It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The John Birch Society

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
have any of you guys heard about them?

Fill me in if you know anything, I just learned about them last night.

www.jbs.org...

Corsig




posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Yup. John Birch society is like one of the oldest anti-UN/globalization organizations around. They have been around at least since the 1950's.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 09:21 AM
link   
The John Birch Society is a radical, right wing extremist organization that opposes communism, socialism, liberalism, and Freemasonry, and supports government-sponsored Christianity. Some consider the JBS to be quasi-fascist.

I've been an opponent of those guys for years.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I came across a pamphlet put out by the John Birch Society at a local auction I went to... It was from the 1950's or so, and was essentially propaganda promoting the idea that Martin Luther King was an agent of the Communists. They took a picture of MLK with school kids and tried to make the claim that he was teaching them about communism. It was a disgusting thing to read... so my take on the JBS is that they were/are quite extremist and downright dispicable.

-Ry



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
The John Birch Society is a radical, right wing extremist organization that opposes communism, socialism, liberalism, and Freemasonry, and supports government-sponsored Christianity. Some consider the JBS to be quasi-fascist.



I wasn't aware that they were anti-Freemason......I have know some that were members of both organizations.

They are more anti-communist, from what I've seen, And yes, they do take it to the extreme, seeing communism in every little thing. They consider themselves to be hugely patriotic, taking issue with anything faintly 'anti-American'.

You might be interested in a 'conspiracy link' with them and the government.

Representative Larry McDonald from Ga, was the National Chairman of the John Birch Society, and while he was a Democrat, he was most definitely a conservative. ( To get elected in Ga, "one had to run as a democrat, but talk republican" per the old-timers).

He was even being mentioned as possible presidential material. His wife has claimed that he was assassinated by 'communist factions' with in our government. ( It does seem a bit odd that his flight just HAPPENED to be 007, and supposedly taken to be spying when it was shot down.)

Here's you some further reading. Have fun!!

www.maebrussell.com...

www.thenewamerican.com...

www.geocities.com...

www.disinfo.com...



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   
From what I've been reading they take a pro American stance but seems to be anti immigration and have an American first philospophy


Cug

posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Groups like the Birchers, Doug Coe's "the family" are part of what I believe to be the real NWO.

Now most of the time I consider them to be just a group of wackos and nothing to be worried about, but sometimes it seems like that maybe that idea is wrong and people really should keep an eye on them.



[edit on 8/31/2006 by Cug]



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by corsig
From what I've been reading they take a pro American stance but seems to be anti immigration and have an American first philospophy


Their "America first philosophy" includes abolishing the separation of church and state, outlawing "Communist" activities (including membership in the Book of the Month Club), and putting Masons in jail.

Take a look at the wikipedia article I linked to above.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   

"The John Birch Society is composed of some of the finest men and women you will ever hope to meet. The charges of extremism, racism, anti-Semitism, and all the rest are pure hogwash."



As everyone in Freedom Force knows, communism is merely a variant of collectivism.

G. Edward Griffin


I have to agree with Mr. Griffin. In fact, most of this slander occurred after the JBS called 'Eisenhower' a communist. Look at Eisenhower's policies and ask yourself, can we call him pro-small goverment or a right-wnger? Wasn't Eisenhower another pawn of the Left and as such may be the JBS called him up on it?

The JBS was one of the first to correctly understand the difference between the "means justifies the ends" vs. the "ends justify the means" - at any cost. At any cost is the key, in case people wondered about where we get any idea of premptive strikes?

If you take a look at the Fabian society's logo of smashing the world to bits and remolding it to their 'evil' hearts content, than you can get a glimpse into what these evil one's believe today and why they always say " the ends justify the means" which allows them to feel justified to commit great crimes to support their end goals. The phoney war on terror is their way of instilling fear and destroying the middle class.

The JBS Society was the first to correctly explain the difference between "right and left" and they understood that there is ONLY one right and everything else is left. Anyone that thinks Bush is RIGHT, than I have a bridge to sell you. Bush is a gun-grabbing leftist who has spent more money than all Presidents before him combined. If you call that RIGHT, than I do not know what LEFT would look like! These so-called right-wingers make Marx look right-wing.

Yes, so the JBS is not anti-Mason. But they are opposed to all forms of 'collectivism' and support 'individualism'; 'individualism' is all about the 'means justify the ends' and this is what made America so special at the beginning. The JBS is also opposed to free-trade and they feel that tariffs would resolve the issue.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Contrary to what Wikipedia says, they ARE anti-Semitic, anti-black and anti-racist of all sorts. I grew up next to Orange County, where they were founded and knew people that had boycotted their organization for their anti-Semitic remarks, etc.

