Connect with us

Uncategorized

The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society

(JTA) — A historian leafing through files in an archive discovered how a Jewish organization helped bring down an influential far-right extremist movement in the United States in the 1960s and ’70s by going undercover and acting as self-appointed spies. 

The discovery of the Anti-Defamation League’s covert operation targeting the John Birch Society is the basis of a chapter in a new book by political historian Matthew Dallek of George Washington University. Published in March, “Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right” is Dallek’s fourth book. It examines the roots of today’s emboldened conservative movement in the United States.

“Birchers” is a history of a group that at its height numbered as many as 100,000 members and “mobilized a loyal army of activists” in a campaign against what it saw as a vast communist conspiracy. He also examines how the Birchers’ mission to defend Christianity and capitalism morphed into a radical anti-civil rights agenda that groups like the ADL saw as an existential threat. 

Dallek, who grew up in a Reform Jewish household in Los Angeles, recently sat with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency to discuss the rise of the Birchers, how the ADL infiltrated their ranks and whether such tactics are justified in the name of fighting extremism.

The conversation has been edited for clarity and brevity. 

JTA: Before we get into the Jewish aspect of the book, meaning the chapter on the Anti-Defamation League’s relationship with the John Birch Society, let’s take a step back. Who are so-called Birchers? Why do they matter? 

Mathew Dallek: The John Birch Society was a household name in the 1960s, becoming the emblem of far-right extremism. It didn’t have huge numbers, but it did penetrate the culture and the national consciousness. Its leader, Robert Welch, had argued at one point that President Dwight Eisenhower was a dedicated agent of a communist conspiracy taking over the United States. Welch formed the John Birch Society to educate the American people about the nature of the communist threat. 

In its heyday, the group had about 60,000 to 100,000 members, organized into small chapters. They sent out literature trying to give members roadmaps or ideas for what they could do. They believed a mass education of the public was needed because traditional two-party politics was not going to be very effective at exposing the communist threat. They would form front groups such as Impeach Earl Warren [the Supreme Court’s chief justice] or Support Your Local Police. They tried to ban certain books that they viewed as socialistic from being used in schools. Some Birchers ran for school board seats and protested at libraries. 

Critics feared that the Birchers were a growing fascist or authoritarian group and that if they were not sidelined politically and culturally then the country could be overrun. The Nation magazine wrote that Birchers essentially had given their followers an invitation to engage in civil war, guerrilla-style. Those fears sparked a big debate about democracy. How does one sustain democracy and, at the height of the Cold War and in the shadow of World War II, Nazi fascist Germany, and the Holocaust?

As you were researching, you came across a trove of historical internal documents from the ADL in the archives of the American Jewish Historical Society in New York. Why did you devote a chapter to what you found in those documents? What did those files reveal to you about the John Birch Society?

These papers are a goldmine. They’re this incredible and often detailed window into the far-right and, in particular, the John Birch Society. They show the ADL had an extensive, multi-dimensional counterintelligence operation that they were running against the Birch Society. 

People knew at the time that the ADL was attending events where Birchers were speaking. But the ADL also had undercover agents with code names, who were able to infiltrate the society’s headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts, and various chapter officers. They dug up financial and employment information about individual Birchers. And they not only used the material for their own newsletters and press releases, but they also fed information to the media.

Another layer is about a debate that’s been going on: Were the Birchers racist and antisemitic? The Birch Society always insisted that they did not tolerate white supremacy and didn’t want any KKK members. They said they accepted people of all faiths and races. And it’s true that they did have a handful of Jewish and Black members. 

But what the ADL found was that a lot of hate was bubbling up from the grassroots and also leaking out from the top. The ADL was able to document this in a systematic way. 

Some critics of the ADL today say the organization has strayed from its mission by focusing not just on antisemitism but on a wider array of causes. But from reading your work, it sounds like the ADL even then took an expansive view of its role, examining not just direct attacks on Jews but also how the political environment can jeopardize Jews. Am I getting that right, and why did the ADL devote so many resources to a group like the John Birch Society?

So, a few things: It’s the late ’50s and ’60s, and a civil rights coalition is emerging. Benjamin Epstein, the national director of the ADL, was friendly with Thurgood Marshall, the Supreme Court justice, and Martin Luther King. John F. Kennedy went to an ADL event and praised the ADL for speaking out very strongly in defense of democracy and pushing for the equal treatment of all Americans. 

Isadore Zack, who helped lead the spy operation, at one point wrote to his colleagues that it was only in a democracy that the Jewish community has been allowed to flourish and so, if you want to defend Jewish Americans, you also have to defend democracy. 

