree among ourselves we could have this magazine written by the office boy and so forth and so on all the core of this discourse is that contrary to what you have recently been told by about half of the press. The United States American opinion is not the voice of the John Birch Society and it is not even the voice of your editor except in those paragraphs which are published over my name. In fact in connection with the very article in our last issue

that separation which caused several dozen assorted editorial writers to have apoplexy I disagreed with the part of the major promise and was some of the conclusions but I still say as I did then that it was a superb commentary which we were delighted to present to our readers unquote Robert Welch. Yeah no i also an opinion. I hope that clarifies the relationship between the John Birch Society and American opinion. Well only in small measure I might say. Because at the bottom of the flyleaf of American opinion I find the following words which American opinion is as any old one we use almost no articles except those written to order to fit our specific needs and can assume no no responsibility for the return of unsolicited manuscripts and I take it from that as well as from the John Birch Society December 30th Bulletin. That in which American opinion speakers bureau in American opinion libraries in the American pinion magazine are all plugged quite handily that there is

some sense of kinship between both the John Birch Society and American opinion and I don't want to be aware of their subsidiary that's lovely However what I was stating what Mr Welch was stating is it's the John Birch Society Council that makes the policies and the opinions and the rules and regulations for the John Birch Society it is not American venue not American venue does not make them for the downward side of the wrong official voice of the John Birch Society as such as a society is the monthly bulletin that we receive that you can receive from Belmont 78 write to us and you can receive it for 50 cents of the if you'll forgive me for a moment. We reached the halfway mark in our program. I'd like to reintroduce you. Our guest tonight is Reverend D.A. Waite pastor of the Faith Baptist Church in Newton Massachusetts and assistant to Robert Welch of the John Birch Society in American opinion. I'm Leonard Fein political scientist from MIT. We've been talking about the John Birch Society and assorted other topics.

One of the questions that I have in relation to American opinion is that clearly that as far as efficient voice being there and not there aren't many more of him. I see it in the issue of American opinion which appeared in October in 1953 in an article by Westbrook Pegler the following sentence. The American the Wapato is not a political and is Tahj This is page 21 Go ahead. The American wop O is not a political entity and his fatherland is held together by the Vatican not withstanding communists and a hundred other splinters. Now this sentence follows a rather lengthy paragraph in which Italians are described variously as guineas they goes and wops. I wonder whether we can. Really. Talk about not spreading hate. If American opinion in what I assume is regarded by the editors as a responsible article is willing to endorse this kind of language with reference to one of America's minority groups I quite agree with you as an individual member of the John Birch Society

I want no part of material such as this in an American opinion whatever they say and minority groups are wops or day goes or heebs or anybody else. And I've communicated these feelings to Mr Robert Wiles as his assistant and I. You'll notice Mr Westbrook Pegler it is not appear in the magazine note for this month of April I guess you haven't seen that as yet it hasn't. I'm also on this plan maybe you haven't either I have a copy and I see it in that in that issue that Westbrook Pegler is going to be writing a series on labor move on the labor unions in America later on perhaps that is true he is no longer however on the this issue. And of course any time that a magazine such as American opinion which is has nothing to do with the John Birch Society mind you right. Any time that the American opinion voices anything which is can be construed as hateful as vicious as attacking minority groups racial groups whether it's anti Negro and foreign bar anti-Semitic anti-Jewish or whatever it is it does not reflect the opinions of the

John Birch Society and does not. Really fit into the opinions of the John Birch Society and I as a member of that society want no part of such hate mongering efforts. I use these terms Mr. Weil very strongly out of the UN on its own Glad to hear that I wonder. I for one is an American citizen want this thing corrected provide survive and I'm glad that you're one of the ZOB gave me opportunity over there to mention it. Well I'm delighted doctor wait not I wonder whether you have similar feelings about an article by Taylor Caldwell in the March 1964 issue of American opinion. Well the article runs I've got it here as you like. Let's try page 40. This is an article on liberals in the United States in which Miss Caldwell on. Well let's try page 39 says in describing the liberal that his glasses if any are horn rimmed and heavy on his pallid face and usually smeared. He rarely walks or his but his mouth has bubbly