My brother for some reason was curious about JBS so he learned alot, which he shared with me and the anti-racist thing was what stuck in my mind the most.

They are somewhere to the right of Hitler I think.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Forestlady,

I do not doubt that certain members may have made racist comments but that does not necessarily reflect the entire vision of the JBS. Just as this holds same in other lodges or societies, we must be carfeul before labeling them as being "Racist" or "Anti-Semetic". I've known people who were called "anti-semetic" for their opposition and thus personal beliefs in opposing Israeli policy. I know people who were called "Anti-semetic" for their tough stance against communism. But overall, I have to say I find this word "anti-semite" long over-used and improperly applied and tend to look upon this angle with suspicion.

Many of these boycott groups (are left/communists) who were funded by the Ford Foundation to attack and defame anyone opposing communism. People who read certain books that implicated the high percentile of Jews as Communists were labelled as Anti-semites. For the record, they could have cared less about their blood or religion other than the fact that they supported comminism.

To be right of hilter is good thing, because Hitler was not RIGHT, nor RIGHT-Wing. Facism is just as left as a Monopoly is, for it controls goverment or rather the gov and corp are "ONE", whereas Communism is the goverment controling the corps. Niether of them are right-wing now are they?

Only a Republic is right, everything else (excluding spiritual socialism which has never been applied) is left and leads to larger goverment control.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 10:38 PM
link   
My stepfather was approached by these guys shortly after returning from Vietnam.

He's pretty level headed and one of the biggest humanitarians I've ever met - and he stressed the importance of NOT joining any social circle or "clique" of people with agendas of this nature.

He refuses to go into the details, but said they usually recruit members who will make them "look good" as a social front.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by GENERAL EYES]



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
My stepfather was approached by these guys shortly after returning from Vietnam.

He's pretty level headed and one of the biggest humanitarians I've ever met - and he stressed the importance of joining any social circle or "clique" of people with agendas of this nature.

He refuses to go into the details, but said they usually recruit members who will make them "look good" as a social front.

I put a blank in there where I think you meant to put a NOT, or am I mistaken?
I would have to agree with your stepfather on this. Groups like these, infact, MOST GROUPS should be avoided.
Im not a member of any group, society, clup, party, fraternaty, clique or clan.
I am a man who can stand alone and think for myself, and
frankly Im surprised at how many Americans are affiliated with this clan or that.



posted on Aug, 31 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Sorry - yes - there should most definitely be a NOT in there.

Will edit, thanks for pointing that out - can't type tonight for some reason.

[edit on 31-8-2006 by GENERAL EYES]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cinosamitna


I have to agree with Mr. Griffin. In fact, most of this slander occurred after the JBS called 'Eisenhower' a communist. Look at Eisenhower's policies and ask yourself, can we call him pro-small goverment or a right-wnger? Wasn't Eisenhower another pawn of the Left and as such may be the JBS called him up on it?


They didn't just call Eisenhower a communist in the general sense, like the right did to FDR. They made specific and knowingly false statements about particular involvement of Eisenhower in the Communist Party USA


The JBS Society was the first to correctly explain the difference between "right and left" and they understood that there is ONLY one right and everything else is left. Anyone that thinks Bush is RIGHT, than I have a bridge to sell you. Bush is a gun-grabbing leftist who has spent more money than all Presidents before him combined. If you call that RIGHT, than I do not know what LEFT would look like! These so-called right-wingers make Marx look right-wing.


Let me here state that I'm about as far left as you can get without being a Dirty Red. And I assure you, George W. Bush is definitely not a Leftist. He may not be as far right as the quasi-fascist John Birch Society, but he supports big business (especially oil and insurance), opposes minimum wage raises, wants to privatize social security, denies environmental issues, is militaristic (as long as he doesn't have to fight personally), opposes national public health care, etc., etc., just like a good rightwinger.


Yes, so the JBS is not anti-Mason.



Birchers also elaborate on earlier Illuminati Freemason conspiracy theories, imagining "an unbroken ideologically-driven conspiracy linking the Illuminati, the French Revolution, the rise of Marxism and Communism, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the United Nations"[2]. Unlike most advocates of the Illuminati-Freemason conspiracy theory, however, The John Birch Society strenuously denies harboring any anti-Semitic views, and claims to have many Jewish members.

Source



However, I have to agree with forestlady, as many of the old Birchers were also members of the Ku Klux Klan, and harbored anti-Semitism.



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cinosamitna


To be right of hilter is good thing, because Hitler was not RIGHT, nor RIGHT-Wing. Facism is just as left as a Monopoly is, for it controls goverment or rather the gov and corp are "ONE", whereas Communism is the goverment controling the corps. Niether of them are right-wing now are they?



Fascism is by definition a right wing movement. In the political spectrum, they are immediately to the right of "ultra-conservatives".

German conservatives emphatically supported the Nazis. Some conservative Republicans in America did also, with even a few at the time suggesting that the US should enter WWII on Germany's side.

In Fascism, the large corporations are mostly if not completely deregulated. This is why Fascism was so strongly supported by the most wealthy capitalists, and is why the various Fascist regimes also had their government seats full of industrial capitalists.

The war between Fascist capitalists and socialist peasants is beautifully captured by Ernest Hemingway in his For Whom The Bell Tolls, which tells of the horrors of the Spanish Civil War. The war was fought when Fascists and Conservatives, led by Francisco Franco, rose up to overthrow the democratic socialist Spanish Republic.



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   
ML, please see my responses below:


They made specific and knowingly false statements about particular involvement of Eisenhower in the


To be honest, Eisenhower did a very good job of closing the US border and he did this at lightening speed. Over the years I have come to respect him more. Back in those days Communism was the ‘great evil’. Bush could not seal the border after the nation was attacked by ‘terrorism’ and even now after 5 years, he still refuses to do it. So I have to give great credit to Eisenhower for at least doing a far better job than Mr. Bush and his gang.

But false statements, I thought that Carol Quigley had explained quite matter of fact that both the left and right parties are being controlled by the Fabians and members of the CFR? And the reason is just in case one side gets out of line. Would you happen to have those false statements handy because I'm willing to bet that there is much truth to his being connected to the Fabians Socialist Party and thus, he's a Collectivist and a Communist, yet under another name. Almost all Presidents since Woodward Wilson have been of this program, so should not the American people wonder why the Presidents would support socialist agendas? Remember how far right Ronald Reagan was? Well, if that's true then where did he get the nickname "Red Ronnie? Reagan was a Capitalist but that does make him, RIGHT-Wing. I wish to explain the paradox of the left and right that still permeates through the general public’s minds today in a little more detail.

To call the JBS Right-wing is quite correct. However, it is odd that they have been accused of wanting to merge Church and State because if that were true, then they would be LEFT and not RIGHT. I understand the Constitution grants certain rights by God, or God Given Rights and not rights given by the Church. There was never any separation between God and the Constitution, but there was separation between the church and the Constitution and the church and the people. I was led to believe that the JBS opposed all Theocracies, and supported all God given rights. So to merge church and state together opposes the JBS’ very mission statement. I’ll have to investigate this further. Nonetheless, I explained that “Right” is a Republic and means smaller government and also it means Free Enterprise. Bigger government is always Left - regardless of whether if be called this ‘ism’ or that. Capitalism, Fascism or a Monopoly, or a cartel, or communism is not free enterprise and thus we cannot call it RIGHT-Wing.

I shall provide an example of this paradox:

The Federal Reserve is known to be a Privately owned bank and it’s no accident that they are not Federal, nor a Reserve! But upon closer examination, what do we find out? The FED is a cartel, a cartel of ownership between both government officials and also private business. So in reality it's a cartel – more so correctly than anything PRIVATE. Now, government involvement is HUGE and thus it's big government all the way and that means LEFT. So let's suppose the FED was owned 100% by the government instead. Well, a Republic cannot have a Federal Reserve exist period because the very meaning of the FED is “centralization of power” into the hands of a few. In a Republic, only Congress is allowed to issue the nations capital based upon a gold standard, which prevents us from paying income tax and prevents inflation also.

So does it matter who owns the FED today? If it were so-called Communists instead of a cartel of both private and government officials who owned the FED, would it make much difference to YOU and ME? Could we not still proclaim with certainty that the ownership is amalgamated into the hands of a small group of men – whether we call them Fascists or Communists? Are we to assume that government officials cannot also own huge Corporations like they do in Communist Red China and Russia?

Yes. So when power is amalgamated into the hands of small group of men, it is a monopoly, or a cartel because there is almost always government involvement. Whether we call it Communism, or Corporatism, or fascism makes no difference to you and me. .


Let me here state that I'm about as far left as you can get without being a And I assure you, George W. Bush is definitely not a Leftist. He may not be as far right as the quasi-fascist John Birch Society, but he supports big business (especially oil and insurance), opposes minimum wage raises, wants to privatize social security, denies environmental issues, is militaristic (as long as he doesn't have to fight personally), opposes national public health care, etc., etc., just like a good rightwinger.