There certainly were other threats at the time, but the Birch Society was seen by liberal critics, including the ADL, as a very secretive group that promoted conspiracy theories about communists who often became conflated with Jews. 

Would you consider the ADL successful in its campaign against the Birchers?

They were successful. They used surreptitious and in some cases underhanded means to expose the antisemitism and the racism and also interest in violence or the violent rhetoric of the Birch Society in the 1960s.

The ADL was at the tip of the spear of a liberal coalition that included the White House, sometimes the Department of Justice, depending on the issue, the NAACP, Americans for Democratic Action, labor unions, the union-backed Group Research Inc., which was tracking the far-right as well. The ADL was one of the most, if not the most effective at constraining and discrediting the society.

Clearly, however, the Birchers’ ideas never died. They lived on and made a comeback. 

It’s somewhat ironic that you reveal the existence of this spying apparatus devoted to targeting an extremist and antisemitic group in the 1960s given the infamy the ADL would earn in a later era, the 1990s, for allegations that they colluded with police agencies in San Francisco to spy on and harass political activists. They eventually settled with the Arab American, Black and American Indian groups that brought a federal civil suit. I know you didn’t study these revelations, which are outside the scope of your book, but could you perhaps reflect on why undercover tactics were seen as necessary or justified?

It’s important to remember that in the mid-20th century, law enforcement in the United States was often led by antisemites or people who were much more concerned with alleged internal communist threats — the threat from the left. 

From the ADL’s vantage point, one could not rely on the government entities that were by law and by design supposed to protect Jewish Americans. There was a sense that this work had to be done, at least in part, outside of the parameters of the government. 

When I first discovered the ADL’s spying, I didn’t quite know what to make of it. But I realized they weren’t just spying to spy, they exposed a lot of scary things, with echoes in our own times — like easy access to firearms, a hatred of the government, a denigration and defamation of minority groups. And this was all happening in the shadow of the Holocaust and World War II. I became much more sympathetic; they were very effective, and they had a vision of equality of treatment for all Americans.

It’s obviously controversial. I try not to shy away from it. But they had a lot of good reasons to fight back right and to fight back in this nonviolent way.

That last thought brings to mind another, right-wing Jewish group that existed in this era of taking things into our own hands, that did use violence, explosives even. 

You mean the Jewish Defense League, led by Meir Kahane. 

Yes, exactly. 

He was a Bircher. Toward the end of my book, I mention that he was a member for a while, under his alias Michael King.

Antisemitism is on the rise, and lots of initiatives are being organized to address it, both by existing groups like the ADL and new ones. The ADL’s budget has almost doubled over the past seven years. I am seeing Jews talk of fighting back and taking things into their own hands. And we are in this politically precarious movement in American history, all of which suggests parallels to the era you examined. What kind of wisdom can we glean from examining the ADL’s secret and public fight against the John Birch Society as people who care about the issues affecting Jews today?

A lot of liberals in the 1960s and a lot of the leadership at the ADL grasped the axiom that things can always get worse. 

In 2015-2016, you’ll recall, there was Trump’s demonization of Mexican immigrants, and the so-called “alt-right” around him and his campaign and expressions of vitriol by people like Steve Bannon. 

There was an assumption among a lot of Americans and among a lot of Jewish Americans that the fringe right — the antisemites, the explicit racists, the white supremacists — that there’s not a majority for them and they can never achieve power. 

If you go back and you look at Trump’s closing 2016 campaign ad, it’s textbook antisemitism. He flashes on screen these wealthy Jewish international bankers, and he argues that basically, there’s a conspiracy of these global elites who are stealing the wealth of honest Americans. There’s also 2017, the white supremacists in Charlottesville, who said “Jews will not replace us” and Trump saying there are fine people on both sides.

The sense that democracy is incredibly fragile is not just a theory or a concept: It’s an actuality, the sense as well, that the United States has only been a multiracial democracy for not very long and a haven for Jews for not that long either. 

The work that the ADL and the NAACP and other groups did to try to constrain and discredit as fringe and extremist still goes on today. It’s harder to do for all sorts of reasons today including social media and the loss of faith in institutions. But it still goes on. You see the importance of institutional guardrails including the Department of Justice that is prosecuting 1,000 Jan. 6 insurrectionists. 

The last thing I’ll say is that one of the admirable things in the 1960s about the ADL and the liberal coalition it belonged to is that it built support for landmark legislation like the Immigration Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of ’65. And a coalition eventually fell apart, but it was powerful, reminding us why Jewish American groups should care about or focus on issues that don’t directly affect Jewish people. 