saliva in the corners when he is under stress which he usually is or on page 37 socially the male or female liberal is a mess. Or on page 40 of last year let me comment on it all but let me just give page 40 and then you can make your general comment to all of these. We can understand a sabotage you want to 37. Oh that had to do with. Socially the male or female liberal is a mess. Just at the top of the page there are. And then on page 40 in the article were Miss Caldwell says we conservatives can deal with those whom we know is outright communists we can understand the savage beast lusting for blood with a feral appetite an animal is something it is a known quantity. But who can understand the non man. The creep. The liberal only the louse and other parasites for he has both. My response and I was just going to ask whether you are suggesting that this is

conventional non-extreme non hate mongering language. I consider this article and portions at least that you read of it to be exactly what the title represents the hominem in the grand manner. Page 33 from the March issue of American opinion by the way can be bought for a dollar in American opinion Valmont 78 if you the listening audience want to read it. I don't agree with this type of hate mongering activity Alan agree with. Certainly I would allow Taylor Cowell to express your opinions. I would allow Mr Robert Welch the editor go ahead and have it in American opinion. But when he says or she says his glasses if any are horn rimmed and heavy on his pallid face and usually smeared this isn't always true of the liberal when they disagree with a liberal but we don't smear them we don't go to the ad hominem attack on them of course. Taylor still does this of course and when she says this on page 40 on the bottom the man the creep the liberal why I call names. Maybe it can't meet argument with argumentation. Then why the smear by ad hominem attack I was taught

in debate and in logic in college and university in Michigan and in other areas in Purdue University. Never to attack people as to what they look like what they smell like if they happen to smile how they appear but to rather attack their ideas if you disagree with them have honest agreement or disagreement on the basis of intelligence. And I maintain that in this particular article I don't buy that particular. Type of attacks. Well it was not this but I still maintain they got a right of freedom if they want to credit in America but it let them print it. I don't hear anyone denying that right. Mike I'm going to do anything and continue I don't think I can do to stop this sort of attacking of people and persons and individuals just because they happen to be liberals and I don't agree with a liberal philosophy I don't think that it's a constitutionally founded and all these other things. However I do think that they have a privilege and a right if they want to espouse their views in this country that's their privilege and I left them out of it is still a part of absolutely delighted to hear all this Dr. Wade. I think what we may be getting at is why some people do regard the

Birch Society as a hate mongering group but appointed to tell issues of the journal in which there are articles that you yourself describe as hate mongering I would say and I have used this term Mr. Wells to say that let's get this knocked off let's not have it along these lines but I do say that and I'm speaking as an individual Professor Vy and I'm speaking as a writer Emad as a pastor of Faith Baptist Church and as a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ I'm laying out right out straight. I'm not in any official capacity with the society and I would point this out. The reason that people have so smeared the John Birch Society and used as you have just used the American opinion to do so is because they have Rajan lay and wrongfully said that the American opinion represents the John Birch Society and nothing could be further from the truth. Why don't they use the Bulletin of the society this marriage while I have the go ahead. I have the bill that I have the side I'll go ahead and try as I might. Of December 30th 1963 and which I thank you at your request you and I thank you very much for it because it tells me the following information on 8 page 21. All right.

Roman numeral seven American opinion. We hope you will like the January number we are not at all satisfied with it here because we are a worm 0 7 page 21 that's right December of December 30th 63. You sent to me that bulletin for January ARE YOU GOT MY LITTLE MIX not sorry but you're in the summer but don't go looking for John you are 64. Go right ahead. We intend to make it a better magazine in essence In the meantime there is one item of news about American opinion aside from the fact that it now costs $10 per year beginning with every number there will be a new writer. Then under roman numeral 8 there's a discussion of American opinion libraries and under roman numeral 9 of the American opinion Speakers Bureau. Yeah. Now as I understand it since this all appears in the John Birch Society bulletin there must be some connection. Quite apart from the fact that Robert Welch heads both the John Birch Society and American opinion between these two institutions.

Yes this is of course related to the book of the John Birch Society which can be deigned by the way by anybody by sending $2 to the John Birch Society Belmont 78 page 71 Section 4 and so let's act as a total of 10 different divisions that Mr. Wells proposed to these who were gathered there December 1058 to form the John Birch Society. On page 77 he mentions first we would establish Christian are not Christians you to establish reading rooms somewhat similar to the Christian Science reading rooms but small and expensive manned by volunteers others not as a present American opinion. Bookstores and reading rooms and so forth. Second we should get the truth out about the various facts and history recent history and so far in the many hands and as many hands as possible and so forth and therefore let's have a conservative periodical. This was the American opinion which we have here. Then of course we want to push the radio stations of conservative newscasters like large Mannion like us and some of the others are mentioned and for rights of letter writing and a five page 86.

