The Boston Globe Attacks JBS with Falsities

The Boston Globe Attacks JBS with Falsities
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Mr. Ted Widmer from The Boston Globe wrote a nasty August 24th article about Robert Welch. Starting with insult-laden labeling of Welch’s followers as a “troll army,” the piece was filled with errors, misrepresentations, and downright falsehoods. Anyone who finds a need for some verifiable history about Massachusetts would be wise to look somewhere other than the Massachusetts Historical Society where Widmer is advertised as a “trustee.”

A great deal of the piece is simply dead wrong. Other parts are shaded to make Welch and the Society he formed seem like unreliable, even libelous, miscreants. For the record, here are some corrections and comments about his screed.

No one in the John Birch Society ever warned that the UN was “going to invade Texas.” For all the years of my association with the Society (I joined in 1964, accepted a staff position in 1966, and stepped aside as a full-time employee in 2016), I either saw other staff personnel put down such rumors or I initiated the put down myself. Same about Obama being born in Kenya and 9/11 being an inside job. Same about numerous other rumors that the Society helped to squelch.

Welch was indeed a “boy genius” but, contrary to the assertion, he never claimed that label for himself. Others who took the time to get to know him, his history, and his prodigious intellect found that indeed, he was a prodigy at an early age.

While a student at Harvard Law School, Welch sought to correct Harvard Professor Felix Frankfurter who insisted that labor and management were “enemies” whose distaste for each other would always be a key to U.S. economic woes. Welch defended the traditional stance that labor and management were partners in productivity, not enemies – an attitude that counters the kind of Marxist divisiveness that Frankfurter spent his life promoting.

The “loss” of China to Mao Tse-tung’s murderous forces wasn’t merely a “so-called” historical event. The government under Mao took the lives of so many innocent millions that he won a place in the Guinness Book of Records as history’s greatest mass murderer. Yet Mr. Widmer  termed Welch’s seeking to alert the American people about such an enormous tragedy as an example of “extremist views.” Incredible!

Welch’s letters in the 1950s weren’t photocopied because photocopying hadn’t yet been invented. (Small point but evidence of sloppy journalism.)

The Welch-led Society opposed fluoridation of water, not because of its supposed health benefits, but because it amounted to government forced mass medication, something advocated by the likes of Adolph Hitler. Shortly after the Society found itself victimized by charges that its stand, absent the reason for its position being given, was worthy of your type of ridicule, a professor at Tufts University suggested that the then-rising U.S. population could be countered by adding birth control substances to the water supply.  And he pointed to fluoridation of the water supplies as a precedent that could be followed. Even the Boston Globe published this man’s totalitarian suggestion.

About Welch’s 1963 book presenting the career of Dwight Eisenhower, no facts in its 300 pages have ever been shown to be false. Even today, readers find the revelations collected and published by Welch to be important history. All of it should be worthy of the time of a “trustee” of any state’s Historical Society.

Earl Warren was never “hated” by any member of the Welch-led Society.  What he did to advance the cause of Communism within the U.S. caused domestic Communists to hold a huge rally in New York City to salute the Supreme Court leader and the help he was providing to further communism’s subversion.  Pointing this out, and showing fellow Americans the harm created by the Warren-led court, wasn’t “hate.” It amounted to supplying facts and perspective needed by Americans.

The Society recommended letter writing. It formed a speakers bureau. It gathered people into rallies. And, yes, it either employed tactics or made recommendations that even Communists were using – each of which was morally based, legal and sensible. But Communists use moral and legal tactics along with immoral and illegal means to carry out their work. Communists have always published a newspaper. The Boston Globe’s owners publish a newspaper. But the Society never accused the Boston Globe’s owners of adopting a Communist practice in publishing their newspaper.

The Society is frequently pilloried for not publishing its membership lists, thereby earning the charge made by Mr. Widmer and others that it is a “secret” organization. But the Boy Scouts, the League of Women Voters, and many other organizations also don’t publish their membership lists. Mr. Widmer seems to have no appreciation for easily understood practices followed by many. Publishing a membership list would violate a trust accorded to members, which is why so many organizations refuse to do so.

The Society never, I repeat never, labeled Martin Luther King a Communist. Its publications did show that he hired communists, accepted funding from communists, attended communist training sessions, and frequently started demonstrations that turned into communist-led rioting and destructiveness. It was these associations that led former Attorney General Robert Kennedy to wiretap King’s phone and take other steps to thwart what King was doing. When J. Edgar Hoover labeled King the “most notorious liar” in America, he had plenty of reason to do so.