—
The post The historian who uncovered the ADL’s secret plot against the far-right John Birch Society appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Post Views: 889
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

US Aircraft Carrier Enters Middle East Region, Officials Say

The USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72), a Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, at Naval Air Station North Island in San Diego, California, US, Aug. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Blake

A US aircraft carrier and supporting warships have arrived in the Middle East, two US officials told Reuters on Monday, expanding President Donald Trump’s capabilities to defend US forces, or potentially take military action against Iran.

The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and several guided-missile destroyers have crossed into the Middle East region, which comes under the US military’s Central Command, the officials told Reuters.

Trump said on Thursday that the United States had an “armada” heading toward Iran, but hoped he would not have to use it.

The warships began deploying from the Asia-Pacific region earlier this month, as tensions between Iran and the United States escalated following a crackdown on protests across Iran.

Trump had repeatedly threatened to intervene if Iran continued to kill protesters, but the countrywide demonstrations have since abated. The president said he had been told that killings were subsiding and that he believes there is currently no plan for the executions of prisoners.

The US military has in the past surged forces into the Middle East at times of heightened tensions, moves that were often defensive.

However, the US military staged a major buildup last year ahead of its June strikes against Iran’s nuclear program.

In addition to the carrier and warships, the Pentagon is also moving fighter jets and air-defense systems to the Middle East.

Over the weekend, the US military announced that it would carry out an exercise in the region “to demonstrate the ability to deploy, disperse, and sustain combat airpower.”

A senior Iranian official said last week that Tehran would consider any attack as an “all-out-war against us.”

The United Arab Emirates said on Monday that it will not let its airspace, territory or territorial waters be used for any hostile military actions against Iran.

The US military’s Al Dhafra Air Base is located south of the UAE capital Abu Dhabi and has been a critical US Air Force hub in support of key missions against the Islamic State, as well as reconnaissance deployments across the region.

Post Views: 4
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Wikipedia, Qatar, and the Future of Knowledge

Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani speaks on the first day of the 23rd edition of the annual Doha Forum, in Doha, Qatar, Dec. 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa

Imagine a world in which facts can be erased from one of society’s key sources of information.

A world where foreign governments and terror-supporters have a say in whether you should know something or not.

A world where truth is malleable and facts are twisted to fit pre-determined narratives.

No, this isn’t an Orwellian dystopia. It’s Wikipedia as it currently operates: one of the world’s most influential websites and a primary source of information for millions.

Because of how it crowd-sources information, Wikipedia is one of the most extensive sources of knowledge on the Internet (and possibly in the entire world). However, this same strength is also Wikipedia’s biggest weakness, leaving it vulnerable to manipulation by autocracies, terror supporters, and other bad actors.

From recently-uncovered Qatari influence to a secret network of anti-Israel activists, we’ll take a look at how the truth is being manipulated on Wikipedia, and what this means for our understanding of the world.

In Qatar’s case, the PR firm Portland Communications was hired after Qatar was selected to host the 2022 World Cup. Its job was to edit Wikipedia articles related to human rights, and to suppress other unflattering facts that threatened the state’s international image.

According to the report, between 2013 and 2024 Portland Communications directed a network of subcontractors to edit Wikipedia articles on human rights in Qatar, as well as entries on Qatari politicians and businessmen accused of corrupt or unethical conduct.

The edits were deliberately small and incremental, designed to evade detection and slip past the scrutiny of other Wikipedia editors.

In short, anyone researching Qatar on Wikipedia has not been presented with a full or nuanced picture of the Gulf state.

Instead, they encountered paid-for reputation management designed to polish its image and suppress unflattering facts. In the process, Wikipedia shifted from an information resource to a vehicle for indoctrination.

Nor is Qatari influence confined to Wikipedia. Analyst Eitan Fischberger has noted that the Qatar Investment Authority has invested billions of dollars in Elon Musk’s xAI. This is a development that has potential implications for how Qatar is portrayed on Grokipedia, xAI’s alternative to Wikipedia.

If this pattern continues, the result is straightforward: future audiences may encounter a curated version of Qatar that downplays human rights abuses and other reputational liabilities. By strategically funding the platforms people rely on for information, a state need not censor facts outright, as it can simply ensure they are never meaningfully encountered.

Wikipedia’s Untrustworthiness on Israel

For those who have followed developments around Wikipedia, the revelation that Qatar actively sought to edit articles in its favor came as little surprise. Abuse of the crowdsourced encyclopedia by bad-faith actors has been documented for years.

In 2024, investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg published an in-depth exposé about a group of 40 activists who had engaged in a coordinated campaign of anti-Israel disinformation since 2020.