Let's have right fronts. There is if there is some connection here that isn't there. Almost certainly. This of course American opinion Speakers Bureau is a. Phase of the activity of what is in mind as far as the outreach of the society is going to turn if that's the case how can the John Birch Society complete and you for that matter completely disassociated and say oh now is myself and I that is where all that how can you disassociate yourself from the views represented in American opinion these hate mongering views are out of the yard Joe exemplify exactly Professor vine the same as you as a professor of political science an MIT master's in student technology do not necessarily have to espouse all of the views that are spoused in and my teeth periodicals and every department imaginable in the speech department in the political science department sociology department science department so for now you certainly are an employee are you not of MIT and indeed therefore you certainly if you used your logic in your region that just espoused to me and mention to me therefore would be responsible would you not for everything that MIT does everything that is done in every department every magazine every periodical etc..

Well I certainly don't have the logic ice or similar I said. I certainly don't want to pin the responsibility for all of these statements these malicious statements on you Dr. Wade but a few minutes ago you said that the reason that people maligned the John Birch Society is because they wrongly identify American opinion as an organ of the John Birch Society now we've no mission. Now we've established I think that while it's not an organ of the John Birch Society the two do have an integral relationship. If they do have an integral relationship the only point that I'm trying to get at is whether you now think it may be legitimate for people mistakenly perhaps in your terms to regard the John Birch Society which has an intimate relationship with American opinion as a hate mongering organization. You know Mr. Fein I would say this is the reason men for instance like Jordan Hall who are an open line program in Providence Rhode Island December 10th I think it was the same night that you broadcast in here it was a delayed broadcast. Said as follows as to Bob Kane's audience he said in regard

to the John Birch Society. Well how about one of the John Birch society condemns falsely an ex-president of the United States a loyal citizen when they accuse him of working for the enemy the Soviet Union. Why is that alright. Ask Gordon Hong. Then he continues. Paul says of this statement and I do not quote. Well it's in their official publications or I'm sorry he referred as the official publication falsely that the book called The Politician was the official publication of the John Birch Society when its privately printed for Robert Welsh Belmont seventy eight and by no means ever connected with the John Birch Society. One in fact in the book The Politician which is available by Mr while writing Mr Welsh and for $2 in regard to President Eisenhower. When they say and here let me emphasize again. This is small Roman numeral 13 that nobody has any slightest degree of responsibility Mr Welch writes for this manuscript or for its past or present printing and distribution except myself. It is worth repeating that neither the John Birch Society nor its members have ever had any connection with a politician in any

way except to be the victims of smears aimed at them because of the founders of the society. Having disavowed the document the Council of the society long ago officially made it clear that this was a purely personal property and problem of my own with which they wanted nothing whatever to do anyway goes on as I'm well aware I'm still one of them and I'm just really pointing it out when Gordon Hall and others and the newspapers by the way and they did it I've nauseum in this last attack by the way. Professor Oliver and the newspapers and so forth linking the American opinion magazine as the official organ of the John Birch Society. This to me Professor Fein is no longer accidental it's no longer very nicely what like it is malicious that's it. Let's slow down for just one man yes. Granted that the American opinion magazine is not the official publication of the John Birch Society. OK the question that I'm asking when I was a newspaper the press way that it is I mention here that while I'm not I am now at least I am not the newspapers or people as you explain I want to get another

question you have a right I said that there is an intimate relationship between these two and I want to come back to this. Why is it you would explain it this way how you would explain it. The reason is Professor vine. There is a determined and a plan and an efficient in the press and in other media by speakers and so forth to undermine the John Birch Society to answer and to smear it falsely as the whole communist press have been doing ever since 1960. Juan and throughout the time of its existence they haven't been able to do away with it but they're trying the liberal press has picked it up we could give you an example of that in 1961 in January in February where the people's world which is the official Communist agent there and they brought a publication on the west coast picked up an article against the John Birch Society wrote out against it said the Captain John Birch was a captain in the Navy which of course was wrong that would make him a force for average you know picked up the same distortions and then later on Time magazine credited the story with even the same similar

distortions the same wrongness the same mistakes calling him a captain the Navy and others have followed suit Nama point is. The reason that people you asked the question why do people say that it's a minor You organization is because of the the press. Sometimes the radio is sometimes a public lecture by form distorting what is or should be considered to be true. Well Might it not be in part for those of us who are not sinister evil communists. I didn't say that. Yeah Americans generally were evil sinister Hermanus. OK did I. Not at all hard for those of us very clear in fact last time might it not be that many people knowing that there is an intimate relationship between American opinion and the John Birch Society. Being familiar with the opinions expressed in American opinion which you yourself have said are hate mongering opinions not only are I in heart some of these sayings some of the mature words were certainly not appropriate.

I don't go along with them and do so for them song against the foreign born they're against the Jews or against this and that as you pointed out right. I don't say this is generally true I don't say it's the general nature of it I don't say that this is true of American opinion generally I say some of the statements you point out you asked me a direct question why is an individual right and I told you go ahead right now. Wouldn't it be reasonable for people to assume that an organization which is headed by Robert Welsh and which has this intimate relationship with American opinion in some sense reflects. Some of the opinions expressed in American opinion let me but one other opinion on the table. This is from Professor Lester that before if you're not up by the way I think it's just as illogical Professor vine just is stupid for individuals to judge the whole by a part in American opinion or the John Birch Society or anything else as in any other field of endeavor. I don't believe it's right I was a chaplain in the Navy for five years U.S. Navy chaplain served with the branches of the Marine Corps with the Navy as such and

served and helped also with the Air Force and the army on certain occasions. But in the Navy I saw all sorts of sailors all sorts of shouts of Marines as far as that things are not just because a Marine happens to get drunk and happens on land in jail. Is that an indictment on the entire U.S. Marine Corps on the tire us nation as a whole the armed forces hold or certainly if people want to pick it up and say Americans are drunkards Americans beat their wives Americans kill people is foolish. Would you by extension you're using the same logic which is just as idiotic in my judgment Professor fine to indict an entire society John Birch Society or even to indict an entire magazine American opinion by what you see in one sentence two sentences three sentences or 10 pages of an entire series of a particular publication. I'm torn right now there are two directions and we I'd like to understand my point of view. I understand your point though I don't accept it and I don't accept it before I pursue it you can judge the whole by the part. Not at all I think that the whole I just what I said I think you don't have here speaks for itself.

I've picked up the three issues of American opinion to which I've had easy access. And I find in each of the three issues similar statements and I don't know what is the hole any longer and what is the park. Well the holding up part is of course the author's own opinion I want to tell her Caldwell article she signed her name she's responsible for what is in the article. When Westbrook Pegler signs his name he is responsible for what's in there despite the fact that Mr Welch says that we use almost no articles except those written to order to fit our specific needs. Yes and of course the managing editor Scott Stanley Jr. of course is the one who more or less directs these particular needs and directs these things Mr. Wells who is very busy with many activities many times doesn't even have a chance to read the articles before they go much less even sometimes after they haven't been printed. Being as he is very busy and so forth going to be now. But as he said that the author must assume his own responsibility for whatever is in there. Certainly the magazine should merit a certain type of consistency I agree with that and that's what I as an

individual as assistant to Robert Welch I'm trying to encourage the magazine to do to take the stand in the right way and not to be subject to these needless pointless criticism we have enough. It is just that I dread differences of various ages of opinion which I think we should be free to voice in this body don't you. Perhaps I'm much someone to disagree with you. We have enough difference without being on hominum and getting into the person which I think is in some instances hitting below the belt as in Professor Oliver's article in February 64 on page 17 where he says Oh you think that there are some things wrong with my going well I wonder whether you would start arrived to the following statement who is the John F. Kennedy who by shameless intimidation and bribery and blackmail induced weaklings in Congress to approve treasonable acts designed to disarm us and to make us the helpless prey of the affiliated criminals and savages of the United Nations. Which column the reading that's for the last column on page 17 last column. Right now we're in the last paragraph I've read about my own weakness through Trans-Alaska Sharma