Mr. Widmer also claims that some of “the beliefs that Birchers held were racist.” That charge is odious, something our black and Jewish members would eagerly resist.

It goes on to describe members of the John Birch Society as a “merry band of radicals.” Shame on him for denigrating some of the finest people in our nation with that slur.

He and many other opponents of our Society rely on the claims of William Buckley to buttress his attacks. But Buckley betrayed his own beliefs when he announced support for abortion, when he suggested that colleague Joseph Sobran and ally Patrick Buchanan were tainted with anti-Semitism, when he accepted membership in the world-government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations, and more. As the “Pied Piper” for the Establishment he once opposed, he became the favorite of numerous liberals who despised constitutional conservatism.

Enough! Mr. Widmer has discredited himself enormously. That the Boston Globe would publish his rantings discredits the Globe.

An apology is due. If one comes, I will gladly have it reprinted here.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Planned Parenthood’s Grisly Practices Worse Than Massive Abortion

Planned Parenthood’s Grisly Practices Worse Than Massive Abortion
by JBS President John F. McManus

In November 1970, two years and several months before the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, The John Birch Society published its attitude about abortion. Its widely circulated statement, never retracted or softened, pulled no punches while asserting:

Abortion is murder. When, therefore, we note the cries for relaxation of laws prohibiting abortion, liberalized attitude toward abortion, or abortion on demand, we read instead, relaxation of laws prohibiting murder, liberalized attitude toward murder, or murder on demand.

Yes, there were “legal” abortions being performed in a few states prior to the Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling. States where abortion had been “legalized” were classified by many as outcasts or worse. But once the 7-2 Court decision destroyed all state laws banning the practice, the number of abortions skyrocketed. Since 1973, the lives of more than 57 million infants have been snuffed out.

The largest U.S.- based agency committing this crime, with facilities throughout the nation, is Planned Parenthood (Image from Flickr by Fibonacci Blue Some rights reserved).

The largest U.S.- based agency committing this crime, with facilities throughout the nation, is Planned Parenthood. Not only has the highest court in our nation given a green light to these baby killers, Planned Parenthood receives federal funding that fuels such work. In the single year of 2014, for instance, Planned Parenthood received $528 million taken from taxpayers, many of whom intensely abhor the practice. In that year, the number snuffed out in the womb by Planned Parenthood totaled 327,000. These were all live infants needing only a few more weeks of not being molested before they could exist outside their mother’s womb. That Americans allow this to occur, and allow themselves to be taxed to fund it, is a severe indictment of our entire nation.

Defenders of Planned Parenthood like to focus on mammograms and cancer screenings, which they claim to supply. Yes, Planned Parenthood does such beneficial work. But its main effort is abortion. And now, it has been shown that Planned Parenthood harvests healthy organs from aborted infants and sells them for profit. Asked about this at a press conference after video tapings of the organization’s officials containing admissions of such a practice surfaced, White House spokesman Josh Earnest defended Planned Parenthood insisting that the organization has “high ethical standards.” Selling the parts of murdered infants doesn’t merit being included in any real “high ethical standards.” Instead the practice merits being classified as a Hitlerian criminal act.

The Obama White House has been especially chummy with Planned Parenthood’s President Cecile Richards. According to CNS News, she has been welcomed to the White House 39 times during the Obama presidency – including four one-on-one visits with the President, two with his spouse, four with both Obamas, and the rest with a variety of the President’s assistants including Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Burwell. Defending Planned Parenthood, Ms. Burwell pointed to preventive care such as mammograms. The problem is that most of the Planned Parenthood facilities performing abortions don’t have equipment for mammograms.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul pointed to the $10,000 campaign contribution supplied by Planned Parenthood to presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The poll-leading Mrs. Clinton states, “I’m proud to stand with Planned Parenthood.” She has to know that this organization was founded by Margaret Sanger who should be known as one of the worst racists that ever claimed to be an American.

Planned Parenthood should not receive a penny of federal aid. Legalization of abortion must be abolished. And Americans must get back to being a place where all living humans, including those living in the womb, are treated as real persons.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news and sign up at JBS.org or on our Facebook page.


Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.


Misrepresenting The John Birch Society

Misrepresenting The John Birch Society
by JBS President John F. McManus

The organization known as Convention of States (COS) wants a constitutional convention although its advocates claim that they want only a limited Convention of the States. Altering the terminology used for a constitutional convention, however, does not alter what is being sought by COS advocates. And the claim by COS or anyone that a constitutional convention can be limited to a single amendment, or to several named amendments, cannot be supported. Article V says that a convention may be called by the states “for proposing Amendments.” No number is given. Once a convention is underway, the number of amendments it produces can be limitless, and the current ratification method by the states could be altered or even abolished.

In addition, a recent COS release entitled “John Birch Society Denies Its History and Betrays Its Mission” accuses the Society of reversing the stands taken by JBS Founder Robert Welch and former Chairman Larry McDonald relative to The Liberty Amendment. It also claims that current John Birch Society President John McManus (this writer) has misrepresented Founder Robert Welch and former Congressman Larry McDonald. This is completely erroneous and irresponsible.

In August 1963, Robert Welch urged JBS members to ask legislators in Alabama to approve a resolution favoring the Liberty Amendment. In his urging, Robert Welch made no mention of the Constitution’s second method for gaining amendments, the constitutional convention. He favored the first choice mentioned in Article V which seeks two-thirds approval of both Houses of Congress before a measure is sent to the States where ratification by three-quarters would be needed to complete the process. This method for adding an amendment to the U.S. Constitution happens to be the only method ever employed. For over 200 years, fear of a runaway convention (as occurred in 1787 during deliberations at a convention called to repair the Articles) has kept the amendment process strictly through the first method.

Similarly, Congressman Larry McDonald favored adding the Liberty Amendment to the Constitution. On October 9, 1973, his interview about the matter was published in the Congressional Record. In it, he mentioned that the Amendment was being “advanced in both ways” but he never advocated the convention route. As a member of Congress, he introduced the resolution containing the Liberty Amendment for passage by Congress in the traditional manner. He mentioned but did not favor the existence of the amendment route that would involve a constitutional convention.

Several years before he was slain in 1983, Larry McDonald wrote the 1976 book entitled We Hold These Truths. In it, Larry McDonald capably noted the two routes spelled out in the Constitution for adding amendments. How could he or any constitutional scholar (McDonald was indeed such a scholar) fail to note the existence of these two procedures? But, in the portion of his book discussing amendments, Congressman McDonald expressed explicit choice for neither. To claim that he favored one or the other when he was simply noting both is a complete misrepresentation of what he wrote. The COS release has engaged in misrepresentation, not The John Birch Society.

The COS release notes that, in 1983, Congressman Ron Paul joined with Congressman McDonald in introducing the Liberty Amendment in the House of Representatives. The two men obviously favored the route calling for the amendment to be passed by Congress. They had already introduced the resolution calling for Congress to pass the amendment several times. On no occasion did they express any favor toward the route of a constitutional convention.

On April 30, 2009, Congressman Paul and two co-sponsors again proposed that Congress pass the Liberty Amendment. There is no mention of the constitutional convention route to amend the Constitution in that move.

To learn more about how you can Stop a Constitutional-Convention go to our action project page (Image from ww.jbs.org).

It is true that state resolutions calling for the Liberty Amendment mentioned the constitutional convention route. And it is equally true that Liberty Amendment author Willis Stone counseled state legislators to call for a constitutional convention on behalf of the Liberty Amendment. But during my own very friendly relationship with Willis Stone, the Liberty Amendment author clearly bared the strategy he was employing. Fearing that such a convention might actually occur if sufficient number of states (34) made the convention call, I asked him point blank, “Do you actually want a constitutional convention?” His very prompt and forceful response to me was, “No, I don’t worry about that because no one would be stupid enough to want a Con-Con.” He was relying on fears of many – including members of Congress – that the existing Constitution would be in jeopardy similar to what befell the Articles of Confederation in 1787. He further explained that if his work among the various state legislatures succeeded in getting close to the number 34 (the number that would trigger a convention), members of Congress would move quickly to pass approval of the measure themselves in order to keep a constitutional convention from becoming a reality.

In 1963, the Liberty Amendment Committee headed by Willis Stone published Action For Americans: The Liberty Amendment, a book promoting the Liberty Amendment. No book on this topic could be issued by the Liberty Amendment Committee without Willis Stone approving of every word. In their book, authors Lloyd G. Herbstreith and Gordon van B. King stated:

Some people have expressed fear of what a Convention might do. They point to the fact that the 1787 Convention was convened to amend the Articles of Confederation; however, it did not do this. It wrote an entirely new Constitution. A convention called now might similarly re-write the entire Document, instead of merely proposing an amendment….

As soon as twenty or more State Legislatures have approved the Liberty Amendment, Congress will approve it, and return it to the States for ratification.

There you have the opinion of the chief promoters of the Liberty Amendment, certainly including Willis Stone. What Mr. Stone told me of his plan is what these two authors, both friends and supporters of Mr. Stone and the Liberty Amendment, have confirmed.