According to Rindsberg, this group accounted for 90 percent of the content on dozens of Israel-related articles and made a combined total of more than two million edits on over 10,000 articles.

This coordinated effort has transformed Wikipedia’s Middle East narrative: Zionism is increasingly framed as inherently evil, Hamas’ violent Islamist ideology is softened or obscured, Iranian human rights abuses are minimized, and the Jewish historical connection to the Land of Israel is routinely challenged or erased.

Rindsberg has also identified another coordinated effort: a group known as Tech for Palestine (TFP), which formed during the recent Israel–Hamas war and edited thousands of Wikipedia articles related to Israel.

In its own welcome message on the platform Discord, the group explained its focus on Wikipedia by noting that the encyclopedia’s “content influences public perception.”

Most recently, independent investigative journalist David Collier conducted a deep dive into a Wikipedia claim that the Israeli town of Ofakim was built on a depopulated Bedouin village. He found that the cited books and maps did not support the claim at all, and that the evidence had been effectively fabricated through misrepresentation.

Yet the claim remains on Wikipedia, upheld by a decision from an anti-Israel activist editor, and it continues to feed into AI systems that treat Wikipedia as authoritative, compounding the misinformation.

Wikipedia’s Israel problem is no longer in dispute. As long as activist editors retain outsized control over key articles, the Internet’s largest encyclopedia remains an unreliable source for understanding Israel, the Palestinians, and the Middle East.

How Wikipedia Influences Your Life — Even Without Your Knowledge

According to Wikipedia’s own data, the site is viewed nearly 10,000 times per second, totaling close to 300 billion page views annually. In practice, this means a significant portion of the world’s population relies on Wikipedia for basic knowledge, often without realizing how susceptible it is to manipulation by bad-faith actors.

And opting out is not an escape. Even users who never consult Wikipedia themselves are still influenced by it, as many AI systems draw on Wikipedia as an authoritative source, recycling its distortions at scale. And to mark its 25th anniversary, Wikipedia has signed content partnerships with major AI companies, including Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, Perplexity, and Mistral AI.

This influence is already embedded in everyday technology. Google’s search results routinely draw on Wikipedia as a trusted reference, while voice assistants such as Alexa and Siri rely on it to answer basic factual queries.

In practice, Wikipedia now functions as a foundational layer of the modern information ecosystem.

Whether you consult Wikipedia directly, ask an AI system for information, or turn to Siri with a question, you are being shaped by the thousands of editors whose collective work forms Wikipedia.

Most of those editors are diligent volunteers committed to accuracy and the pursuit of knowledge. Some, however, are not. They omit facts, introduce disinformation, and quietly reshape narratives to fit an ideological agenda.

The real danger is not Wikipedia’s scale, but the trust it enjoys. Too often, it is treated as neutral while users have no reliable way to distinguish between an article written to inform and one designed to manipulate.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

Post Views: 5
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Italy Pushes for EU Clampdown on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Over ‘Heinous Acts’

Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani speaks during an interview with Reuters in Rome, Italy, April 15, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Guglielmo Mangiapane

Italy will ask European Union partners this week to place Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on the EU‘s terrorist register, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said on Monday, signaling a shift in Rome’s position.

Until now, Rome had been among the governments resisting efforts to brand the IRGC as a terrorist group, but Tajani said a bloody Iranian crackdown on street protests this month that reportedly killed thousands of people could not be ignored.

“The losses suffered by the civilian population during the protests require a clear response,” Tajani wrote on X, adding he would raise the issue on Thursday at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.

“I will propose, coordinating with other partners, the inclusion of the Revolutionary Guards on the list of terrorist organizations, as well as individual sanctions against those responsible for these heinous acts.”

Being branded a terrorist group would trigger a set of legal, financial, and diplomatic measures that would significantly constrain the IRGC’s ability to operate in Europe.

Set up after Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, the IRGC holds great sway in the country, controlling swathes of the economy and armed forces, and is also in charge of Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs.

While some EU member states have previously pushed for the IRGC to be listed, others have been more cautious, fearing that it could lead to a complete break in ties with Iran, harming any chance of reviving nuclear talks and jeopardizing any hope of getting EU nationals released from Iranian jails.

However, Iran’s violent crackdown on protests has revived the debate and added momentum to discussions about adding the IRGC, which is already included in the bloc’s human rights sanctions regime, to the EU terrorist list.

Italian, French, and Spanish diplomats raised qualms during a meeting in Brussels earlier this month about adding the IRGC to the list, EU diplomats told Reuters at the time.

If France continues to object, then the move to sanction the IRGC will fail, diplomats have said.

Post Views: 5
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News