So I long as there are Americans. His men already hold it can we can we let me just put one more sentence into the hopper so long as there are no same. That's right context just keep following and you'll find it. So long as there are Americans his that is Kennedy's memory will be cherished. With distaste he says I mention but a few of the hundred reasons why we shall never forget John F. Kennedy. Yes along and follows that I don't so long as there are Americans whose memory will be cherished with distaste and I may continue if the United States is saved. That is by the communist invasion and infiltration of this country by the desperate exertions of patriots. We may have a future of true greatness and glory but says Dr. Oliver professor of the classics University of Illinois a scholar of no mean import by the way in his field. If however we have to read this but we shall never forget how near we were to total destruction in the year 1963. And if the international vermin referring here as opposed to the communist conspiracy who kill who cheat who lie who steal who

murder and torture innocent people if they succeed in completing their occupation of our country Americans will remember Kennedy while they live and will curse him as they face the firing squad or toil in a brutish degradation that leaves no hope for anything but a speedy death unquote. Page 18 I gather that and I'd urge everyone to write and get for themselves the entire article for a dollar American opinion Valmont 78. Would you subscribe to those statements that you just read. May I read the context I think you would say that I would very definitely subscribe to the statements I don't have to as an individual. That's why he has a straight bar let me quote it. The Departed Kennedy is the John F. Kennedy I'm reading now from page 70 who procured his election by peddling bull bait to the suckers including a cynical pledge to destroy the communist base in Cuba. I that's the first statement that he made. I agree that he should have kept his pledge if he gave it to destroy the communist nation Cuba he did not keep. I don't know about the bull bait at all suckers I mean that's Dr Oliver's neat way of saying we're not number two.

He is the John F. Kennedy with whose blessing and support the Central Intelligence Agency staged a fake quote invasion of Cuba designed to strengthen our mortal enemies there and to disgrace us disgrace us not merely by ignominious failure but by the inhuman crime of having murdered brave men into a trap and sent them to suffering and death. I agree that if our president has promised air support for these who invaded Cuba on that day at the Bay of Pigs I believe he should have been a man and should have kept his word and I believe it was in human to do as our government did in planning this invasion and then backing off I think we've got the documents to prove it and us who were right or just have a few minutes left I let me continue he is the John F. Kennedy who in close collaboration with Khrushchev staged the phony embargo that was improvised bolted to befuddle the suckers on election day in 1962 and provided for several months a cover for the steady and rapid transfer of Soviet troops. So for ease of John Kennedy you install maintain power so far as I know you quoted the five. And then you quote of the conclusion. Well I guess these

are only a few of the hundred reasons. If a person who wants to write me Dr D-Wade Valmont 78 and asked for 100 ways in which JFK hated the other side or aided an Americanism I'd be glad to send it to him there are a hundred well-documented specific regions that I do happen in this case to agree with Professor Oliver on the losing. Do you agree with him when later in the article when explaining why Kennedy was murdered when he says this is on page 18 on the evidence and with consideration of human probabilities there are only three explanations of the murder that are not preposterous. The first of these which Dr. Oliver says is not preposterous is that Kennedy was executed by the communist conspiracy because he was planning to turn American. Do you agree with that. Of course I do not nor does Dr. Oliver if you read the context Professor fine and I had a guy that I wish I could believe in and he doesn't.

Go on to the second one that the assassination was a result of one of the rifts that not infrequently occur within the management of the communist conspiracy and so forth so he doesn't agree with that nobody said Oh sorry wait I'd like to wait I'm sorry when he says I wish I could believe that he's referring to the preceding sentence in which it's a long sentence we've only got a minute left and which he says roughly that there is a possibility that Kennedy was playing footsie with the communist but was planning to turn around and sweep the scum out of Washington and rally the forces of the great majority of loyal and patriotic Americans. I wish I could believe that. Yet he does not as follows this you Professor find if you read on page 20 of the article as your listeners I hope will read and buy the magazine and read the 16 pages instead of taking things out of context like the press is not that the conspiracy order of the assassination as part of a systematic preparation for a domestic takeover. Now he espouses this view proves it and goes on a long about his business in that fashion I if you wish to have the John Birch Society official view you must turn to the December 1963

Welton of this asylum afraid that you don't have the time to do it because our time has just about every December issue at that time. Our time has just run out thank you very much Dr. Wade. Thank you President. For that.