Conclusions:

1. Neither Larry McDonald nor Robert Welch ever favored the route of a constitutional convention for adding amendments to the Constitution. Both merely knew that the Constitution allowed such a method.

2. Larry McDonald’s book We Hold These Truths does not place him in the camp of those favoring a constitutional convention.

3. Willis Stone’s strategy is clear. He wanted to force Congress to act to pass the Liberty Amendment resolution in order to prevent creation of any constitutional convention.

4. The book by Herbstreith and King confirms the Stone strategy.

5. An apology for accusing The John Birch Society for denying its history and betraying its mission directed to me and to the memory of Robert Welch, Larry McDonald, and Willis Stone should be issued by COS. It would be received with gratitude.

Learn of other false accusations made by Con-Con supporters here.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news by signing up at JBS.org or on our Facebook page.


A former U.S. Marine officer, Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.


Wind and Solar Power Not the Answer

Wind and Solar Power Not the Answer
by JBS President John F. McManus

In France, 80 percent of electricity is generated by nuclear power. In the United States, the figure hovers around 20 percent, and it’s declining. Anti-nuclear power partisans point to supposed dangers in this form of acquiring electric power. But history shows their error. The only nuclear power plant accident in the U.S., occurring in 1979 at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island facility, actually demonstrated how safe this form of generating power truly is. There were no deaths, no injuries, and no nearby inhabitants adversely affected – except for the few who were seriously frightened by irresponsible propaganda.

The anti-nukes like to refer to the Chernobyl “meltdown.” Yes, that Soviet-built power plant did spew large amounts of radiation into the atmosphere and it harmed some people. But, unlike plants in the West, it had no containment shield around it that would have minimized or even completely prevented any accidental discharge of radiation. Then questions arise about the harm caused in 2011 when a huge tsunami crashed into Japan and severely damaged the Fukushima nuclear power plant. It now turns out, however, that the harmful health effects caused at the plant by that wall of water were nearly non-existent and two Stanford University experts who studied the event concluded that mandatory evacuations around the plant killed more people than are supposed to have died because of leaking radiation.

Environmentally charged individuals (they like to be called “Greens”) continue to insist that wind and solar power should replace not only nuclear plants but coal and gas-fired plants as well. They want less carbon sent into the atmosphere by burning coal and gas. Getting rid of burning coal and gas, they insist, will slow or eliminate global warming. But claims by the Greens that carbon emissions lead to a warming of the planet are dubious to say the least.

Journalist Barbara Hollingsworth recently noted that even after “receiving an estimated $39 billion in annual government subsidies over the past five years,” the solar energy industry accounted for a meager “one-half of one percent of all the electricity” generated during 2014 in the United States. TIME magazine reported that the largest solar farm in America, California’s Desert Sunlight Solar Farm, received billions in federal loans and incentives while producing a minimal amount of electricity. Wind farms, once thought by Greens to be a replacement for fossil fuel-burning plants, have proven to many that they are expensive boondoggles.

Over in Europe, Germany’s Greens have so discredited nuclear power that plans are being laid to shut down existing plants. But other Germans have found out that turning to wind and solar isn’t a good alternative. Instead, these people have learned the hard way that wind and solar power occasionally go dead – as when weather doesn’t cooperate. The result? New coal and gas-fired plants are being built to stave off blackouts, just the opposite of turning away from sending carbon into the air. And France, the world’s leader in the use of nuclear power, is bowing to the demands of her own Greens and planning to close nuclear plans in favor of what Germans are discovering isn’t the answer.

Three conclusions arise from this admittedly brief survey of the problems of electric power generation. These are: 1) Much of the noise coming from Greens should be ignored. 2) If expensive subsidies given to solar and wind power generation interests were cancelled, there would be far fewer opting for it. And, (3) Generating power from the atom is one of the greatest inventions of modern times. As a supplier of clean and plentiful electricity, its usage should be increasing not declining everywhere, even in America.

Learn more about how America’s current energy program is being driven into the ground by the federal government.

Then get involved to join the battle for less government, more responsibility, and — with God’s help — a better world.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.


Falsehoods Mark the Campaign for a Constitutional Convention

Falsehoods Mark the Campaign for a Constitutional Convention
by JBS President John F. McManus

For one excellent reason, The John Birch Society has always opposed the creation of a constitutional convention (Con-Con) as authorized in Article V of the Constitution. The Society isn’t opposed to amendments and would support any that would cancel existing Amendments 16 (Federal Income Tax) and 17 (Popular Election of Senators). This could be done via the other route to adding an amendment noted in Article V, the passage of the measure by two-thirds of each house of Congress and then ratification by three-fourths of the states. This is the only route to adding an amendment that has ever been employed in the 228 years of the Constitution’s existence.

Having both houses of Congress agree to an amendment before sending it to the states for ratification is the safe route to adding any amendment. It was the route taken when Amendment 18 (Prohibition) was erased by Amendment 21. A Con-Con, however, would open the entire Constitution for change, even total erasure – which is what occurred in 1787 when a Con-Con assembled under the Articles of Confederation met with the sole assignment to revise the Articles. But because a Con-Con cannot be limited, America’s Founders used the power any Con-Con would have and scrapped the Articles. They then proceeded to write an entirely new Constitution, even changing the state ratification requirement from unanimous (under the Articles) to three-fourths in the new Constitution. Such a runaway could happen again because a Con-Con can’t be limited.

Most of today’s proponents of a Con-Con want to use it to add a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. Calling their proposal a “Convention of the States,” they claim that it can be limited. But, in reality, what they claim for a Convention of the States is a nothing but a Con-Con which can’t be limited to a single topic. Some of these proponents also claim that John Birch Society Founder Robert Welch and Congressman Larry McDonald, his 1983 successor, advocated the Con-Con route in favor of the “The Liberty Amendment.” This proposed amendment, written more than 50 years ago by Willis Stone, is a brief proposal whose most appealing feature would require the federal government to divest itself of every “business, professional, commercial, financial or industrial enterprise except as specified in the Constitution.” The money saved would enable the Federal government to abolish the federal income tax – another clause in the proposed amendment.

But neither Robert Welch nor Larry McDonald nor this writer (current JBS President) has ever advocated a Con-Con on behalf of the Liberty Amendment or any other amendment. After sponsoring Willis Stone for a speech in 1965, I became quite friendly with him (he is deceased). He even implored me to accept appointment as a state chairman for the amendment; a request I declined because I was already overloaded with other commitments. But I discussed the matter with Mr. Stone at length and knew that his plan sought to have state legislatures pass a resolution asking Congress to create a Con-Con was simply a tactic to call attention to his proposal. He very clearly explained to me that he feared a Con-Con. He expected that members of Congress, themselves fearful of what might happen if a Con-Con were created, would use their Article V authorization to propose the amendment directly and singly in both houses of Congress (the alternate method for starting the amendment process spelled out in Article V). When the number of state legislatures calling for a convention approached 34, he was certain that Congress would act and turn to the far safer portion of Article V to accomplish the first step toward passage of the Liberty Amendment.

I vividly recall questioning Willis Stone about the danger that 34 states would indeed call for a Con-Con. I noted that if that number of state applications for a convention were reached, then the Constitution requires that Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.” He emphatically assured me, “No, I don’t worry about that because no one is stupid enough to want a Con-Con. We know what happened when the Con-Con met in 1787; its members cancelled the Articles of Confederation. If a Con-Con were held today [1965], it could and likely would lead to cancellation of the present Constitution and put in its place something far different.”

I know that Robert Welch never wanted a Con-Con. I know of no JBS official who wanted it. I never discussed the matter with Larry McDonald, but I’m sure he discussed it with Robert Welch. Anyone who claims that JBS leaders (past or present) ever intended to have Congress create a constitutional convention either doesn’t know what he or she is talking about or is being deceitful.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.


Ignoring the Full Truth About the Castro Brothers

Ignoring the Full Truth About the Castro Brothers 
by JBS President John F. McManus

Press coverage of President Obama’s decision to normalize relations with Cuba avoided any mention of the fact that Fidel Castro and his companions were helped to take control of the island nation by the U.S. government and elements of the American mass media. Had not pro-communist personnel in Washington and elsewhere assisted in the takeover, Cuba would not have become a bastion of communism only 90 miles from portions of Florida. And while many thousands of Cubans succeeded in fleeing their native land for Southern Florida, untold numbers didn’t make it in waves of rickety boats and rafts.

Fidel Castro, 1978. Photo by Marcelo Montecino, CCBY-SA 2.0.

Castro didn’t just become a communist after he took control of the island nation. As far back as April 1948, Fidel participated in a communist-led uprising in Bogota, Colombia that left thousands dead or wounded and a huge portion of the city in ashes. Arrested for murder, Fidel boasted, “I did a good day’s work today; I killed a priest.” Incarcerated for a time, he won release and then led a band of his followers into Cuba in July 1956 where he was arrested, tried, and sentenced to 15 years in prison. Given amnesty by the government of Fulgencio Batista, he went to Mexico where he studied guerilla warfare under communist Alberto Bayo. Back into Cuba in early 1958, the bearded revolutionary seized control of the nation on January 1, 1959.

Plenty of competent people knew of Castro’s history and were ignored. Arthur Gardner served as U.S. Ambassador to Cuba in 1957. He came upon information about Castro’s background, reported what he’d learned, and was forced to resign on June 16, 1957. His replacement, Earl E.T. Smith, likewise made the same discovery but State Department officials ignored his warnings and he resigned in June 1959. Veteran Latin America diplomat Spruille Braden, a former ambassador to Cuba, released a statement in the summer of 1958 in which he called Fidel “a pawn in the Kremlin’s international intrigue.” He termed Cuban leader Batista “America’s best friend in Cuba.”

In the September 1958 issue of American Opinion magazine, publisher and soon-to-be founder of The John Birch Society, Robert Welch wrote that “the evidence from Castro’s whole past, that he is a Communist agent carrying out Communist orders and plans, is overwhelming.” On November 4, 1958, the Communist Party of Cuba stated its allegiance to Castro and an English translation of that declaration appeared in the next issue of Political Affairs, the official publication of the U.S. Communist Party. And in the February 1959 issue of American Opinion, J.B. Matthews filled several pages with of evidence that Castro was a Red.

All of this amounted to nothing at the State Department. On March 14, 1958, State Department officials imposed an embargo on arms shipments to the legitimate Cuban government. Batista fled the island nation and the communist forces led by Castro took control, as noted previously, on January 1, 1959. Had Castro not received diplomatic aid and hugely favorable press coverage in the United States, he would never have succeeded. He came to America where he was feted as a glorious revolutionary, praised on popular television programming, and promised substantial aid. Less than two years later, he admitted that he’d been a communist all his adult life. Some U.S. officials and Castro lovers in the mass media said, “Don’t believe him!” But Fidel and his comrades started a reign of terror in Cuba that has claimed an untold number of victims.

In April 1961, 1,400 brave anti-Castro Cubans conducted an amphibious assault at the Bay of Pigs in hopes of ousting the communist regime that had seized their homeland. They were betrayed when promised U.S. air support for their venture never arrived. In October 1962, the American people were frightened during what was termed the Cuban Missile Crisis. Though no Cuban missiles (whatever they had was supplied by the USSR) were ever fired at the United States, the episode strengthened the hand of the Castro government, then considered a formidable foe backed in numerous ways by the Soviet Union.

The recent change in the official U.S. attitude toward Cuba amounts to a huge victory for the Castro government now led by Fidel’s brother Raul. Accompanied by a prisoner swap in which the Cubans were given five while only one American was released and sent home, the diplomatic maneuvering has amounted to another victory for the Castro regime. And both the U.S. government and the mass media have never mentioned the above summary you have just read.


Mr. McManus joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966 and has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.


Imagine a World without The John Birch Society

Imagine a World without The John Birch Society
by JBS CEO Arthur Thompson

Imagine, if you will, a world without The John Birch Society.

Few people have ever thought about this except for the Insiders. They constantly hope and work for a world without the JBS.

JBS Founder Robert Welch

Let us give you a “baker’s dozen” of the ways that the world would be different if our founder Robert Welch had not imagined a world with The John Birch Society. We do so in order that you, our members and supporters, can have a better appreciation of what you are involved in and just how valuable you are to the liberty of not only the citizens of the United States, but also for liberty around the world.

One. Before the JBS, there were thousands of conservative organizations, large and small, all going every which way with very little success. And, they lacked any perspective of a conspiracy behind the various fingers on the hand working to squeeze the life out of American society and our Constitution. They simply looked at all manner of socialists as independent from one another, not noticing these various fingers all seemed to end up at the same place, at the same time, with the same goal in mind. We still have that problem today, but progress in an awareness that a conspiracy has to exist has taken root.

The polls we have seen in this regard, show that from one-quarter to one-third believe that a conspiracy exists, up from virtually no one believing so when the Society started. The very idea that the question would be asked demonstrates our influence. The role of the JBS in this change in the understanding of the American people has led to us being attacked over the years, calling us “conspiracy theorists,” “paranoid,” and a lot worse.

Two. Among the action projects we have initiated to educate Americans about certain dangers to their liberty and what needs to be done about it, none take a more important place than our “Get US out! Of the United Nations” campaign.

When the Society started this initiative, fully 80% of the people supported the UN. By the turn of the century, only about 30% of the people supported it. This was the result of millions of pieces of literature, scores of visual aids seen by hundreds of thousands, road signs, and several hundreds of speeches given by members of the Society on the UN.

Without the JBS, the UN would today have a great deal more control over local government through myriad causes such as sustainable development, local schools through UNESCO, and our military. It can be argued that this control more than likely would have been complete by this time.

Three. If the JBS had not started its campaign to “Support Your Local Police – and Keep Them Independent,” our police departments would already be run by communists ― at least in the bigger cities ― and federal control would already be a practical reality if not codified by law.

We will not spend the time documenting the problem we saw in the 1960s other than to say that the communists, coupled with the federal government, were intent on using any and all excuses to take control out of the hands of local citizens and place it either in the hands of civilian police review boards run by local radicals or into federal receivership.

Our “Support Your Local Police” slogan was so successful, that it was recognized by nearly every American.

Four. Without the JBS, sex education would now be a K-12 year course in all public schools. We stopped most of this program but some aspects lingered in the larger school districts.

We will not discuss the issue herein other than to say that you can teach an idiot what he needs to know about sex in 30 minutes. Why the need for a full curriculum? The answer is that it was, and is meant to be, a study in breaking down Judeo-Christian morality and a direct attack on the mental health of all children. The latter takes too long to go into other than to say that if you saturate children with sex education during their latency period, you are setting many of them up for serious psychological problems.

Five. Without the JBS, the Western Hemisphere would look like the European Union but it doesn’t as a result of our campaign against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). This scheme was launched by President George W. Bush to create a similar EU structure that would have led to the same problem that the citizens of Europe have today. The JBS was virtually alone in this effort. This defeat of a major Insider initiative led to a fallback position called the North American Union.

Six. Without the JBS, the countries of Canada, Mexico, and the United States would already be locked into a tripartite pact linking us together in all of the major aspects of our society leading to the structure of a new country, nicknamed the North American Union. The original timetable to have this in place by George W. Bush and the heads of state of the two other countries was 2010. Its official name was the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

The various entities to be integrated were to be environmental initiatives, banking, healthcare, and others. The police and armed forces were also to be integrated. Finally, there would be a common tariff with no borders between the three countries with the freedom of movement into each country by all North American “citizens.”

Members of the Society put millions of pieces of literature into the hands of opinion molders and others and showed hundreds of thousands of people videos on the subject, all prepared by the JBS, while JBS members gave speeches and guest appearances on the media before more hundreds of thousands.

While there were other organizations involved, the vast bulk of the campaign that was started by the JBS was done by our members.

Seven. Without the JBS, a new constitutional convention would have already taken place. While we owe a great debt to Eagle Forum in this regard, it is safe to say that without the JBS with its large network of members, the Con-Con would have been unstoppable.

The battle rages on in this regard, and if it had not been for the educational efforts and hands-on work of our members over the past four decades, the current effort to alter our Constitution through the use of Article V of the Constitution would have already happened.

The work that our members have done so far this year to stop it is built on the foundation of the years of work that had come before. Without the JBS, a Con-Con could go forward next year, or the next.

Eight. Without the influence and educational efforts of The John Birch Society, many other organizations would never have been formed or leaders produced. Some of these have been indirect, but there are several organizations of merit that were formed with the direct influence of our members. We will forego identifying these leaders except to say that their efforts have greatly expanded the message of the JBS to a second level of contacts.
Some of these leaders are seen regularly on national media when the same media would never give a leader of the JBS a moment of time.

Nine. Without the JBS, literally millions of people would never have seen the likes of “Overview of America,” “Dollars & $ense,” and a hundred other videos, either in audiences or on the Internet.

Ten. Without the JBS, The New American magazine would not exist. Frankly, it is nearly incalculable as to how many Americans have read a hardcopy of the magazine, but it must exceed five million of just the special issues we have produced in the last couple of decades. As to reprints from TNA, it is many millions more.

The online articles on the TNA website reach over five million people each year. These are unique numbers, not repeat viewers.

The amount of information and valuable content enables the readers to carry the information into their daily lives and situations. It is not unusual for the information contained in the pages of TNA to have an impact on decisions made in Washington and local communities. The magazine also serves as a basis for the dissemination of educational tools for our members’ action projects.

Eleven. Without the JBS, FreedomProject Education, the educational arm of our American Opinion Foundation, would not exist. The significance of this is that FPE personnel in the last few months have been in over half of the states speaking on the latest threat to American education, Common Core, delivering over 200 speeches to live audiences, not counting over 60 radio appearances. Over three million have viewed, downloaded, or embedded FPE educational videos on not only Common Core, but the Constitution and the presidents.

