From: cberlet@igc.apc.org (NLG Civil Liberties Committee)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: Bellant: Old Nazi Networks in US
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:27:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1299600110:cdp:1299600119:000:13647
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!cberlet    Dec 11 18:27:00 1992


/* Written  9:10 pm  Dec  8, 1992 by cberlet in igc:publiceye */
/* Written  8:30 pm  Dec  6, 1992 by cberlet in igc:p.news */
/* Written  6:56 pm  Mar  4, 1990 by nlgclc in igc:publiceye */
PART TWO - SECTION 2
	
     - Eisenhower's Nightmare -
	
      In 1958, the Military-Industrial Conference formed the 
Institute for American Strategy (IAS) to conduct ongoing Cold War 
propaganda. It was left to the American Security Council and the 
University of Pennsylvania's Foreign Policy Research Institute to 
administer the IAS. [f-112] The IAS became a center of 
controversy in 1961, however, because of its role in political 
indoctrination of the military and its ties to active duty 
military organizations that were beginning to conduct propaganda 
in civilian forums. The concern of IAS critics was that an 
emerging military-industrial complex could begin to dominate 
politics and government policymaking, as was noted by President 
Eisenhower in his 1961 farewell address. Senator William 
Fulbright and President John F. Kennedy began to share that 
concern, especially when it became clear that it was liberalism 
itself that was under attack.
	
      In 1961, the <New York Times> reported that a 1958 National 
Security Council> directive recommended that "the military be 
used to reinforce the cold war effort." The NSC decided that the 
>military should conduct indoctrination campaigns for the 
American public on cold war and foreign policy issues. The 
Institute for American Strategy became the vehicle for the NSC 
program, organizing "National Strategy Seminars>." The <Bulletin 
of Atomic Scientists> noted:
	
     "What is particularly striking about the National Strategy 
Seminars is that through the authorization of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, the Institute for American Strategy, in effect, took over 
from the services the responsibility for training reserve 
officers on active duty, even though the National War College, 
whose facilities were used, had been giving courses on strategy 
to senior officers of the three services as well as civilians for 
the past ten years. "
	
     "At the same time, while the government paid for allowance, 
travel, facilities and services, the Richardson Foundation 
provided the funds for other expenses, including the cost of 
developing a curriculum for the seminar, hiring a staff, securing 
speakers, and purchasing books and other materials to be 
distributed to the students without charge. [f-113]"
	
      Fulbright warned of the dangers implicit in the situation:
	
     "The relationships between the Foreign Policy Research 
Institute, the Institute for American Strategy, the Richardson 
Foundation, the National War College, and the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, should be re-examined from the standpoint of whether these 
relationships do not amount to official support for a viewpoint 
at variance with that of the Administration. "
	
     "These relationships may give one particularly aggressive 
view a more direct and commanding influence upon military and 
civilian concepts of strategy than is desirable. [f-114]"
	
      Frank Barnett was Director of Research for the Richardson 
Foundation (now the Smith-Richardson Foundation) and Program 
Director of the Institute for American Strategy. Barnett 
advocated "political warfare" abroad that included fomenting 
"diverse forms of coercion and violence including strikes and 
riots, economic sanctions, subsidies for guerrilla or proxy 
warfare and, when necessary, kidnapping or assassination of enemy 
elites." [f-115] Riled by those who did not share his militant 
foreign policy outlook, Barnett told attendees at one Cold War 
seminar that "it is within the capacity of the people in this 
room to literally turn the State of Georgia into a civilian war 
college," in order to overcome their opponents. [f-116]
	
      William Kintner, a 25-year ASC veteran who left the CIA 
after 11 years as a planning officer and joined IAS in 1961, 
attacked the critics of extreme rightism in the <Readers Digest>, 
May, 1962. He said the campaign against extreme rightists, 
including the John Birch Society, began when "dossiers in 
Moscow's espionage headquarters were combed for the names of 
unsuspecting persons in the United States who might do the 
Kremlin's work." In other words, Presidents Eisenhower and 
Kennedy were dupes of the KGB. . .or worse. In the jargon of 
today's extreme right, those concerned over the growing 
military-industrial complex were spreading "Soviet disinformation."
	
