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.
Uncategorized
African Union Summit Clouded by Saudi-UAE Rivalry in Horn of Africa
FILE PHOTO: A delegate walks next to African Union (AU) member states flags ahead of the 38th Ordinary Session of the Heads of State and Government of the African Union at the African Union Commission (AUC) headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, February 14, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/ Tiksa Negeri/File Photo
A feud between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates across the Horn of Africa is overshadowing this weekend’s African Union summit, though most of the continent’s leaders will try to avoid taking sides, nine diplomats and experts said.
What began as a rivalry in Yemen has spread across the Red Sea into a region riven with conflicts – from war in Somalia and Sudan to rivalry between Ethiopia and Eritrea and a divided Libya.
In recent years, the UAE has become an influential player in the Horn – encompassing primarily Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Djibouti – through multi-billion-dollar investments, robust diplomacy and discreet military support.
Saudi Arabia has been more low-profile but diplomats say Riyadh is building an alliance that includes Egypt, Turkey and Qatar.
“Saudi has woken up and realized that they might lose the Red Sea,” a senior African diplomat told Reuters. “They have been sleeping all along while UAE was doing its thing in the Horn.”
Initially focused on the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden – both crucial shipping routes, the rivalry is now reaching further inland.
“Today it is in Somalia, but it is also playing out in Sudan, Sahel and elsewhere,” the diplomat said.
COMPELLED TO CHOOSE A SIDE
While these conflicts have strong local drivers, Gulf involvement is forcing countries, regions and even warlords to choose a side, diplomats said.
Michael Woldemariam, a Horn of Africa expert at the University of Maryland, said regional actors, including Eritrea, Djibouti, Somalia and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), have grown uneasy with the UAE’s “muscular” foreign policy.
“Saudis may seek to limit or curtail UAE in the Horn but, it remains to see how that will play out,” he said. “UAE has a lot of leverage across the region – it has this expeditionary military presence and dense financial linkages.”
Saudi officials say UAE activities in Yemen and the Horn threaten their national security.
Senior Emirati officials say their strategy strengthens states against extremists, while U.N. experts and Western officials argue it has sometimes fueled conflict and empowered authoritarian leaders, charges the UAE denies.
The officials and diplomats interviewed in this story declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter.
AVOIDING A BRAWL BETWEEN GULF POWERS
Israel’s recognition of Somaliland’s independence bid is the starkest example so far of tensions being stoked.
Somalia has cut all ties with Abu Dhabi, accusing it of influencing Israel’s recognition of Somaliland. Mogadishu has since signed a defense agreement with Qatar, while Turkey sent fighter jets to the capital in a show of force.
Tensions are also rising between African Union host Ethiopia and neighboring Eritrea, which have been on the verge of war for months. Eritrea’s leader recently visited Saudi Arabia, a trip that analysts perceived as signaling Saudi backing.
UAE and Saudi Arabia back opposing sides in Sudan’s war, all the sources and experts interviewed said. The UAE is accused of providing logistical support to the RSF paramilitary, while states in line with Saudi Arabia largely back the SAF.
Egypt, a Saudi ally, has deployed Turkish-made drones along its border with SAF and used them to strike RSF in Sudan, security officials said.
Analysts said Ethiopia benefits from UAE support, and Reuters found this week that Ethiopia is hosting a base in western Ethiopia where RSF fighters are recruited and trained.
Ethiopia has not publicly commented on the story.
‘ACTING THROUGH ALLIES AND PROXIES’
Across the region, Saudi Arabia often acts through allies and proxies rather than directly, experts said.
Woldemariam said African countries were likely to tread carefully.
“Even those actors in the Horn who were alarmed by UAE influence may be cautious about how much they want to be caught up in a brawl between these two Gulf powers,” he said.
The Horn is not the only crisis on the AU summit’s agenda.
War continues in Democratic Republic of Congo, and al Qaeda- and Islamic State-linked insurgencies are spreading across the Sahel region.
But those conflicts are still likely to take a back seat to the Horn.
Alex Rondos, the EU’s former special representative for the region, said the Horn had become a subsidiary arena for Middle East rivalries.
“Do the Saudis and UAE … fully grasp the implications?” he said. “Will the Horn of Africa allow itself to be broken into pieces by these foreign rivalries and their African accomplices?”