We have no way of finding out how many people have actually seen these videos once they are embedded or downloaded. While it is probably not indicative of the numbers, we discovered that one site alone which embedded an FPE video had been viewed 58,000 times.

We can now say that thousands of people have been involved in the classes presented by FPE, both in student and adult venues. Enrollment in the K-12 classes is running at three times what it was at this time last year.

Twelve. Without the JBS, the entire conservative movement would probably have been co opted and diverted from effective action. The Article V fight is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to conservatives being misguided.

As an example: The solution is not to change the Constitution, it is to get everyone to adhere to the Constitution. Just as a balanced budget amendment is not a solution. The so-called budget does not include the spending for Social Security, Medicare, the Post Office, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae because these and more are considered off-budget. And, then, how can one even contemplate solving the federal budget deficit unless you factor in the Federal Reserve? You begin to see the problem of having a proper understanding of what is going on before you can have an effective solution ― yet none of the proponents of the Article V convention even discuss any of the aforementioned points.

There may not be total clarity by Americans as to the problems we face and their solutions, but without the JBS there would certainly be much less.

Thirteen. Finally, although we could continue on point by point, without the JBS perhaps you yourself may not have ever gotten involved. The work that you have done, and are doing, and will do into the future might not have existed.

Then look around you and determine what has been done by fellow members and what will be done in the future, simply because the JBS exists.

We are a long way away from victory. Yet we may be closer than we think. There are indications that there are large numbers of people, even members of Congress, who are beginning to get backbone.

The Conspiracy has a problem simultaneously moving forward interrelated parts of its agenda: If one or two parts are out of sync, it can delay all the rest of their plans. We believe that the successful campaign efforts of the Society on the United Nations and Support Your Local Police ultimately led to the facade of the death of communism. The Insiders had to slow down the communist program due to our education of the American people, who are the ultimate key to the success or failure of the global revolution.

The Conspiracy is very afraid of the American people. What we do as a country will have a bearing on the success or failure of the Insiders’ entire scheme. This makes the education of the American people so very vital. Not just education, but a level of understanding of what is wrong, who is behind it, and what is right and how to restore liberty as envisioned by our country’s Founders.

Educating and campaigns are the frosting on the cake. The cake itself is organization.

Children like the frosting. And, in this analogy, so does the average person. The frosting is everything most conservatives engage in or watch. It is the glitz of campaigns, marketing, and public relations. Lots of people can produce frosting. Few understand the need to build the tiers of cake that give it all substance and the basis for the frosting to even matter ― for the frosting is meant to aid in the appeal and flavor of the cake, not the other way around.

Yet most organizations are frosting without the cake.

Frosting is necessary in order to convince people that you are successful. The JBS has always been better at making the cake instead of icing it. And, the Insiders who control much of the media, academia, and other public venues have never allowed the JBS to play in their controlled field ― because they know to allow us access would help build the cake, and this they cannot tolerate.

The other problem with glitz is that it is expensive, and we would rather put our funding into things that matter in the long run: organization, in other words. And, we have proven over and over again that superior organization will defeat all the frosting glazed over an organization to make it look formidable whether it is conservative or doing the work of the Conspiracy.

And, that is why, more than anything, the other side attacks us.

2014 is a year of decision unlike any “off-year” election that we have seen in many generations. As such, it will be a year full of solutions presented by a myriad of political organizations and politicians. And all of them will be operating under the mantra of “get me/us elected and I/we will solve all of our problems.” It will also be the year of quick-fix “solutions,” such as an Article V Convention.

Can you imagine a weakened JBS because our members and supporters concentrate their money into political campaigns rather than education and the organization necessary to carry our mission forward? This condition would last long after the election year. The consequences could be catastrophic.

It is not simply the organization; it is our ability to do all we can to amass the wherewithal to effectively defeat the Con-Con and the current spate of foreign entanglements.

In light of this, we ask you to consider supporting The John Birch Society. Can you consider at this time a gift of $2,000 or $1,000 to carry our action projects forward? Small and large gifts will strengthen our opportunities to extend liberty to our heirs and to future generations. As always, we do not pretend to know your present giving situation, but we must ask.

Foreign Entanglements book by Art ThompsonThose sending in $200 or more will receive a signed copy of my new book, “International Merger by Foreign Entanglements.” It sounds dry ― but it isn’t. It is a good read and very quotable, even if I do say so myself! We are seeing people starting to order the book by the case for large distribution, and we are going into a second printing after being released for only one month. To receive this, please mention the book in the comment field when making your online donation.

Regardless of your decision, we want you to know that we appreciate each and every one of you and what you are doing to save our Constitutional Republic. Thank you!