      Despite the controversy, the NSC directive authorizing the 
military's role in Cold War propaganda remained in effect.  
Edward Lansdale became Administrative Director of IAS in the 
mid-1960's, serving while John Fisher was president of the 
organization. Lansdale was also an architect of CIA covert 
operations in Vietnam. [f-117] The Institute for American 
Strategy later changed its name to the American Security Council 
Foundation. 
	
      In the early 1960's the ultra-right was planning 
Goldwater's presidential campaign effort, helping to build the 
political base of extreme right groups. In concert with the 
Goldwater campaign, the American Security Council in 1964 
published a book called <Guidelines for Cold War Victory> which 
listed board members and cooperating organizations from several 
far-right groups, including some linked to the John Birch 
Society. At least one ASC official was even associated with the 
quasi-Nazi Liberty Lobby. [f-118]
	
      These relationships take on greater significance as one 
learns more about the nature of groups such as Liberty Lobby and 
the John Birch Society. For instance, the founder of the John 
Birch Society, Robert Welch, once called President Eisenhower "a 
dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy," while 
the leader of Liberty Lobby, Willis Carto, edited a publication 
in 1960 calling for voter support for the American Nazi Party.
	
      In his book <The Liberty Lobby and the American Right>, 
author Frank P. Mintz outlines the "overlap in ideology and 
clientele" between Liberty Lobby and the John Birch Society as 
well as the important differences:
	
     "The John Birch Society in the early 1960's aspired to the 
leadership of a `radical right' that strongly defended national 
sovereignty and opposed American membership in international 
organizations such as the United Nations. Closely related to the 
nationalist stance was a conspiratorial interpretation of U.S. 
history that made the Council on Foreign Relations an ally of the 
`Communist conspiracy.'"[f-119]
	
      But while the Birch Society trumpeted jingoistic patriotism 
via conspiracy theories, Mintz says that the "Lobby voiced racist 
and anti-Semitic beliefs in addition to conspiracism." 
Mintz explains:
	
     "Structurally, the Lobby was a most unusual umbrella 
organization catering to constituencies spanning the fringes of 
Neo-Nazism to the John Birch Society and the radical right. It 
was not truly paramilitary, in the manner of the Ku Klux Klan and 
Nazis, but was more accurately an intermediary between racist 
paramilitary factions and the recent right. The pro-defense 
network being created by the American Security Council in the 
1960's offered a respectable and anonymous way for members of the 
radical right John Birch Society and quasi-Nazi Liberty Lobby to 
pursue the pro-military anti-communist portions of their ideology 
in a setting where the less savory portions of their views could 
be ignored in the spirit of coalition building. "
	
     - The Coalition for Peace Through Strength -
	
      The ASC's role in elections wasn't highly visible until 
1970. That year it targeted opponents of Richard Nixon's Vietnam 
War policies for defeat through the distribution of a "national 
security vote index" which claimed liberals were soft on 
communism. The ASC warned voters, "Did <you> vote for. . .a real 
missile gap? A new Cuban missile crisis?. . .Well, that's what 
you got! And a powerful coalition of members of Congress is 
trying to further reduce our defenses." [f-120]
	
      After Jimmy Carter became President in 1977, the ASC began 
to organize opposition to his plans to ratify the SALT II treaty. 
The ASC formed the Coalition for Peace Through Strength in 
August, 1978 for that purpose, and to put together a network to 
defeat the Democratic Party's nominee in 1980. In a Coalition 
report issued immediately after the 1980 elections, Coalition 
co-Chair Paul Laxalt,  who was also Reagan's 1980 campaign 
chairman, praised Fisher and the ASC: "The combination of all 
your efforts--particularly your TV blitz, Speakers Bureau and 
Political Action Committee--had a powerful impact on the election 
results." [f-121]
	
     - The ASC Role in the 1980 Elections -
	
      In 1980 the American Security Council Foundation produced a 
film, "The SALT Syndrome," to oppose Senate ratification of the 
SALT treaty and to suggest that Jimmy Carter was unilaterally 
disarming the U.S. Its use by the tax-exempt ASC Foundation was 
described by Fisher: "In the last three months of the campaign. . 
.ASCF increased its average TV showings from 30 a month to 180 
bookings per month for a total of 1,956 showings during this 
election year." Fisher claimed that the purchased commercial air 
time, cable showings and screenings by private groups reached 
anywhere from 50 to 137 million people.
	