ML,

Once you are on the left, you can only go further left, due to habit. There is no turning back because once we spend money on a particular program, and then it only increases the need for more. When FEMA failed to properly aid those who suffered in New Orleans, what was the common response? The FEMA needed more funding! As you may know, many people believe that FEMA did not fail and in fact, did exactly what they were supposed to! So, if we think this idea of failure will improve – it will not and in fact, we will only make it stronger but funding it through our taxes.

Was it not the words of Lenin himself who said that Communism is nothing less than “fast socialism”? So what does this suggest? Well, I think he understood that socialism leads only to Communism but in nations with a strong Constitution of law, socialism paves the way into eventual Communism. The Fabians use as their logo a Wolf in Sheep’s clothing and also a turtle to show a slow attempt to take over Strong first world nations, like America. Bush wants a Democracy in the Middle East. But the American people do NOT want Democracy; they do want a democratic system, but a democratic system is NOT “Democracy”. A democracy is living in old Rome before it collapsed under Democracy. Why bring Democracy to the Middle East when we just finished help put in puppets like the Kuwait’ Royal families and supported Theocratic dictators like in Iran, only to later remove them and replace them with something called Democracy? If Bush were serious, would he not want to create other strong Republics and build up the lower class into a strong middle class? No, he does not want any competition.

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Cinosamitna]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Think about what makes Canada different than the USA. One nation has a Constitution, and one nation never had one. Canadians see themselves as socialists but the big joke on them is that the Elite who run Canada promote socialism, because it allows them to amalgamate all the power into their own hands! So why does the US seem less free now? Because the Americans have forgotten who they are and Bush says the Constitution is a piece of paper. Let us look into the matter further. Bush is a member of the Fabians Socialist Party started by Nesta H. Webster and others. Bush speaks of privatized industry as if it's FREE ENTERPRISE they are promoting but they destroy small business, hate private ownership for the citizens and amalgamate everything into a Monopoly. How can we call this a Republic? The difference is between:

Free Enterprise/Republic on one side
Vs.
Cartel, or Corporatism/Communism/Socialism/Fascism/Monopoly etc.



And I assure you, George W. Bush is definitely not a Leftist.


Bush is a Corporatist/Capitalist and not a supporter of competition or free enterprise. Bush is pro free trade, which is a socialist program because it allows other nations to dump their crap on our markets and not pay any penalties. Why should they take your space on YOUR shelves in your nation when they do not pay taxes, or live in your nation? We cannot compete against slave labour, can we? If Bush were truly a Republican, then he would be placing tariffs on all goods entering into the US market from other nations like China. Communists in China love free trade – does that mean that they are being good Republicans? The Republic of America is opposed to offering grants to Wal-Mart, or to Halliburton or any business at all. But here we are seeing Bush grant them huge sums to open up big business and thus destroy all the surrounding small businesses in communities! Why should the government be able to give your tax dollars away (in the name of being far-RIGHT) to one particular company, but not issue grants to another company? This policy, I cannot call it RIGHT! You see this is the difference between a true Republican and a phoney republican like George W. Bush.

So here we have: 2 different forms of Collectivism (Fabians & Leninist). Both are bad, both are far left. One is to brutally destroy nations in bloodshed, the other through slow take over.

But America was founded a Republic by Masons/Christians, so I find it odd that the JBS would be Anti-Mason! If they were making comments like this, then may be they saw that many Masons were supporting Communism? May be so were many Jewish people at the time of the rise of Leninism in Russia? Would you agree that this might have been (at least) partly the case, ML?


However, I have to agree with forestlady, as many of the old Birchers were also members of the Ku Klux Klan, and harbored anti-Semitism.


Whether this accusation be true or not, I cannot prove it. However, many people in those days, including Freemasons were said to have been racists. Does that mean that Freemasonry is responsible for the misdeeds of a few members also?

I would say that G. Washington was a Free Mason; or at least was a member of a Lodge one at one time, correct? But whether he was a Mason or not, he seemed to hold an opinion of the Illuminati being a threat. G. Washington stressed (at that time) only certain members of those lodges were forwarding the diabolical tenants of the Illuminati and Jacobins, but not the lodges as a whole. Now if Washington felt this way, why not call him an anti-mason, or even anti-Semitic just for fun? The JBS are not perfect and may have had members who strived to do wrong. Gentleman, is this not the very same defence which other societies claim daily on this board? How come we can lend credence to other societies and overlook the deeds of a few, but the JBS is somehow more Anti-Semitic and Anti-Mason, and everything good they stand for is somehow overlooked?

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Cinosamitna]



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
EDIT: Double Post

[edit on 1-9-2006 by Tamahu]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join