Uncategorized
US Military Preparing for Potentially Weeks-Long Iran Operations
FILE PHOTO: An Iranian woman holding a poster depicting Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei walks under a large flag during the 47th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Tehran, Iran February 11, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS/File Photo
The US military is preparing for the possibility of sustained, weeks-long operations against Iran if President Donald Trump orders an attack, two US officials told Reuters, in what could become a far more serious conflict than previously seen between the countries.
The disclosure by the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the planning, raises the stakes for the diplomacy underway between the United States and Iran.
US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner will hold negotiations with Iran on Tuesday in Geneva, with representatives from Oman acting as mediators. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio cautioned on Saturday that while Trump’s preference was to reach a deal with Tehran, “that’s very hard to do.”
Meanwhile, Trump has amassed military forces in the region, raising fears of new military action. US officials said on Friday the Pentagon was sending an additional aircraft carrier to the Middle East, adding thousands more troops along with fighter aircraft, guided-missile destroyers and other firepower capable of waging attacks and defending against them.
Trump, speaking to US troops on Friday at a base in North Carolina, openly floated the possibility of regime change in Iran, saying it “seems like that would be the best thing that could happen.” He declined to share who he wanted to take over Iran, but said “there are people.”
“For 47 years, they’ve been talking and talking and talking,” Trump said.
Trump has long voiced skepticism about sending ground troops into Iran, saying last year “the last thing you want to do is ground forces,” and the kinds of US firepower arrayed in the Middle East so far suggest options for strikes primarily by air and naval forces. In Venezuela, Trump demonstrated a willingness to rely also on special operations forces to seize that country’s president, Nicolas Maduro, in a raid last month.
Asked for comment on the preparations for a potentially sustained US military operation, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said: “President Trump has all options on the table with regard to Iran.”
“He listens to a variety of perspectives on any given issue, but makes the final decision based on what is best for our country and national security,” Kelly said.
The Pentagon declined to comment.
The United States sent two aircraft carriers to the region last year, when it carried out strikes against Iranian nuclear sites.
However, June’s “Midnight Hammer” operation was essentially a one-off US attack, with stealth bombers flying from the United States to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. Iran staged a very limited retaliatory strike on a US base in Qatar.
RISKS INCREASING
The planning underway this time is more complex, the officials said.
In a sustained campaign, the US military could hit Iranian state and security facilities, not just nuclear infrastructure, one of the officials said. The official declined to provide specific detail.
Experts say the risks to US forces would be far greater in such an operation against Iran, which boasts a formidable arsenal of missiles. Retaliatory Iranian strikes also increase the risk of a regional conflict.
The same official said the United States fully expected Iran to retaliate, leading to back-and-forth strikes and reprisals over a period of time.
The White House and Pentagon did not respond to questions about the risks of retaliation or regional conflict.
Trump has repeatedly threatened to bomb Iran over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and crushing of internal dissent. On Thursday, he warned the alternative to a diplomatic solution would “be very traumatic, very traumatic.”
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have warned that in case of strikes on Iranian territory, they could retaliate against any US military base.
The US maintains bases throughout the Middle East, including in Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Trump for talks in Washington on Wednesday, saying that if an agreement with Iran were reached, “it must include the elements that are vital to Israel.”
Iran has said it is prepared to discuss curbs on its nuclear program in exchange for lifting sanctions, but has ruled out linking the issue to missiles.
Uncategorized
UpScrolled is a social media haven for unspeakable antisemitism. How does that help Palestinians?
When Issam Hijazi launched the social media app UpScrolled last June, he positioned it as the antidote to Big Tech censorship — a haven where pro-Palestinian voices could finally speak freely. The platform really took off in January, expanding to some 2.5 million users. It looked like the Promised Land for internet denizens concerned that TikTok, Facebook and X suppressed speech or monitored users.
So, a few days ago, I created an UpScrolled account and listed my interests as “Politics.” Then the platform delivered exactly what its algorithm thought I wanted, based on that limited information: accusations that Israel runs a bioweapons lab out of a Las Vegas AirBnB; endless conspiratorial exposes about supposed connections between Jeffrey Epstein and the Mossad; Holocaust denial posts hashtagged #holohoax; and a Der Stürmer-worthy caricature of a hook-nosed Jew hunched over gold coins.
In other words: The app showcases the bankruptcy of the part of the American pro-Palestinian advocacy movement that can only imagine liberation through Jewish annihilation.
The freedom to glorify murder
Existing social media platforms have their share of antisemitism, misinformation and hate. But what stood out about UpScrolled was the absolute imbalance. There’s widespread glorification of Hamas, and a total lack of any thoughtful content about Jews and Israel.
No substantive critiques of settlement expansion. No debate about two-state versus binational solutions. No Israeli or Palestinian voices for coexistence. Just lots of posts celebrating Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader whose “strategy” built to the Oct. 7, 2023 attack, resulting in the destruction of Palestinian society in Gaza.
How is lionizing the architects of Palestinian suffering — a goal that Hamas transparently sees as serving its interest — remotely “pro-Palestinian”?
“We support initiatives that can make an impact in some way in the liberation of Palestine,” Paul Biggar, founder of the incubator Tech for Palestine, which helped launch UpScrolled, told me.
Biggar, an Irish computer scientist, said UpScrolled, as opposed to other social media platforms, is “human-centric.”
I asked Biggar if the content on UpScrolled was what Tech for Palestine expected, or wanted, when it helped launch the site. Among the examples I saw: a post that claimed to include a “recording of a JEWISH rabbi” — capitalization theirs — “explaining how they drink the blood of children and have their bodies minced and made into food!!”
He said he had not kept up with UpScrolled’s content.
“No one is interested in having their name on a platform that includes that kind of antisemitic imagery that you described,” he said.
Biggar blamed the platform’s “runaway growth” for the proliferation of hate. With all the attention has come “a lot of people f—ing with us,” he said, including rampant bots.
This week, Hijazi, UpScrolled’s founder, also addressed the problem. “No form of racism belongs here,” he said, in a video posted to the app. He promised to expand content moderation teams and upgrade technology to “catch and remove harmful content more effectively.”
Join ‘to upset the Jews’
Hijazi’s message is reassuring. But the problems with UpScrolled speak to a deeper issue with the American pro-Palestinian movement: that factions within it can prioritize demonizing Jews and Israel over helping actual Palestinians.
When Larry Ellison — a longtime Israel supporter — took control of the American spin off of TikTok in late January, angry users fled en masse. Within weeks, UpScrolled became the second most-downloaded free app on Apple’s App Store.
“People who are knowingly and very publicly and unashamedly antisemitic have weaponized UpScrolled to get back at Jews,” an ADL analyst tracking the platform told me. (The analyst asked that her name be withheld, out of concern over potential doxxing and other online threats.) Messages across antisemitic influencer networks explicitly called on users to join UpScrolled “to upset the Jews,” she said.
Those messages suggest that advocating for Palestinian rights and spreading Jew hatred are somehow connected projects. That you can’t oppose Israeli settlements without also questioning whether Jews were actually murdered at Treblinka.
We’ve seen this trajectory before, and it doesn’t end well. The Tree of Life shooter spent hours on the far-right social media platform Gab sharing antisemitic content before murdering 11 worshippers in 2018. Yes, Gab and UpScrolled are on opposite sides of the political spectrum, but the same truth holds for both: The path from online hate to real-world violence isn’t theoretical.
This is poison for Jews — but also for Palestinians. It mires their cause in the oldest hatred rather than in universal human rights. It replaces serious discussions about actual solutions with slogans and memes.
And it sends a very clear message to Jews around the world — heard especially loud and clear in Israel — that Palestinian liberation means Jewish extermination. If anything, this sets the Palestinian cause backward. Any future Palestinian state will need to coexist with an Israeli one. No one is going anywhere. Reinforcing the belief, prevalent in some quarters, that its establishment would mean disaster for Jews will only make that establishment less likely.
The yawning enforcement gap
UpScrolled’s actual Rules and Policies prohibit speech condoning violence, promoting hate or supporting terror groups. But so far the site has not enforced them.
The ADL analyst said she tested the site’s content policy by reporting nine accounts that clearly violated platform terms. None of her reports were acted upon.
“If this platform wants to have an anti-hate speech policy, which they do, it needs to be enforced,” the ADL analyst said.
Biggar said Tech for Palestine will continue supporting the platform “because we keep hearing the right things” about preventing harm.
But he added a caveat: “If ever we felt that UpScrolled did not live up to the human rights-based focus that we have, we would be the first people to say so.”
That moment has arrived. The test isn’t just whether UpScrolled can moderate content at scale — it’s whether its founders and users can imagine Palestinian freedom without devolving into vicious antisemitism. Until they can, they’re not building a platform for liberation. They’re perpetuating the politics that keep Palestinians stateless and Jews under threat.
The post UpScrolled is a social media haven for unspeakable antisemitism. How does that help Palestinians? appeared first on The Forward.