      The ASC was also active in realigning the Senate toward the 
GOP. Fisher, for instance, celebrated the victory of James Abdnor 
of South Dakota, by noting Abdnor had "unseated the 18-year 
super-dove incumbent, Senator George McGovern."  Fisher also 
reported Abdnor expressed pleasure with the help he received. 
"Aside from my own campaign committee itself, no organization was 
more helpful in my successful Senate race than the Coalition for 
Peace Through Strength/American Security Council," Abdnor is 
quoted as saying.
	
      In the South Dakota race, according to the <Coalition 
Insider> (the newsletter of the Coalition for Peace Through 
Strength), the film "The SALT Syndrome" was shown 11 times on the 
three major television stations in South Dakota and as a 
projected film or videotape it was screened to 1,000 audiences. 
Making the ASC film his own, "Abdnor prepared an opening and 
closing statement that was incorporated in the 16mm version of 
`The SALT Syndrome.'" ASC organizers "along with Abdnor's staff 
were responsible for these more than 1,000 showings of the film. 
. .throughout the state," reported the <Coalition Insider>.
	
      The ASC-PAC also gave Abdnor's campaign $8,000. Other 
pro-military Senate candidates for whom the ASC made special 
efforts included Charles Grassley, Alfonse D'Amato, and Steven Symms.
	
      According to Fisher:
	
     "Coalition Co-chairman Major General [Ret.] John (Jack) 
Singlaub played a continuing role in the Grassley campaign, first 
visiting Iowa in the early summer. Singlaub's radio and 
television ads made for Grassley became an important part of the 
campaign's thrust. In addition, Singlaub filmed a special 
introduction to "The SALT Syndrome" for Grassley, who used the 
film widely in his campaign."
	
      The report notes that Grassley's Democratic opponent, 
incumbent Senator John Culver, moved ahead in the polls, so 
Grassley asked retired Lt. General Daniel O. Graham, former CIA 
deputy director and ex-head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, 
to campaign for him. Graham, who was executive director of the 
ASC's PAC, was carried by private plane on "a whirlwind tour of 
Western Iowa." A rally and press meetings were arranged. Grassley 
pulled ahead in the polls and held the lead through the November 
4 elections. The ASC PAC also gave the Grassley campaign $8,000.
	
      Another all-out effort was made by ASC in behalf of 
Alphonse D'Amato against Elizabeth Holtzman in New York's Senate 
race. "ASC staffers were in there pitching from the start. A 
whole contingent went to help the D'Amato campaign with the 
press. . . ." According to the report, Gen. Graham, retired Brig. 
Gen. Robert Richardson and several Admirals represented the 
Coalition for Peace Through Strength on D'Amato's behalf. The ASC 
PAC also gave his campaign $1,000. The Fisher ASC election report 
notes that Graham enjoyed most his campaign against Frank Church, 
who had led the Senate investigation of illegal CIA activities. 
Graham called Church, in typical ASC overstatement, "the 
architect of the destruction of our intelligence system" for 
investigating the CIA illegalities.
	
      Both Graham and Singlaub (who also had worked for the CIA) 
"campaigned vigorously for Steve Symms. . .each paying Idaho 
three separate visits. They were together for the Idaho Republican 
State convention." One headline, typical of the ASC style of rhetoric, 
read "Singlaub blames Church for Soviet supremacy." Symms received 
$2,000 from ASC-PAC. Fisher claims that in 1980 the Coalition and ASC 
"briefed and/or campaigned for 67 candidates." He said ASC 
staffers served as media consultants, researchers, and aided 
candidates in making introductions and closing statements to the 
ASC's film, "The SALT Syndrome."
	
      The ASC-PAC also aided Republican Senators Jake Garn and 
Dan Quayle [now vice-president Quayle] with $3,000 each, as well 
as Paula Hawkins, Paul Laxalt, Mack Mattingly and Don Nickles 
with $1,000 each. In the House, Jack Kemp, Robert K. Dornan and 
Gerald Solomon were Republicans who received $1,000 each, as did 
Democrats Sam Stratton, Andrew Ireland and Bill Chappell.
	
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy