The Smear Terror - John T. Flynn

I. The Terror

Would you believe that there are in this country several outfits that specialize in the destruction of reputations? I can name an organization with large offices equipped to destroy the reputation of anyone whose influence in the community gets in the way of its clients.

Having chosen its victim, it lays out a carefully prepared plan of action. The enterprise is labeled professionally a "project," This is organized like a program for selling a commercial product. The type of smear is decided on. An estimate is made of the expenditures for personnel travel, snooping, publicity, etc. A budget is prepared. The persons interested are informed of the cost. When the money is in hand the job is put in motion by a set of trained character assassins who make a living out of this sort of thing and do very well at it!

Many people wonder why some public men or business leaders or writers do not lift their voices against certain strange policies of government. The answer is simple. It is because of fear of the assassin—not the assassin armed with the dagger or machine gun, but the assassin armed with the poisoned pen; not the killer who takes a life, but the calumniator who knows the process by which a good name may be destroyed.

The time has come to put an end to this terror, to name the smearers, describe their methods and their reasons for existence, I now propose to line them up, to pursue them in the practice of their profession and to suggest that it is high time to inquire who their clients are. I believe the readers of this document will be surprised at the strange collection of seemingly unimportant persons who have been frightening so many people of importance and power. Some of the smearers are queer, some vicious, some merely eager for money, some consumed by powerful hatreds and ambitions. However, we shall see them in our "line-up" presently and the reader may form his own estimates of them. He will ask why I waste time upon such persons. The answer, of course, is that they are tools in the hands of far more dangerous men.

There is nothing new in attacks upon public men and business leaders. Always a man's record is open to scrutiny and criticism. Critics have always felt free to charge him with offenses. But they made direct charges. They could be called to hook in court and made to prove their charges or retract them.

The new modernist smear is different. The essence of it is that it consists in making charges in such a way as to escape responsibility for libel. The victim cannot, frequently, sue for libel because it is difficult to put a finger upon a direct charge against him. It may be called smear by association or innuendo. It might be called the splash method of defamation.

Briefly, here is the trick. First it is necessary to select what I call a Smear Carrier. Some person who is either guilty or actually convicted of an offense is selected. He is loaded with infamy for all to see. He, however, is not the real intended victim. The real victim is some prominent senator or congressman or political or business leader or writer against whom nothing could be proved and who could not be libeled with impunity. Having completely covered the Smear Carrier with guilt, the smearer proceeds to link him with the rea victim. He merely mentions that the intended victim knows the Smear Carrier, or that he has written him a letter or got one from him or received him in his office or appeared at some public meeting with him. By mentioning the victim frequently in this way the reader gradually absorbs a feeling that there is something wrong with him. And if this is repeated in a book, in a pamphlet, over the air, constantly, if every time the Smear Carrier is mentioned he is referred to as the "friend of Senator X." it will not be long before the senator himself is as effectively smeared as die Smear Carrier whose guilt has been "splashed" on him.

In this profession certain words are important. If you attack Communists, you are called pro-fascist. If you are pro-fascist, you are anti-Semitic, because Hitler was anti-semitic. Thus by the simple device of proving that you are anti-Communist you can be shown to be a fascist, a pro-Nazi, an anti-semitic and a subversive person. Going one more step, if you are seen with such a "pro-fascist" or "anti-semitic", if you answer his letter, attend the same meeting with him, then you are also branded as pro-fascist, pro-Nazi and anti-semitic.

Let me give you a specific case. In a smear book written by a professional smearer, the name of Senator Burton K. Wheeler appears 39 times. Not once is he called fascist or anti-semitic. His name is merely repeated 39 times in connection with the names of various subversive persons. We are told that some anti-communist, pro-fascist quoted a Wheeler speech. This type of detail is multiplied, truthfully and untruthfully, 39 times. So that the name of an honorable senator whose whole life has been dedicated to the defense of the under-privileged, is covered with a calumniating dust which accumulates gradually with each successive mention of his name until the final result of the book leaves him convicted, in the minds of the casual readers, of outright unpatriotic conduct.

Why has this technique been so deadly? For the last seven years we have been at war or moving toward war. That war disturbed in America a number of racial and religious groups—Poles, Czechs, Jews, Greeks, etc. They were deeply moved by the outrages heaped upon their homelands by Hitler. They constituted large minorities with decisive voting power here. If you could smear a candidate for office as even remotely tolerant of Hitler, you could get the votes of those whose brethren in Europe had been oppressed by the Nazis. You can ruin a man completely in Chicago by proving that he is anti-Czech or anti-Polish. You can ruin him an New York by proving he is anti-Jewish.

Put this smear on the politician and he will lose enough votes to defeat him. If he is a business man he is in danger of a boycott. I have seen editors driven from their posts by these smearers. I have seen the columns of magazines closed against writers. However, let us now behold some of the practitioners of this art.

II. Mata Hari and the Colonel

At West 46th Street and Broadway, in the heart of the night-life district of New York City, is an office which houses one of the strangest of these private gestapos. As you enter, an atmosphere of mystery confronts you. The receptionist peers at you through a hole in the wall. There are doors leading into other sections of the plant. They are locked and employees, as they enter, must clear through the receptionist who admits them to their own offices by pushing a button.

This is the office of the Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi league to Champion Human Rights. When formed in 1933 by the late Samuel Untermyer it was a respectable organization. Such men as former Ambassador James W. Gerard, Oswald Garrison Villard, George Gordon Battle, John Haynes Holmes and others were its directors. Mr. Untermyer believed that by an American boycott of German goods Hitler could be so seriously crippled that he might be induced to end his persecution of the Jews. The Anti-Nazi League was created to promote this boycott. The movement was conceived in a humane cause by men whose good faith could not be questioned.

Slapstick Patriots

However, the moment came when this League fell into different hands and was directed to other purposes. It acquired a new chairman and a new chief investigator and assistant investigator who, if their own stories are to be credited, might well be cast for roles in a slapstick movie spy comedy.

The chief investigator was Colonel Richard Rollins, A.R., Syracuse University. But alas, he was neither a Colonel, a Richard, a Rollins or an A.R. from Syracuse. He was just plain Isidore Rothberg with a yen for opening other people's mail, rifling their desks, offices and safes and he operated without any shadow of law as the snooper for a private gestapo. This, however, was after Mr. Untermyer and most of the original directors of the League had resigned. The names on the letterhead now belong mostly to utterly unknown people.

In 1934, Congressman Sam Dickstein was chairman of the House Immigration Committee. He decided to investigate anti-Semitic influences and introduced Mr. Isidore Rothberg to Washington society. He explained to Rothberg that he could not make him an official investigator and that he must operate as an "unofficial" deputy. Thus equipped and with no legal authority, Mr. Rothberg proceeded, as he boasts, to board a German liner in port, to pry open lockers, search desks and carry away such material as suited his purpose.

His next escapade was to join an insignificant outfit run by a man named Royal Scott Gulden. Thus inside Gulden's office he used his position to get information on Gulden for Dickstein. Gulden had a secretary—"a beautiful blonde"—named Miss Dorothy Waring. Very soon Rothberg learned she was working for another private gestapo outfit and was planted in Gulden's office as his secretary:

I know nothing of Gulden. But he must have been a man of monumental gullibility. He had two employees—one, working actually for Sam Dickstein and one working for another private spy group. This precious pair were enjoying a spy's paradise in Gulden's records. Finally Rothberg decided to stage an all-out raid on Gulden's files. Gulden's beautiful secretary, Miss Waring, acted as scout for Rothberg, while he entered desks, cabinets, safe and carried away whatever interested him, had it photostated and returned in time to escape detection.

He made six such hauls. On the last he was still away front Gulden's office when Gulden returned. Miss Waring quickly phoned Rothberg a warning. Gulden discovered the theft and yelled through his phone for the police. They swarmed into the office awaiting Rothberg's return. But he never came back. This is related to give the reader some idea of the kind of people who inhabit the kingdom of Smear.

Spy Circus Ends

Some time later Dickstein, through John McCormack, later majority leader of the House, got a special committee appointed to investigate subversive activities. McCormack left the job to Dickstein who put on a hilarious show. Rothberg went to work for that committee as an investigator. He wrote a book and told the epic story. He describes how he had given his name as Richard Rollins, A.B., Syracuse—a falsehood—and how he thus became "the first the government had ever appointed to fight Nazism and the new kind of native and alien spy." This must have been news to Mr. J. Edgar Hoover, but these easily checked mendacities will give the reader another sidelight on the character of Mr. Rollins.

With Dickstein as ringmaster, this committee was turned into such a circus that it was discontinued and the Dies Committee named in its place.

Then Rothberg went to the Anti-Nazi League as its Chief Investigator. By this time it was no longer interested in fighting Hitler. It was interested in fighting in America those who opposed the foreign policies of the Roosevelt administration and this it did by smearing them.

Some time later Miss Dorothy Waring became the assistant chief investigator. She was, you will remember, the "beautiful blonde" who was as hired as secretary by Gulden while she was acting as a plant in his office on another payroll. She was born in Alabama as Dorothy Kahn, She moved to New York when a child, later married Siegfried A. Wurzherger from whom she was divorced in 1934, when she assumed the name of Dorothy Waring.

The following simple facts about this glamorous snooper are taken from an article she wrote in the magazine True Confessions, which she called "The Life and Loves of a Woman Spy", by Dorothy Waring, U.S. Secret Agent 89. It begins with this inviting paragraph;

"They call me America's Mata Hari. I risked my right to love, my peace of mind, my chance for happiness for country. To my superiors in the United States Government I was known only as Agent No. 89. It was I who have been responsible for uncovering much of the deadly, loathsome Nazi underground work in America."

Miss Waring begins with an account of her life in Alabama, "where our family reflected our established position in Southern life." At 18, she says, she married Allen Mueller—a pure myth—but by 1933 they parted.

Next she tells how she became the secret agent of the United States government. She admits she cannot describe her feelings as she was sworn in as Agent 89 by the "Chief of the Undercover Department of the Government." He was, she says, the gallant Fritz Von F. I need hardly say there was no such department and no such official and in a subsequent application for a job she admitted she never worked for the government.

Under the gallant Fritz she worked in the underground passages of the Bundists and Silver Shirts. She tells how she went to dinner beautifully gowned, "sometimes wearing the diamond given her by Buddha Baron Von Stein." She had to associate with the lecherous Bundists, some of them inevitably pawing her, an ordeal she submitted to for the sake of her country.

Of course the gallant Fritz fell in love with her. He begged for her hand. She would not yield. What would become of her country? There was a beautiful apartment, champagne, trips to swanky night clubs with the gallant Fritz. In the end her work was done, America was saved for the moment. She was free, free yes, of everything except the gallant Fritz. He demanded her body. He pictured their flight to those fairy-like palaces on the Continent he loved so well. One day he seized her in the hall and kissed her. She returned the smack. She looked up. And there stood the Baron D., another suitor. He spoke to her. They became friends. You know the rest. He must have the woman, he said, who could kiss like that.

She wanted to get away from it all—Bundists and agents competing for her body. To escape she decided to do something big. And she did. She wrote the life of the American Defender. And who was that? Washington? Lincoln? Roosevelt? No. It was Sam Dickstein. In case you do not know the Great Defender, Sam was a New York Fast Side congressman already mentioned here.

All this grotesque farrago of technicolored nonsense is soberly offered by her to magazine readers as truth. And at the end she describes herself standing in her "New York home where she lives graciously as the Baroness D. . . "

The gallant Captain Fritz is, of course, a pure fiction. As for the Baron D., he is a Hungarian named Stephen Kelen D Oxylion, a recent refugee. He is not a citizen and had been desperately resisting deportation. He was jobless when he won the beautiful Mati Hari. He applied for home relief. On Nov, 15, 1940 she complained of the suspension of home relief to the "baron" but without success. The order of deportation still stood against him as of December, 1946.

The first chairman of the Anti-Nazi League, Samuel Untermeyer, disgusted, withdrew long ago, as I have said. The second chairman, Dr. Nelson P. Mead, then acting President of City College, also withdrew in 1941. In his letter of resignation he wrote:

"I still believe in the American principles of tolerance and freedom of opinion. Under the circumstances, I feel I must resign as chairman of the Advisory Committee of the Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League and request you to remove my name from the League's stationery and literature"

The present chairman is Professor James H. Sheldon. He was for a brief period an assistant professor in a Boston college and the title of "professor" has been carefully exploited to lend some prestige to the League. All but three of the original directors have severed their connections. Since 1934 the league has had approximately 112 persons on its directorate, 71 of whom have withdrawn. The directorate now is composed; save for a few exceptions, of unknown persons.

Conspicuous in the affairs of this strange organization is a most mysterious figure—a Belgian refugee named Isidore Lipschutz. Lipschutz is a diamond trader from Antwerp who pulled into these parts in May, 1938, then left in October, only to return once more in April, 1939 as the war clouds lowered over Europe. He maintains offices at 630 Fifth Avenue. But how much he is in the diamond business and how much in the business of stirring the murky waters of alien propaganda is difficult to determine. He certainly came here with a huge bankroll. And he began with little delay to take an active part in the affairs of the Anti-Nazi League. While in 1943 he was billed as Vice-President and Treasurer, actually Lipschutz might almost he said to be the League. Mr. Phineas J. Biron, who writes a column in the Chicago Jewish Sentinel called "Strictly Confidential" wrote June 3, 1913:

"Isidore Lipschutz, the diamond man from Belgium, is doing a gigantic job for the Anti-Nazi League; having turned his vast business organization into what is virtually an adjunct of the League."

This man is not even a citizen. He applied for citizenship in August, 1944, but has not yet been admitted. The Immigration Office has been investigating Lipschutz for two years, has a record of material on him a foot thick and still withholds citizenship while another department of the government investigates him. Meantime he directs and helps finance this Anti-Nazi League which specializes in defaming and traducing American citizens who do not agree with his views on American politics.

There is a Women's Division. It is headed not by some well-known American woman but by Mrs. Irene Harand, a refugee from Austria, who has been industrious in some European movements in which the League says she has over 80,000 members. She got here in 1938 and became a citizen only three years ago.

It is this strange collection of recent alien refugees, aided first by "Colonel" Richard Rollins and now by the fictitious Mata Hari who have performed deeds of intimidation upon whole sections of the American people.

Ostensibly this outfit is devoted to hunting down what they call "subversive" elements and influences in the United States. But strangely they never get around to the Communist subversives.

Their technique is the established one—smearing American citizens by associating their names with the names of known or suspected fascist propagandists.

The question is, in whose interest are the victims to be discredited? The answer is not always simple. In the case of this Anti-Nazi League, certainly it was operating in 1936 and since in the interest of the New Deal administration. "Colonel" Rollins, in a book "I Find Treason" boasts of his achievements in this field. In 1936, he writes, "a group of Washington officials approached me with an offer of a job—investigator of un-American activities during the national campaign for the New York State Democratic Committee."

This was in May. He describes how he had set up his investigating office the previous February. He says "the board granted my request to devote part of my time to investigations for the politicos and I began operating out of Democratic headquarters in the Commodore Hotel." Immediately thereafter Miss Dorothy Kahn ("Mata Hari") joined him in Democratic headquarters where she worked as "director of the German Division" from June to December, 1936.

Rollins then admits that it was his business to "pin something on the G.O.P." His business was to smear Republicans as anti-semitic. It was to stir up the Jewish citizens against their fellow citizens who opposed the New Deal. He gives an illustration of how he did it. He used the names of Fritz Kuhn, Griebl, and other Bundists to smear the Republicans. The "big story" broke October 30, 1936 on the eve of the election, palmed off on the World-Telegram under a large headline, as follows:

Anti-Semitic Radio Speeches by Griebl, others, Sponsored by G.O.P.

The Republican Party had been sponsoring radio broadcasts by American Nazis to win votes, it was disclosed today. One of the recent speakers was Dr. Ignatz Griebl, a national Nazi leader and pronounced anti-semite.

Immediately after the election. Clarence Low, the treasurer of the Democratic State Committee and also a member of the Executive Committee of the Anti-Nazi League, asked Rollins to stay on after the election. He asked him to put together a permanent exhibit of his work and to take it around the country. Low said the League would sponsor the tour to pour out this anti-semitic smear on the Republican party. This was done.

There is much to this story of the League. During the war it fished in the troubled waters of refugee politics in this country. Enough is known about this subject alone to justify a congressional investigation. One investigation was already well on its way to the truth about these strange matters when it was strangled by methods which themselves cry, aloud for investigation. Now the League has set up as the champion of the negro in the South. It pursues the Ku Klux Klan of evil memory. The war criminals are dead or in jail. Hitler is gone These terrors can no longer be invoked to frighten our unfortunate foreign populations and induce contributions.

The Bund has vanished. Fritz Kuhn has been deported. Polley and Viereck are m jail. Something like the Ku Klux Klan must be found to justify the existence of this private gestapo. Meantime Congress must deal with the question of whether these private terror organizations shall be permitted to usurp the police functions of the State.

III. Dark Waters

The man is bold indeed who dares to discuss the delicate subject of the religious provocateur. This provocateur works upon the emotions of some religious group, frightening them with stories of their wrongs in order to get their support for some objective of his own. Religious divisions are old; they flare up at times. But I believe it to be true that since the break-up of the old Klan in the twenties, these divisions have subsided.

Religious prejudices are like a dust on the spirit. That dust had not been purged out of us. But it had certainly settled down. However, it lay like a deposit upon the minds and hearts of millions. The gains we have made in clearing the atmosphere would he quickly lost by any movement that would stir up that dust, blow it about and make it once again a factor in our thinking.

I am convinced that nothing has done so much to stir up that dust as the incredibly inept so-called defense of our Jewish citizens these last eight years. Some of it has originated in the ill-advised activities of some Jewish organizations. A tolerant man can excuse that because the ruthless persecutions by Hitler had deeply troubled the Jewish people. But much of it has been promoted by the activities of intellectually corrupt political groups who see the Jews not as distressed human beings exposed to grave spiritual vexations but only as so many votes in a ballot box.

Also there are the revolutionary groups which have a program for making our society unworkable. Part of that plan is to discredit, our social system by introducing disorder into every part of it. Those Who understand this program know its purpose is to set all the elements in the community into hostile clashes against each other—Catholic against, Protestant, both against the Jews and the Jews against them; to inflame employer against labor, labor against employer, farmer and worker against each other—to so manage as to have every man's hand raised against some other man.

In the preceding chapter I have described an organization devoted to frightening and arousing our Jewish citizens. Now lot us look at one devoted to arousing hatreds against the Catholics. The public instrument of this organization is a magazine called the Protestant. It is led by a man named Kenneth Leslie. He was born in Nova Scotia, studied for the ministry in Canada, served as assistant minister in two Baptists churches and at one time went in experimentally for Catholicism! He has been a stock salesman, a jazz-band leader, a would-be poet, has done some propaganda folk-song crooning on the radio, has run a restaurant, and has taken a fling as a song publisher in Tin Pan Alley, He is now editor of the Protestant and the head of Protestant Digest, Inc,, which controls his various enterprises in religious hatreds under the guise of tolerance. His real occupation is glorifying the Soviet Union and reviling the Catholic Church. In eight issues of the Protestant I counted 29 articles attacking the Catholic Church and 26 glorifying Russia.

Leslie's position may be quickly illustrated by the following tribute to Russia, quoted in the Communist organ, the Daily Worker:

"If there is a heart of justice in the universe it is beating now in thq Red Army. I believe in that heart. I call it God . . . "

Of course this queer journal could not fail to get a boost from Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt. She wrote as follows:

"Perhaps you subscribe to the 'Protestant Digest'. It is not just a Protestant magazine, but it does try to awaken those of us who happen to be Protestants to a realization of our responsibilities and interests in the world. I found it interesting. It is always stimulating to realize that if you belong to a certain religious faith there is a responsibility to make sure your thinking is constantly progressive and that you are a living force, not a static one."

And of course she had to recall her testimonial after it had done its share in promoting Leslie's adventure in hatred.

One enterprise of the Protestant is publishing a popular edition of Hewett Johnson's "Soviet Power," a Red propaganda book originally published by the Communist Party.

Another enterprise of Leslie is the 'Textbook Commission to Eliminate Anti-Semitic Statements in American Textbooks'. Full-page ads containing the names as endorsers of 1100 Protestant ministers were printed at a huge cost in many American newspapers. Where did the money come from? Did the preachers who signed the ad know the background of its sponsor? American textbook publishers vigorously protested against the charge, whereupon Leslie admitted he was aiming chiefly at textbooks in Catholic schools.

The names of the editors are indeed singular in a Protestant magazine. Among them are Joseph Brainin and Albert E. Kahn. Strangely enough, we find the names of Joseph Brainin and Albert Kahn as editors of the Jewish New Currents. Both of these gentlemen are Communist fellow-travelers and can be found in all sorts of Communist activities, constantly defending the most appalling Soviet infamies; yet they turn up as editors of a Jewish magazine and a Protestant magazine.

The origin of this enterprise betrays its real purpose. It began with what was called the Protestant Digest. A group of practical gentlemen were promoting a magazine called the American Hebrew. A man named S. S. Eichen was pushing its circulation. December 27, 1939 he wrote on a letterhead of the Protestant Digest to the men employed by him in pushing the American Hebrew. In that letter he said:

"Many of the better grade men who formerly worked for me on the American Hebrew, have come with the Protestant Digest and are more than doubling, their weekly earnings. Should you decide to join my sales force, write me immediately, etc."

Thus in one moment you see the gang pushing their adventures with the American Hebrew as their weapon. In the next the whole outfit moves over to another office and under the name of the Protestant Digest pursues the same objective with a mere change in the incidental music.

In short order Leslie and his collaborators were able to display a list of 1100 Protestant clergymen and religious leaders. These smear enterprises require two things: (1) reputable sponsors and (2) money. There is available a large collection of chronic sponsors and inveterate committee men and women; an odd assortment of gullible softies, publicity and celebrity-hunters who love to see their names on a letterhead with a few well-known writers. Some of these softies can be found roosting in as many a dozen or more of these committees, leagues and councils, Their names add prestige to the particular enterprise in defamation that is under way, very heavily disguised as a "movement" or "crusade" to save democracy, to promote tolerance or defend religion—sometimes with a bunch of Red atheists managing the show. And with this window-dressing of sponsors they can collect a good deal of money in addition to whatever sums they get from those groups who secretly encourage and support them.

The Noble Thief

Of course the Protestant kept up a continual smear attack against all the opponents of Soviet Russia and the New Deal. Here is an example. In July, 1944, a meeting was held under the auspices of the Protestant at Swan Lake in the Catskills. The speaker was William S. Gailmor. Although the audience was entirely Jewish, Gailmor was there to solicit funds for the Protestant. He told the audience that at the Republican Convention in 1914 a Resolution was offered before the Resolutions Committee to make anti-semitism a crime. He said Senator Taft was chairman of the committee, that a number of people appeared against it, and that their spokesman was the "notorious fascist" Merwin K. Hart, who spoke for an hour and attacked Frankfurter, Rosenman, Lehman and President "Rosenfeld by name," His talk, Gailmor said, bristled with anti-semitism. When he was through he was "vociferously applauded by the Resolutions Committee presided over by Taft," who let Hart speak for ail hour and held the proponents of the measure to only a few minutes.

Practically every one of Gailmor's statements was an outright lie. Hart never appeared before the committee on this resolution, but on another matter, purely economic. He spoke only a few minutes, never once mentioning the names of Frankfurter el al. The committee did not applaud his talk. Senator Taft did not give him an hour but only a few minutes. This infamous attack came to light only because a gentleman present, a prominent Jewish lawyer, was shocked at it believing it to be false. It was he who brought it to my attention. But Gailmor collected for the Protestant several hundred dollars on the strength of this speech.

Gailmor's real name is Margolis and he changed it to conceal the fact that he was a convicted automobile thief. When sentencing him the judge said:

"This man is suffering from a mental ailment and has impulses to repeat the act which he has committed in the past. For this reason, this man at this time would be unsafe to be allowed to roam the highways and the city streets."

He was sent to a psychiatric institution for a year. Despite this he was later employed as a news commentator by the American Broadcasting Co, for its New York station. This network is owned by Edward J. Noble, former New Deal Under-Secretary of Commerce under Hopkins. Westbrook Pegler brought Gailmor's criminal record to Noble's attention. Instead of firing him, Noble put him on a national hook-up. The criminal courts held Gailmor to be unsafe to roam the public highways and streets, but Noble thought it safe for this mentally disturbed thief to roam the highways of the air helping to form public opinion on grave national issues attacking reputable citizens.

Here is a test of the sincerity of these outfits. The Leslies and their allies stir up hatred of the Catholics, which is one of the poisons on which the old KKK fed. While thus providing Klan-minded groups with ammunition, they denounce the Klan for the intolerance they help to breed. Even Protestant leaders who counsel tolerance are defamed by them.

Pierre Van Passen, one of the Protestant editors, at its annual banquet, attacked Bishop Manning and Harry Emerson Fosdick for advocating closer inter-faith relations. This, said Van Passen, "numbs the sensitivity of Jews and everybody else so that the Church can put it over on the Russians in the Polish border dispute," He denounced the American Jewish Committee because of its Cooperation with Catholic groups for tolerance.

This crew has evoked a reaction which has in it the germ of the best remedy for this grave evil. The National Community Relations Council which represents leading Jewish organizations recently issued an appeal to its groups "to discourage support of the Protestant Digest, Inc., of its magazine, the Protestant and of its other enterprises" because "it contributed to inter-group dissension" and "has made irresponsible attacks upon Jewish agencies."

AH the leading Jewish organizations concurred. The American Jewish Congress, the largest, concurred in the criticism but not in the recommendation to the constituent societies to stop contributing to the Protestant. It urged that contributions be stopped if the attacks on the Jewish agencies were not ended.

Since this the editors have quarreled among themselves. Pierre Van Passen has led a revolt against Leslie on management—not policy—and has formed a new group and has announced with amazing assurance that they will continue their fight against anti-semitism, anti-Negroism and—wonder of wonders!—"against anti-Catholicism."

IV. Calumny Wholesale

The most curious of these private gestapos is that strange collection of snoopers and sneerers collected under the tent of a parson. He manages an outfit called The Friends of Democracy. It was set up in 1937 by Reverend Leon M. Birkhead in Kansas City to fight American subversive elements. Birkhead seemed especially aroused at the fascist threat to religion in America.

Dr. Joseph C. Cleveland, Unitarian minister of Kansas City, was President. Birkhead became Director. It still maintains an office in Kansas City but its work is conducted from a New York office at 137 East 57th Street. At times the organization has had on its board some widely known American citizens

From the beginning Reverend Birkhead has used the organization pretty much as he saw fit. For the last four years its President has been Rex Stout, an author of detective stories. The Friends of Democracy during that time has been an instrument of vilification in the hands of Birkhead and Stout. This being so we might well begin by having a look at these two men who have set up as the defenders of religion and democracy.

Birkhead was a Methodist minister who left that sect to become a Unitarian minister in 1914. The Unitarian Church takes its name from the fact that it accepts the unity of God rather than the Trinity. Its creed is summed up in the covenant used in many of its church services: "In the love of truth and in the spirit of Jesus we unite for the worship of God and the service of man." It has numbered amongst its followers some of the most eminent names in American history, including at least four Presidents.

In 1937, Birkhead began to clamor for Hitler's head as the foe of religion. "Protestants! Catholics! Jews! Pull Together!" exhorted Birkhead in his earliest pamphlet, "Resist the Spreaders of Hatred and Intolerance!" In another Friends of Democracy folder he said in capital letters: "AN ATTACK ON ANY MAN'S RELIGION IS UN-AMERICAN." He continued: "If you join any movement which attacks beliefs of Protestants, Catholics or Jews, you are undermining the Bill of Rights." Another pamphlet bore in great black letters the terrible alternative: "HITLER OR CHRIST?"

In the midst of Birkhead's frantic defense of religion, I came upon a little booklet containing a debate on the subject: "Can We Follow Christ?" To my surprise I found Birkhead supporting the proposition that we cannot follow Christ. Thereupon I looked up more of his writings and I am bound to say he is the most singular Christian preacher I have ever encountered.

Birkhead had struck up a publishing relation With Emanuel Haldemann-Julius, the atheist publisher of the Haldemann-Julius Quarterly, Debunker and Militant Atheist. Haldemann-Julius was working the atheist side of the street. But we find Birkhead working both sides—operating as a preacher in 'All Souls' Unitarian Church in Kansas City while knocking hell out of religion in the Haldemann-Julius Little Blue Books and magazines.

Birkhead and Hitler

Birkhead's religious discourses take the form of savage attacks on those who disagree with him. He used these atheist publications to defame his fellow ministers. A few excerpts will prove edifying. "Everyone," he wrote in the Haldemann-Julius Quarterly, "familiar with the status of the clergy in America knows that vulgarity and coarseness are characteristics of a majority of the preachers." In another article Birkhead said: "Preachers as reformers are nearly always mountebanks and demagogues." He asked if anything could be done to save the preachers. He had several suggestions, one of them being to "destroy the theological summaries. They belong to another day." Another was that "Two-thirds of the preachers be demobilized."

I do not quarrel with Reverend Birkhead because he is an atheist or an agnostic. As an American he is entitled to these views and to print them. I merely call attention to the phenomenon of the Christian preacher who urges, in an atheist magazine, abolition of theological seminaries, mass demobilization of ministers, while at the same time practicing as the pastor of a Christian church; scoffing at religion and religious people, announcing that "we cannot follow Christ," while on another platform he calls on Americans to choose between Hitler and Christ. Why not between Birkhead and Christ? Hitler never got as far as Birkhead suggested for American Christians—the destruction of ALL the seminaries and the demobilization of two-thirds of the ministers. Only joe Stalin hit that ideal.

No religious group escaped Birkhead's stream of vilification as he turned out the Haldemann-Julius Little Blue Books and articles for his Militant Atheist. If there is any religions group which enjoys the sympathetic tolerance of the people it is the Quakers. However, in the election of Herbert Hoover the Quaker in 1928. Birkhead saw "an opportunity for the Quakers to exploit that election for all that it is worth." Then he proceeded, in a Haldemann-Julius Little Blue Book, to castigate the Quakers. "I wonder," he wrote, "if Quakerism with all its compromises, with its disparagement of intellect, with a psychopath for its founder and guide, is not out of place in the modern world."

To his church in Kansas City, Birkhead brought an ex-priest from England named Joseph McCabe, a notorious enemy of religion. A stranger apparition never appeared, in a Christian pulpit, McCabe had been a Franciscan monk in England, who left the church and has since poured out a flood of Little Blue Books chiefly upon the futilities and follies of God and the uses of sex. He was co-editor of one of Haldemann-Julius' atheist magazines and turned out numerous pieces attacking the Catholic Church. Birkhead, who proclaimed that whoever attacks any man's religion is an enemy of America, featured this ex-priest for three weeks, in his pulpit attacking the religion of Christians and Jews.

Birkhead scoffed not merely at religious groups, but at religion itself. Imagine this coming from a preacher—in an atheist magazine (Haldemann-Julius' Debunker):

"In rare cases religion has had a happy effect upon the habits of religious devotees but I am convinced that such effects of religion are the exception and not the rule. Religious people are ordinarily narrow, petty, trivial. How could they be otherwise when they are the victims of narrow and intolerant intellects. , . .

"Most people who make any pretense of being religious would be better off without any religion . . . . The little or much religion they possess makes them meaner than they would be as non-religious beings."

Birkhead did not stop at religious people. He had a peculiar aversion to "good people." He wrote; "My 25 years' experience as a preacher confirmed my growing conviction that the biggest problem of modern civilization is not the bad people but the good people." He lists the sins of good people as "grasping, self-righteousness, arrogance, tyranny, dogmatism and unkindness." In another place he wrote:

"Good people are notoriously bad company. The bad people are usually mellow, genial, and very frequently unselfish. The good people would be better off if they would COMMIT A DARK, PLEASANT, TERRIBLY WICKED DEED."

He added; "In fact I would suggest that one way of curing good people of their unpleasantness would be to persuade them into sinning a little."

Something may be said for the theory that bad people are sometimes more interesting than good people. People would much rather read about a murderer or gangster than about a law-abiding citizen, or about a glamorous prostitute rather than a devoted mother. But that these people are more unselfish and better than decent citizens is quite another doctrine. I had supposed it to be the function of the Christian minister to draw the wicked away from their sinning rather than to introduce the good people to sin in order to make them more interesting. I would like to know how Birkhead classifies himself—among the good or the bad people. Certainly there must have been an age of innocence for the Reverend, say when he was a young divinity student. He should write a Little Blue Book and tell us the sins he experimented with to cure himself of his goodness and which ones he recommends.

Why did Birkhead storm at Hitler? Because, he said, In Germany, if "a mother wants her son to join one of her church societies, her little boy is ridiculed." This, mind you, from Birkhead, who had spent years ridiculing not only little boys but anyone for joining those unscientific and ridiculous churches led by "coarse and vulgar mountebanks and demagogues" where religion was making the good men bad and the bad ones worse. Birkhead cries out in one of his pamphlets:

"The salvation of humanity everywhere now depends upon the loyally and devotion of men and women who believe in religion which has been the source of their hope and comfort and the power alone which can save mankind from despair."

Ah, Brother Birkhead! What about your good friends—the Bad People? Not a word about them saving mankind from despair. Here he is calling on the God-fearing people to unite to save the world from the bad and interesting people! On one side of the street he calls the good people to cut out their religion and to commit some dark and interesting deed to escape dullness. Then he crosses the street and urges the religious people to help him save the world from the wicked people on the other side* In the Friends of Democracy he wants the religious people to chip in with him to save their fellow religionists in Germany from a fate which Hitler has brought on them and which the Reverend recommended for America.

Birkhead has another grouch about Christians. They are meddlers, he says, in the affairs of others. Yet we see him through his Friends of Democracy hiring snoopers and informers to pry into other men's lives, ransack their offices and meddle in their affairs upon a scale no normal meddler ever dreams of using. For this is what the Friends of Democracy turned out to be. Behind its pious facade of love of freedom and tolerance and religion its chief activity, under the guise of warring on Hitler, was to smear upon a mass scale the reputations of everyone who dared to oppose the policies of Birkhead, Stout and their clients,

The Perfect Partnership

What he did we shall presently see. But first he had to get two things—money and the prestige of good names. First he raised a banner which attracts most Americans—religious tolerance. The beginning, however, left something to be desired. His first president was Dr. Joseph G. Cleveland, a fellow Kansas minister, who had achieved a dubious notoriety by introducing into his pulpit as a lay preacher Miss Sally Rand, the fan dancer. However, Birkhead after a while got a number of very well-known people to allow their names to appear on his Board. Many of them later forsook him but he managed to acquire a perfect partner for his adventures in calumny, namely Mr. Rex Stout, who became the chairman of his board.

Before the war Rex Stout was unknown save as a writer of "Who-Done-It" fiction. He describes himself as successively office boy, store clerk, bookkeeper, sailor, hotel manager and inventor of a school thrift system. He made a fortune in the last of these careers. At this point he turned his hand to writing. In 1926, Stout and a group of Reds began publishing the New Masses which became the weekly organ of the Communist Party. Ruth Stout, then his wife, was its business manager. He was one of its executive board. The leading editorial hailed the great Red Experiment in Russia. It read:

"In millions of proletarian hearts in every corner of the world the workers' republic is still enshrined as fresh and new and beautiful as first love."

Stout insists he is not a Communist. However, in 1944, he was before a Congressional committee. He was asked if he believed in the theories of either Communism or Fascism. He replied that he did not and never had, Yet the New Masses official organ of the Communist Party, when launched said:

"Hail, great artist nation, great scientist nation, great worker nation, . . . Hail, Red youthful giant, as you go marching and singing out of the tragic present into the glorious future! Our deepest hopes arc centered in you, our right arms are yours to command, our life is your life. You have killed the dogma of capitalism as surely as the French Revolution killed monarchism. Hail!"

And Stout's name appears as a member of the executive board that sponsored that statement. Yet he swore under oath not only that he is not a Communist now but that he was never a Communist. He remained as a contributing editor until 1930.

The man who assures you he is not a Communist, yet who in most instances plays the Communist Party line is a common specimen, particularly in New York. There are, of course, the very practical revolutionists of the writing profession who know precisely how to dilute their Red philosophy with the necessary escape clauses. They disclaim being Commies and under cover of this protective disclaimer they go to town with any Commie enterprise that tickles their fancy. You can hear them on the radio or in the magazines industriously plugging the Red line to the plaudits of the Daily Worker. Some, of course, like Stout, may be merely exploiting their social hatreds. Others are in revolt against mediocrity. Still others are merely conforming to the prevailing fashion in the profession. They are not Commies. Heavens, no! But generally they think Stalin is right and we are wrong in all the grave divisions between Soviet Russia and America. Let us not trouble ourselves about what they call themselves. Read them in the magazines, listen to them on the radio, look at them in the committees they join. You will find them planted on the Communist line nine times out of ten. You will hear them raving against the horrors of the fascist tyrannies, with never more than an occasionally feeble and qualified whisper against the tyrannies of Russia.

Those who know Stout know that the one spiritual urge which dominates him is hatred. It is interesting to note that the only listed contribution to periodical literature I can find outside of detective stories is an article in the New York Times entitled: "We Shall Hate or We Shall Fail." If ever a man had a golden opportunity to exploit his hatreds. Stout found it in his partnership with Birkhead, who had spent the preceding 15 years vilifying religion and its ministers—a magnificent preparation for the wide offensive of defamation he has directed for the last eight years.

V. The 'Lindbergh Project'

Let us now have a look at the Friends of Democracy as it got down to business around 1940.

A good example of the work or Birkhead and Stout in the field of defamation is what they called the "Lindbergh Project." To make this incident clear I must first tell briefly a story about Lindbergh. In 1936 Lindbergh was in Europe studying aviation problems. In Berlin the American Embassy was trying to get information about Hitler's war preparations. It learned plenty about the army and navy but could get nothing reliable about Hitler's air program. Colonel Truman Smith, U. S. military attaché at the Embassy, did not know Lindbergh but wrote to him at London asking him to come to Berlin and help him. Lindbergh gladly complied. Colonel Smith figured that, because of Lindbergh's great reputation and Goering's vanity, the latter might like to show off his air power. Colonel Smith submitted his plan to the Army and received its full approval.

On his arrival in Berlin, Lindbergh was introduced to Goering by Colonel Smith. Lindbergh expressed a desire to see what Goering was doing in plane production. Goering proceeded to entertain Lindbergh extensively and to escort him around to German airfields and factories. Lindbergh was allowed to fly in their planes and study them. He had stipulated that a United States army officer must accompany him everywhere and this was done. As a result Colonel Smith was enabled, with Lindbergh's collaboration, to write an impressive report on Germany's rising air power.

But the report was not complete. Lindbergh had not seen everything. The next year—1937—the Germans were preparing for the Olympic games. Again Colonel Smith figured that the Germans would pay a high price for another visit from Lindbergh because they were anxious to put their best foot forward. They agreed that if Lindbergh came they would show him the rest of their air armament. Before Lindbergh left Berlin, Colonel Smith, with the information thus obtained, was able to prepare a voluminous report putting into the hands of our Army the fullest information of Hitler's great air power—and for the first time. I have a copy of that report. It contains a sketch of every airfield, every plane factory, with the number and types of planes based or made at each one and the fullest information about the planes, engines, etc.

The whole purpose of these visits was to get these hitherto concealed facts for the purpose of arousing France, Britain and the United States to the pressing need of arming in the air. It was a patriotic commission by Lindbergh for his government, executed with great skill and success and without any compensation or reward.

Lindbergh's next visit to Berlin was in 1938 at which time has was handed the medal by Goering which has been so cruelly used against him. In 1938 Lindbergh did not go to Berlin for information. Thanks to him his government and Britain had that in full. He went upon another mission. I am not at liberty to tell it here. One day it will be revealed and then those who so shamefully traduced him will have ample reason to blush with shame. Suffice it to say he was there in the interest of Hitler's enemies. The American Ambassador was eager to talk with Goering, but the latter evaded him. The Ambassador felt that if he tendered a dinner to Goering and had Lindbergh present, Goering would come. He did come. Lindbergh knew the reason for the invitation and when Goering arrived and presented a medal to the surprised Lindbergh, what was he to do? His business was with Goering. It was of supreme importance to the allies. Of course he could do nothing about the medal and to this day Lindbergh has refused to permit the story of that mission to be told. But the time will come shortly when this can be safely done.

Lindbergh opposed our entry into the war. His speeches were models of sobriety and tolerant reasoning. He attacked no one. However, someone decided that something must be done about Lindbergh. He was delivered over to the formula: "Don't argue with him; smear him. And Birkhead and Stout were entrusted with the task.

I have in my possession a document entitled: "Report on the Status of the Lindbergh Project." It went from Rex Stout to persons who were asked to put up the money for the job. It outlined various other "projects"—programs for destroying various other reputations. It pointed out that the techniques evolved in these cases would be used in the Lindbergh Project. The report said:

"Now we have completed the groundwork for applying this technique to Lindbergh. Because of the nation-wide ramifications it is the most ambitious project we have undertaken."

Rex Stout wrote to contributors:

"It will take time and money to destroy Lindbergh politically. But it will take only a little of your time to read the enclosed report. . . . As for money probably you can't spare easily $10 or $25 or $50—but the return of Lindbergh to the seclusion he used to crave is of vital importance to all decent Americans. . . . A check or money order to Friends of Democracy . . . will be a nail in Lindbergh's political coffin."

At another point the report said:

"The Lihdbergh Project, although the most militant at the moment, is only one of several projects now under way. . . . This project, and many others must remain unrealized until we are provided with the necessary funds. . . The Lindbergh Project will require at least $15,000."

Here was a coldly calculated plan for destroying the reputation of an honorable man with whom Birkhead and Stout disagreed. How did they proceed?

Birkhead and Stout took the episode of Lindbergh's visit to Germany and completely distorted the facts. Lindbergh went at the request of his own government. Birkhead and Stout pictured him going as the friend of Goering and Goebbels. His report on the strength of the German air force they treated as a lie told by Lindbergh to Chamberlain and the British in the interest of "his Nazi friends" to frighten the British. His opposition to American entry into the war they described as an effort to save his Nazi friends from defeat. They showed pictures of him giving a Nazi salute. These were photographs of Lindbergh at an American meeting using the traditional salute employed by the American Legion and all American school children in reciting the pledge to the flag. They showed photographs of him in company with Goering and other Nazi leaders, some taken in the American Embassy at a reception to these men given by American officials. A more dastardly crime against the good name of a fine American cannot be conceived.

Lindbergh's Reward

Of course Lindbergh was pictured as anti-semitic because he was pilloried as the "friend of Hitler and Goering," The object of the whole enterprise was to arouse the Jewish population against Lindbergh. It was eminently successful. The Jewish people, Jewish organizations by the score, Jewish leaders poured out upon Lindbergh's head from January to December, 1941, a flood of abuse such as few men have had to endure. He was called a traitor to his country. All this Lindbergh received for having performed a service of signal importance to his country at the request of its official representatives.

I suggest that interested students reread the speeches which Lindbergh made prior to October, 1941. He did not utter a single word in condemnation or criticism of the Jews. It was not until October, after this storm of hatred had beaten upon his head for nearly a year, that he made any reply. A man of less calm and sober spirit would have been roused to furious invective. He bore it with patience and forbearance. No one can blame the Jewish population in general for believing that Lindbergh was an enemy of the Jews. They were told so daily by the Birkheads and the Stouts, and Franklin D, Roosevelt added his contribution by calling him a "copperhead"—though Roosevelt knew as well as anybody the truth about Lindbergh's visit to Germany. When Lindbergh finally said that the "Jews were seeking to take us into the war," he also added a word of sympathy for the persecutions they had suffered at the hands of the Nazis, saying that they would be less than human if they were not aroused by it.

When we were finally brought into the war, Birkhead and Stout continued their persecution of Lindbergh and others. Lindbergh himself immediately gave his services to his country, made great contributions to the efficiency of the air force and actually flew in air combat, without ever receiving any other reward for his services than the approval of his own loyal heart, while his detractors here continued their pursuit, some of them making rich financial rewards from it.

VI. Defamation En Masse

The most comprehensive offensive in the field of mass defamation was the book "Under Cover," written by a native Armenian named Avedis Boghos Derounian, alias John Roy Carlson. Derounian is an employee of Birkhead and Stout. The book contained material collected by Derounian (alias Carlson) who was paid $50 a week while doing it by the Friends of Democracy.

This volume pretends to be an account of the adventures of a young American among the subversive groups in America. He tells how he penetrated the inner councils of the Bund, the Christian Mobilizers and other organizations. It is a long, dull catalogue of repetitious drivel. The serious culprits "exposed" by the author were thoroughly exposed before he took up the task. Few of them operated in secret. The newspapers were full of their antics. Some were shouting their stupid messages from the housetops.

The real object of the book was not to expose the genuine fascist enemies of this country but was to discredit the political opponents of the Roosevelt war policy.

The plan was to prove that they were in league with traitors. This was attempted by first holding up Pelley and the Bund and Joe McWilliams and numerous smaller fry as traitors and then connecting them with Senator Wheeler, Senator Nye, Colonel Lindbergh, Senator Robert Taft, Colonel Robert McCormick, General Robert E. Wood and others. Let me now give an illustration of how this was worked.

George Sylvester Viereck was convicted and sent to jail as an unregistered German agent. He had edited a paper called Today's Challenge. Viereck was now used to splash the reputation of an American gentleman, William R. Castle, former Ambassador to Japan and Under-Secretary of State under President Hoover. Derounian records in his book;

"In the summer of 1940 I came upon a copy of Today's Challenge, in the Germania bookstore. . . It was inspired by George Sylvester Viereck, registered as a Nazi agent with the German Library of Information."

Then the smearer proceeds;

"Viereck's prize catch was William R. Castle. . . . Castle swallowed Viereck's cunning propaganda at one gulp. He wrote several articles for Today's Challenge."

Then follows an excerpt from the article which Castle "is said to have written" for Todays Challenge. Here it is:

"Fascism is essentially nationalistic. It has no desire to create other fascist states except insofar as the spread of fascism seems to create a more sympathetic world in which to try to get the space and few raw materials which it needs. Let us at least be wholly honest with ourselves. . . . We must recognize that Hitler has kept the movement purely German, that his seizures of territories have been territories inhabited by Germans . . . That is why Hitler is so popular in Germany."

This was, of course, all true at that time. But actually Mr. Castle never wrote a word for Today's Challenge. He had made a speech before the American Bar Association. The magazine, without permission, printed parts of it, transposed sentences altering their meaning and completely omitted the parts of the speech criticizing Hitler.

Months later Mr. Castle's attention was called to these quotations. He wrote a letter of protest to Viereck and sent a copy to the British Embassy. Derounian makes no reference to this. Instead he mendaciously states that "Castle wrote several articles for Viereck," that he was a "prize catch," that "he swallowed Viereck's propaganda," and he artfully intimates that this piece was one of several in a series of articles written for a German propaganda paper. He invents words for Castle when he writes that "Castle was dominated by Viereck's syrupy assurances that Hitler was the friend of all and the enemy of none." Nowhere in Mr. Castle's speech itself was there anything remotely resembling such an idea.

As repetition is part of this technique, in another part of the book, Castle is referred to as the "friend of Viereck" which is a downright lie. Mr. Castle is as loyal and honorable an American citizen and public servant as breathes in America. But if you do not know him, if you do not understand the technique of calumny, you may well come away feeling that Castle has been too close to the Nazis and that you want none of him. Yet the whole incident is a downright lie from the beginning.

This Derounian (alias Carlson) by himself is not worth the space devoted to him. But as the tool of smarter men he became a force for evil of almost unbelievably malignity. He cannot be dismissed any more than one may dismiss some poisonous germ. As a specimen of the means used in this plague of smearing he is worth holding up between the forefinger and thumb for an inspection.

He was born in Alexandropolis, Greece in the Armenian colony there and came to this country with his parents as a youth. He has worked under at least a dozen different aliases. He says Carlson is just his pen name and admitted when first discovered, that his right name was Derounian—Arthur A. Derounian. But that was not his right name either. Under pressure he then admitted it was Avedis A. Derounian—and to this he still sticks. Actually he entered this country, went to Mineola (N.Y.) High School, through New York University and worked as a reporter and editor on an insignificant Armenian newspaper as Avedis Boghos Derounian. He has written that his family moved far away from the Armenian neighborhoods, and, in order to get away from "these racial islands," joined the Presbyterian Church. The truth is he went to work for an Armenian newspaper and plunged head over heels into the bitter quarrels which agitated the much troubled Armenian people here.

In World War I, the Armenians, who had been oppressed for centuries by the Turks, joined the Allies, liberated Armenia and set up a republic patterned on our own. After the war the Soviets rode roughshod over Armenia, extinguished the republic and incorporated Armenia in the Soviet Union. They suppressed the Armenian Church, jailed its head, hunted bishops and priests out of Armenia and murdered many. By 1929 the Bolshevists altered their policy. Gabrillian, the Armenian Quisling, said: "We are enemies of the church and religion." But he added that they must abandon force and violence and use other means to "emancipate the workers, from the influence of religion." The plan was to "indoctrinate the workers in atheism," and "prevent the ordination of young priests," until the church came "into the hands of a few enfeebled and easily managed old men."

Great numbers of Armenians were outside Russia—in Greece, Syria, Britain, America. The secret police were put to work among them. Bishops outside Armenia were bribed to act as secret agents. The church was reestablished but as a Soviet agency. No one could be made a bishop without doing business with the secret police (the OGPU). Armenians abroad were bewildered. They did not know what priest or bishop to trust. All this was revealed in a book written by George Agabedov, head of the Russian secret police, after his break with Stalin in 1931.

The Red Bishop

As a result of these revelations, when a new bishop—Leon Tourian—arrived in New York around this time, Armenian Catholics were disturbed. Could they trust him? They knew he had contributed to a pro-Communist magazine in England. They felt he could not come here without the goodwill of the Russian secret police. On Armenia Bay at the Chicago Fair in 1933 he refused to enter the grounds until the old flag of free Armenia was hauled down. He used the flag of Soviet Armenia in his church.

The church here was split asunder. A new congregation was formed. We have the same situation in the Russian Orthodox Church, now following the Armenian experiment. Stalin has reestablished the Russian Church—which he hates. He has sent a bishop here to demand possession of all the Russian churches. The head of that church in New York, unlike Tourian, has refused to submit and has called on all Russian Catholics to resist. He knows Stalin is using the church as an instrument of propaganda. However, I do not doubt Tourian was a Soviet agent, any more than I doubt this new Russian bishop now trying to get the Russian churches here is a Soviet agent.

However, the Armenian feud boiled to a crisis here on Christmas morning, 1933. Bishop Tourian was assassinated in his New York cathedral by six Armenians who believed he was a Russian agent. They were convicted and sentenced to prison. This stupid assassination played into the hands of the Communists. It deepened and inflamed the division between the Armenians. They remained split into bitterly hostile camps. One is dominated by the Communists, the other by the anti-Communists who still fight against Soviet despotism in their homeland. In between are a considerable number of bewildered people, who would like to enjoy their religious life in peace. I have related all this because it is in the murky waters of this Armenian feud that the stool pigeon Derounian (alias Carlson) makes his debut in the art of smearing.

Derounian (alias Carlson), after a collection of small jobs, went to work as a reporter for a small Armenian paper called the Mirror Spectator in New York and later became its editor. The Armenian Communists took the well-known line that every Armenian opposed to Communist aggression in Armenia was a fascist. The murder of Tourian was fastened upon every member of the anticommunist group. They were therefore called the Bloody Dashnag fascists. Dashnag refers to the Armenian Revolutionary federation—Dashnag means federation.

Derounian in the Mirror-Spectator proceeded to unloose upon the groups opposed to Communism the same kind of smearing that, under the sponsorship of Birkhead and Stout, he later used upon perfectly good American citizens. When I exposed his defense of the Reds following the Tourian murder, he was shocked that I condoned a murder or suspected the "holy Tourian" of being a Soviet agent. Of course in this Derounian was putting on an act, since the murder of scores of bishops and priests in Armenia by the Reds did not stop him from glorifying them. And of course I did not condone the murder.

The Mirror-Spectator, while he was an editor, sponsored a delegation to Russia to pay homage to the Soviet conqueror of Armenia on the 35th anniversary of the conquest. On that day the Mirror-Spectator printed an editorial which read:

"Armenians throughout the world, particularly those of the fatherland, today joyously celebrate the fifteenth anniversary of Soviet rule in Armenia. . . .

"This seemingly radical step of our Fatherland, subscribing to a new political theory and forming a link in the mighty chain of the Union of Soviet Republics despite the agitation of long-distance politicians in Europe and America dedicated to policies to suit themselves, proved to be the sanest move that could be made. The present era of progress denoting the vigorous growth of our tiny government under the sheltering wings of the fraternizing Soviet Union is a guarantee that Armenia is on the right highway to prosperity and new attainments in the cultural and industrial sphere. . : .

"It is with this spirit (of pride and gratitude) that the Armenian Spectator raises its voice with sincerity to shout 'Many, many happy returns of this glorious day.'"

The day when the Bolshevist horde overran his homeland, suppressed its republic and gave it to the tender mercies of Communist tyranny, he looked upon as the "glorious day" in its history. Like all of this gang of smearers, he occasionally insists he is not a Communist. However, he edited a paper that glorified Communism, hailed its glories in his own country, and attacked savagely every Armenian who opposed Communism in Armenia. Who cares what he calls himself? It is what he does that counts.

In November 1936, the organ of the Friends of Soviet Russia called Soviet Russia Today published an article by Avedis Derounian. It pictured the magnificent progress of Armenia under Soviet rule. It paid tribute to the civilization which Communism had brought to Armenia. It ended by saying:

"Sixteen years of loyal cooperation with the program of the Union have infused the Armenians with a boundless energy of a grateful people, nor is the debt paid. It has just begun payment. Future years will show the lengths to which a grateful people will go to show its gratitude toward a workers' government which saved it from extinction in 1920."

Derounian says he did not write this article. I feel sure he did not. It is written in a style altogether too literate for his clumsy sophomoric hand. But he doesn't deny his name is signed to it and he has admitted under oath that he supplied much of the material.

After leaving the Armenian paper he shifted around from one small magazine to another. Then he got a job with the Anti-Defamation League. About 1938 he went to work for the 'Council Against Intolerance', headed by James Waterman Wise, treasurer of the 'League for Peace and Democracy' which Earl Browder testified was a Communist-front organization. Then he transferred to Birkhead and Stout's 'Friends of Democracy' as a stool pigeon and informer. He lived a kind of triple life. As Avedis Roghos Derounian and Arthur Derounian he posed as an Armenian patriot and wrote for the Armenian papers. He wrote for certain American papers under the name of John Roy Carlson, Thomas L. Decker, George Paige. As George Pagnanelli he posed as an Italian and published a frightful little anti-semitic smear sheet. His name record runs as follows: Avedis Boghos Derounian, alias Arthur A. Derounian, alias Avedis Arthur Derounian, alias John Roy Carlson, alias George Pagnanelli, alias Thomas L. Decker, alias George Paige, alias John Correa, alias Rudolph Eilers, alias Donald Brady, alias George Alexander, alias Henry Renard, alias Robert Thompson Jr. and Sr., alias Charles Roberts, alias Lawrence H. Wayne; alias Mrs. and Miss Roberta Thompson. The fellow is name crazy.

It is a waste of time to speculate on this stool pigeon's opinions. He probably is neither Communist, Fascist, Democrat or Republican. He is merely an eternal juvenile, an exhibitionist playing at cops and robbers to get with his "underground" clowning the public notice he could never command with his clumsy pen. Some peep into his character may be gleaned from a letter he wrote a friend when he was looking for a publisher for his book. It is a document of unprintable filth. I choose, therefore, a few of the milder sentences:

"If that book ("Under Cover") was out now—If some cockeyed publisher had had the vision a few months ago, he'd been rolling in wealth this very minute. But no, the God-damned bastards were too busy thinking of the few dollars they have in the bank, they chose to sit on their cans. , . .

"Those bastards that turned down the book, those sons of bitches who sip their cocktails and minimize things are the real fifth column. They are the ones spreading the poison of complacency. These bastards ought to be shot at sunrise, maybe well have some action against the Nazi fifth column. . . .

"God damn it! I wish I had those publishers in front of me now. I'd punch off their noses one by one, and good riddance. The book could have been making a fortune now, Son-of-a-bitch!"

The "bastards," as he called them, he identifies as such publishers as Harpers, Reynal, Viking and a dozen or more who rejected his book. Those who refused to print his libelous book he called "fifth columnists" who ought to be "shot at sunrise."

VII. A Wilderness of Lies

The book "Under Cover," while having an immense sale, had its influence enormously multiplied by a vast network of propaganda. Winchell plugged it incessantly over the air and has been sued for libel for this. Communist magazines, newspapers and front organizations advertised it. Red and fellow-traveler lecturers and radio commentators boosted it. Moving picture and television programs were used. An immense newspaper advertising campaign costing tens of thousands of dollars was launched.

The book itself is a wilderness of lies. I repeat, its chief purpose was to tell the story of (1) the more imposing subversive groups, such as the Bund, Pelley, Viereck, etc.; (2) then connect them by hook or crook with a whole spawn of small-fry groups and (3) finally splash the odium fastened on these people upon men like Senator Wheeler, Senator Nye, Senator Taft, Senator Brooks, General Wood, Colonel Lindbergh and others. In doing this the most shocking smears were plastered upon the good names of decent people without a shadow of basis.

I cannot here begin to describe these smears. I can give only a few illustrations and assure the reader that they are characteristic. The case of former Ambassador William R, Castle, already noted here, is one. Another refers to Dr. Norman Vincent Peale. He is pastor of the Marble Collegiate Church in New York City and a gentleman of the highest standing. He is smeared because he was a joint speaker at a dinner of patriotic societies with several people who had already been smeared by the writer, hence could be conveniently used to smear others. Actually Dr. Peale delivered the prayer at the dinner and left before it ended because he was offended at some of the things said there.

A man named Court Asher is smeared in the book, I know nothing about Asher. but having smeared him, this is used to splash guilt on a congressman, Charles I. Faddis, who is called a fascist because "Asher told me (Derounian) that he had received small contributions from Congressman Charles I. Faddis." Congressman Faddis was in the service as a volunteer for the third time while this calumniator was defaming him. Mr. Faddis wrote me: "I do not know who Asher is, but when he says he ever received any contributions from me for any subversive activities he is a damned liar." Of course we do not even know that Asher said that.

He selected as another victim an old gentleman named John Cole McKim Because he had lived many years in the East and written for some Japanese magazines, Derounian tried to smear him as a Japanese agent. He called on McKim and tried to induce McKim to endorse a movement to promote an uprising of the Harlem negroes to aid the Japanese. He got nowhere, McKim insisting that the Japanese did not consider themselves as "colored people." He wrote Derounian, In answer to a letter, that "I am sorry to disappoint you but I am certain that the Afro-Americans have nothing to gain from a Japanese victory and everything to lose from being involved in the efforts to impede the government's War exertions."

Derounian did not print this this, instead printed McKim's statement that the Japanese do not consider themselves as akin to the negro race as an evidence of McKim's anti-negro bias. McKim thought Derounian a dangerous character and wrote to the FBI reporting his experience and suggesting that he be investigated.

Before we entered the war, hundreds of thousands of mothers formed themselves into various mothers' organizations against war. Derounian went amongst these frightened and worried mothers actually shedding tears over the "recent death of his own mother," which was a lie, and seeking to trap them into disloyal statements. Of course he found women angry at the government and he tortured all sorts of trifles into evidence that they were anti-semitic and pro-Hitler. For instance, he called on Mrs. Rose M. Farber in Detroit. He, of course, wept about his "dead mother." He tried to provoke Mrs. Farber into a disloyal remark. All he was able to write was that "she told me she had worked with Mrs. A. Cressy Morrison, Catherine Baldwin and Dr. Maud DeLand (women he had already smeared) and had read Social Justice." I know nothing of these ladies save what I have read in this book, which is doubtless false. But Mrs. Farber writes me:

"I do not know Mrs. A. Cressy Morrison, Mrs. Catherine Baldwin or Dr. Maud DeLand, And I told him so. I have not worked with these ladies and impressed that fact on his irresponsible mind." He asked her if she read Social Justice, She said: "Yes, I also read the Nation, the New Republic, PM and the Daily Worker. Of course he mentioned only Social Justice.

In numerous cases he brands men and women as subversive and then produces as evidence of this against them that they are anti-Communist. The late Channing Pollock said he had counted 100 such instances and then gave up. I have counted scores myself,

Over a period, while he himself was inflaming people against Jews and negroes in order to get some hostile sentiments from them to use in his book, Derounian (alias Carlson) was publishing a thing called the Christian Defender. It was a little anti-Semitic sheet published every Monday. Here are a few excerpts from this Derounian publication:

"Let the kikes attempt to stop the sale of Social Justice, and they will court the righteous wrath of several million Christians in New York. Then woe unto the miserable Yiddies. Woe unto them and their progeny. Their now confounded yelpings of persecution, when that day comes, will find full justification in fact. All we can say now is: BEWARE JEW!"

"The American Immigration Conference Board which did admirable patriotic work in beating down attempts of International Jewry to make a dumping ground of this country, reports that the House of Representatives passed five bills aimed to free America of some of its social and political parasites."

"Of course it's none of our business to tell those Jew boys where to go, but it would have been a better thing if they went to Palestine first."

There are sneering references to "refu-jews"; a hilarious laugh at "Yiddish flyers" who never reached their destination. A federal judge, hearing a case against Derounian, said of a batch of these publications:

"The man who wrote this charges other men with being anti-semitic . . . Each one of these is infinitely worse than anything you called my attention to in Robnett's writings."

Derounian published these scurrilous sheets and distributed them. He got people to read them and used against them the anti-semitic responses to which he inflamed them. The first one of these infamous sheets I saw was distributed on the sidewalk outside a meeting at which I spoke and was then used by this smear gang as evidence that the meeting was anti-semitic.

Derounian on a lecture tour boasted that if his "book was untrue, why was I not sued for libel." The answer, of course, is that he was sued for libel. A number of suits are still pending against him. But four cases in which his charges were subjected to judicial review have been heard with most disastrous consequences to him—the Drew case, the Chapman case, the Robnett case and the Stokes case.

Derounian made grave charges against a New York policeman named James L. Drew. Here was a deliberate attempt to frame an officer. Drew's home, without a warrant, was illegally entered while he was away and raided. The officer was tried by a Trial Judge of the Police Department, Derounian was the chief witness. It was proved that Drew served on the force for 17 years, all of it in Jewish neighborhoods, without a complaint being lodged against him. No evidence of any anti-semitic utterance from Drew was presented. The trial judge exonerated him. Police Commissioner Valentine concurred, ordering Drew back to duty. The smear brigade in New York raised a storm of protest. Mayor LaGuardia named a board composed of Hon. Frederick E. Crain and Hon. Edward R. Finch, former justices of New York's highest court and former Police Commissioner George L. McLaughlin, to review the case. They unanimously approved the findings. Thus in the first test of Derounian's charges a Police Trial Court, Police Commissioner Valentine, former Commissioner McLaughlin and two justices of the State's highest court were unanimous in exonerating Drew and branding Derounian's charges as false.

A Lie Retracted

The next case heard was that of Conrad Chapman. Derounian charged that Mrs. Leslie Fry, wife of a Czarist officer, came to the United States in 1936 to promote a Nazi revolution. But, he said, she was under the orders of Conrad Chapman. Derounian said Chapman was a clever operator, "gave the orders and had charge of the funds. He had many contacts high in the Ministry of Propaganda and was involved in the abortive Nazi putsch engineered by Manfred Von Killinger." When exposed "Chapman quietly left the country followed by Mrs. Fry."

Here is a direct charge that Chapman was a Nazi operative, that he helped lead an abortive Nazi revolutionary putsch in this country. Derounian further said the plan was to set up a general staff of 13 Germans, White Russians, Italians and Americans. A more direct charge of sedition could hardly be made. Yet every shred of this is utterly false.

Chapman, member of an old American family and professor in a Boston college, promptly filed suit for libel. Derounian had to admit that he made the charges on the strength of a little smear sheet printed in Los Angeles. He had no evidence whatever for these outrageous charges. After testimony in the suit from nobody but his publisher and himself, his own lawyers threw up the sponge and offered to make a retraction. Derounian signed it and it was filed in court. It reads:

"Whereas the defendant hereby alleges that he did not, nor was it his intention by any of the statements contained in said book to imply that the plaintiff was in any way a representative or agent of Germany or an enemy of the United States of America or to accuse the plaintiff of the crime of sedition or treason.

Therefore, the case was withdrawn. Thus over his signature, he crawls out of the hold by admitting that when he said Chapman was a Nazi operative, a representative of Nazi Germany, distributing money and giving orders in a Nazi putsch in this country, he did not mean it.

However, his veracity has been well settled in a third suit. George W. Robnett, executive secretary of the Church League of America, received a visit from Derounian as a result of which Derounian in "Under Cover", suggested that he was anti-communist and anti-semitic. On this basis Robnett filed suit in the United States Court in Chicago for $100,000 against Dutton, the publisher, and a million dollars against the National Broadcasting Company and Walter Winchell for endorsing these statements. The against Dutton & Co. was tried in October, 1946.

On the witness stand Derounian made a pathetic spectacle. He admitted numerous statements he made to Robnett were false. The jury brought in a verdict sustaining the charge of libel. The damages assessed were only $1.00 because Derounian's lawyers proved that Robnett had not suffered any actual money damages. However, Derounian's publishers were ordered to pay the costs of the suit which involved many thousands. And, of course, the important fact is that a judge and twelve jurors, after hearing this queer stool pigeon, decided that he had lied.

Judge P. Barnes, a distinguished United States judge in Illinois, left no room for doubt about the meaning. He said:

"This book charges the plaintiff was disloyal, anti-Semitic and a Nazi agent. During the entire course of the trial I have never heard any evidence to sustain any of these charges. I think this book was written by a wholly irresponsible person who would write anything for a dollar. I think this book was published by a publisher who would do anything for a dollar. I don't believe any investigation of the author was made by the publisher to the extent they say it was because they cared more for the dollar than they did for the almighty truth. I wouldn't believe this author if he was under oath and I think he and the publisher are as guilty as anyone who was ever found guilty in this court."

Judge Barnes hit close to the mark when he touched on the dollar aspect. The publishers sold 700,000 copies. Derounian's royalties must have grossed close to $300,000; the publisher's close to $500,000. It was a dirty job, but it paid well.

In a fourth case, Jeremiah Stokes of Salt Lake City filed a suit against Derounian (alias Carlson) for libel. The case was heard in Salt Lake City in December 1946. Stokes was smeared by association by imputing to him the odium charged against others—and because he had written a book, "The Communist Plot to purge American Patriots from Congress." As in every other test, the jury held Derounian guilty of libel and assessed damages of $10,000 and costs.

Thus in four cases in which this book was submitted to judicial review the judges refused to believe him in three cases and in one he himself, on the advice of his lawyers, quit and retracted. A police commission trial judge, Police Commissioner Valentine, former Commissioner McLaughlin, Justice Crain, Justice Finch and thirty-six jurors (in three cases) and a United States Judge in Chicago, all unanimously, after hearing Derounian's testimony, have refused to believe him and he stands judicially condemned as a liar "unworthy to be believed under oath" and "willing to do anything for dollar." Are all these judges, commissioners and 36 jurors to be dismissed as irresponsible?

In all the search for subversive elements, Stout, Birkhead, and their stool pigeon Derounian (alias Carlson) have left the Communist alone. Now in a new book, Carlson has a chapter "exposing" the Commies. This, however, completely exposes his own hand on the subject. In this chapter his whole tone changes from the angry vituperation heaped on men like Lindbergh and Wheeler to a tone of softness. He actually gives the Commies several testimonials. He says the members are mostly American-born—a fact he knows nothing about since their membership lists are secret. He contrasts their humble headquarters with the magnificence of the National Manufacturers Association offices. He is careful to say he aims his mild criticisms, not at Russian Communism, but only at the American Communists. William Z. Foster said the same thing when he was attacking Earl Browder. He, Derounian boasts that he understands Russian Communism better than the Commies here and respects it more. There is not a word about the incredible infiltration of these Commies into our State Department, our Army and Navy, our Washington bureaus, our radio and movies and press. And we must not forget that when the book "Under Cover" was issued no one plugged it more incessantly than the Commies.

The trail of Birkhead and Stout took them into some queer experiments in "democracy." They were not content merely to smear men; they sought to silence them completely. Birkhead, addressing a group of veterans, urged them to aid in "disciplining the obstructionist press," By "obstructionist press" he meant papers like the Chicago Tribune, New York Daily News and Washington Times Herald. He told them he had a plan to cut the circulation of the Daily News by 50 percent by getting advertisers to boycott it. He said the "Chicago Tribune will be an easier job. It has to be done in order to protect our minority groups."

At a Fulton Theatre meeting in 1943, Stout suggested a letter campaign to a chain of newspapers to "get" Westbrook Pegler. However, he added, the only "way to get Pegler is with a meat-axe."

Another group in March, 1942—the Overseas Press Club—composed mostly of foreign correspondents who had been whooping it up for war, for Britain and for Russia, had a banquet in Washington. Cabinet officers were present and a great galaxy of New Deal celebrities. One speaker, in a musing speech, denounced the former non-interventionists as criminals and demanded that they be charged with subversive activities, with violating the Mann Act, the income tax law, anything, to "GET THEM," This incredible outburst was delivered amidst a roar of applause in which the highest officials joined. This represented the moral level of a government that boasted it was fighting to bring freedom to the whole world.

Suppression Project

Stout got himself put at the head of a War Writers' Board by Elmer Davis, which was subsidized by the government, and which he used to drive out of magazines, newspapers, and radio those writers who displeased him. When the war ended he tried to keep it up. He formed the Writers' Board and went to work to punish the Chicago Tribune. He wrote a letter to American authors on the letterhead of the Writers' Board suggesting that they instruct their publishers not to advertise in a Literary Review which the Tribune had just launched. I sent a copy of that letter to 22 members of his Board and asked them if they, as writers who believed in freedom of the press, knew of Stout's action and approved it. Sixteen replied that they did not know of it, did not approve it and many, in consequence, quit his Board.

On the very day I write these lines, at a large meeting of an organization which has aided Birkhead and Stout, the head of that organization told the audience that they were at work on the 'Daily News' Project"—a project to boycott the New York Daily News. The success of these intimidation schemes has been shocking. However, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News and Washington Times-Herald, most savagely attacked—refused to be intimidated, stood steadfast to their principles despite almost unbelievable pressures, and prospered enormously—a lesson which ought to be learned by those editors who ran to cover in fear of these smearers.

Men were pursued individually and in groups. The most comprehensive smear was in 1943 when Birkhead and Stout tried to prevent any person opposed to their own objectives from holding a government office. Every applicant for a government post must be cleared through the Civil Service Commission. Birkhead and Stout filed with the Commission a document called "Material on American Fascist Groups." It fills 480 typewritten pages with thousands of names. These include most of the distinguished American senators, congressmen, business men, educators, writers and others, who opposed the objectives of Birkhead and Stout. Mixed in among them were the names of various indicted and convicted persons charged with subversive activities. Thus the evil repute of these few contributed to the odor of subversion of all the other names.

Every person on that list meets this charge automatically at the threshold of government service if he should seek a job. A more irresponsible outrage against the good names of a small army of people who had committed the prime of disagreeing with the weird opinions of this scurrilous pair I have never encountered.

A New Project

The latest project, now under way, is their plan to "get" a new organization known as American Action. The officers of this organization are Edward A. Hayes, former national commander of die American Legion, Joseph Staaek, former national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and R. K. Christenberry, former chairman of the Policy Committee of the American Legion, all Americans of the highest character. Their object is to defend our political and economic system against Communist and Fascist propagandists. The attack on them began logically in the Communist Daily Worker and George Seldes' little pink smear sheet In Fact and then, based wholly on these two "exposes" showed up as an "original" story in the Cleveland Press upon whose editor it had been palmed off. Now Birkhead and Stout take it up as a "project."

The whole purpose is to prove that these men are pro-fascist and anti-Semitic—outrageous lies of the whole cloth. And this is done with the old trick of connecting the gentlemen and their movement with the names of already smeared persons of no significance who have no connection with the movement.

They performance of this so-called Friends of Democracy must have produced upon the minds of many of its directors much the same impression as in the case of the Anti-Nazi League for in the last few years no less than 27 of these directors have resigned.

VIII. A New War is Born

The various operators pictured in the Friends of Democracy, the Anti-Nazi League are now seen gathering with some new recruits under a new banner—The Society for the Prevention of World War III. While using the smear, it has, so far as I know, no spy force of its own. Rex Stout is its president. Birkhead is a board member. So is Clarence Low, treasurer of the Friends of Democracy, along with the Belgian diamond trader refugee, Isidore Lipschutz, vice-president and treasurer of the Anti-Nazi League.

The idea for this new movement seems to have taken rise in the minds of two other non-citizen refugees of recent vintage—Dr. F. W. Foerster and T. H. Tetens.

Foerster and Tetens have a pet theory—that practically all Germans are bad, and should be rendered permanently helpless. This is the basis of the infamous Morgenthau Plan which the Roosevelt administration adopted in Germany and which is a disgrace to America. Tetens says he escaped from a concentration camp in 1935, fled from Germany to the Argentine from whence after a few years he came to America. Foerster has been at war with his native Germany for over a generation. Before World War I he was arrested for his attacks upon the government. After World War I he, with Kurt Eisner in Switzerland, organized a Red revolution in Bavaria and seized the government—Foerster acting as Foreign Minister. It lasted only a brief moment. When the Social Democratic Republic was created, Foerster declared personal war on that. The republic was as hateful to him as the old Empire or the Nazi regime later. He did not wait for Hitler's rise to power in 1955 to get out of Germany. He left in 1923 and denounced the governments of Stressemann and Bruening as bitterly as others berated Hitler.

The chief product of this outfit is a pamphlet bitterly attacking Americans of German descent and in particular Mr. Victor Ridder, publisher of a number of American newspapers. One of these is the German language newspaper, Staats Zeitung. The pamphlet is signed by Foerster and Tetens with a preface by Quentin Reynolds and Rex Stout. Ridder is accused of visiting Hitler and of signing a public declaration after Pearl Harbor artfully designed to soften public sentiment toward Germany. The truth is that while Mr. Ridder visited Hitler before the war —in 1933—he did so at the request of certain Jewish leaders to try to point out to him the folly of his persecution of the Jews. The declaration he signed after Pearl Harbor, known as the Christmas Declaration, was prepared by Miss Dorothy Thompson at the request of our government and was printed in numerous newspapers as an advertisement and paid for by the American Jewish Congress. All Ridder had to do with it was to sign it at the request of a government official.

It is clear that in the plan to make continuous war upon Germany this group is determined to make war also upon Americans of German descent. That is a numerous group. If it submits to this infamy indefinitely it will be strange indeed. If not we shall see another of these miserable European feuds fanned into flame in our land to bedevil our own policies and decisions.

IX. The End—What Is It To Be?

In what has gone before I have tried to make clear how various organizations have operated around a general pool of calumny. This is a reservoir filled with rumors, innuendos, direct charges, lies and half-truths and some whole truths about a score of persons—a few important, but mostly unimportant. They are covered with the odium of fascism, anti-semitism and subversion generally. This done, the Smearers have but to wade into this odious swamp and splash around, scattering their ill-favored muck upon the forms of decent men who are their real targets, who can be charged with nothing directly, but who can be destroyed in this way.

This no American is immune. The Smearers can destroy any man in this country, however innocent, who does not yield to the intended intimidation. However, they have departed from this technique and made direct charges in some notable instances when, in the very frenzy of their hatreds, they have hungered for the quick liquidation of their victim.

The chronicle of these attempted direct character assassinations is almost unbelievable. There was the incredibly wicked attempt to defame Senator David I. Walsh of Massachusetts through the New York Post by charges so vile and so false that even Senator Alben Barkley, the New Deal leader in the Senate, recoiled from them and provided the evidence which shattered them. There was the diabolical conspiracy to eliminate Martin Dies by means of charges contained in forged documents attributed to a half-demented creature who ended in the penitentiary for his part. There was the scheme to ruin John O'Donnell, the columnist—a scheme in which President Roosevelt played a leading role—by calling him a liar for making statements which were ultimately admitted to be true by the President himself and by presenting him with an Iron Cross with the Presidential implication that he was in the service of the enemy. David Stern's Philadelphia Record collaborated in this by printing in words what Roosevelt had insinuated.

O'Donnell sued Stern, got a verdict of libel and in a new trial got a second verdict of libel—two juries, 24 citizens, agreeing unanimously that O'Donnell had been attacked with lies. I cannot in these brief pages notice all these programs of liquidation. A large volume, involving senators, congressmen, writers, business men, could not contain the shameful story. One would have to go back to the glorious days of Florentine intrigue to match some of these "projects" in character assassination. I shall mention but one—the latest and one of the most instructive—directed against Senator Burton K. Wheeler.

Senator Wheeler ran for reelection in the Montana primaries. He has a long career as a true liberal leader. But he committed the crime of opposing Roosevelt's plan to take this country into war. The same forces that have been evident in what I have been describing here were out to get Wheeler. The focus of the smear was a book, "The Plot Against America"—which throughout its filthy pages associated the honorable name of Burton Wheeler with the vilest and most disgusting behavior.

This was managed by a fellow named John E. Kennedy, a local Montana New Dealer. He wanted someone to write a book, he took no chances. He advertised in New York for a writer, drunkard preferred—unbelievable as that may seem—a drunkard trying to pull himself together. He promised a trivial reward—room and victuals, small pay and maybe, expenses. He got what he advertised for—a human being named David George Plotkin, In addition to being a drunkard trying to sober up, he had been rejected by the Army as having a "manic depressive psychosis, paranoid tendency." This means a mind alternating between mania and melancholia and tending toward systematic insane delusions. In the Missoula Hotel this creature wrote a book, Kennedy supplying the material. It is without doubt the most abominable political tract that has ever appeared in print in this country. Oddly, it not only attacked Wheeler. Plotkin, in the exuberance of his vilification turned his venoms against President Truman as well. He wrote: "Truman and Wheeler see eye to eye. They are leading the retreat from reason into the safe ventilated hell of Nazi-Fascism," Also: "Hitler's body has been resurrected and is sleeping in the White House bed." These are not samples of the book's filth, I could not print that.

Who paid for this odious adventure in calumny? Well who was interested in destroying Wheeler? A senatorial investigation of this incident, which was squelched when it got too hot, has revealed some of the names of those who contributed to the campaign to defeat Wheeler. Of the $11,000 contributed to the campaign fund, over $8,000 came from outside Montana—chiefly from New York. Following an appeal to L. M. Birkhead and to Edward Waterman of the A.D.L., we find Arthur Goldsmith sending $4,250. Who is Arthur Goldsmith? You will find his name among the supporters of Birkhead, Stout and other committees. One thousand dollars went from A. Greenbaum in the Ritz Towers. Several contributions were made by pinkish labor unions to the PAC in Montana. The book enterprise itself is supposed to have cost $13,000. The money was supplied apparently, by two small-bore persons in Montana. But there is plenty of ground for suspecting that it did not come from them but was, rather, routed to the enterprise through them. Who?

And now, behold them! Behold the brave legion of the Calumniators! Behold America's own Mata Hari and "Colonel Richard Rolling A.B. Syracuse!" Behold Lipschutz, the Belgian diamond trader held up by the Immigration Department as he seeks citizenship here; Birkhead, the church- and religion-hating preacher; Rex Stout, the evangelist of hate and suppression; Leslie, the former Baptist curate, jazz bandmaster, tin-pan alley publisher and worshipper of the Soviet god; Gailmor, the thief and Plotkin, the poet of the sewers equipped with manic depressive psychosis; and Avedis Boghos Derounian, the desk searcher and file rifler, thrice branded a liar by juries, judges, and investigators. Look them over.

Why do I waste 32 pages of good ink upon such a shabby crew? Who would believe they could do so much damage? Of course they do not and cannot save as directed and financed by stronger and smarter men. What is the power which sits off in the shadows and pulls the strings and supplies the cash which vitalizes these puppets?

Senator Johnson of Colorado said of the creature Plotkin that he should, be horsewhipped. If there is to be horse-whipping it is not upon the backs of the Plotkins and Derounians and Gailmors that the lash should fall, but upon the backs of those men who hide behind the scenes and provide the means by which these otherwise futile and feeble instruments can function with so much malignance and effectiveness; .But WE WANT NO HORSEWHIPPING IN THIS COUNTRY. There is, a better way. To deal with this grave, evil I make the following suggestions.

1. Congress must investigate the activities of all these private gestapos. Police we must have, but that is the business of the State. As for secret police, this is something even our State has not used here. Public detectives may use assumed names and even disguises to trap criminals. Even that is an extreme use of power. We trust the State in this because we assume it is responsible and can be supervised and called to account. But we have never dreamed of permitting the State to use police—secret or otherwise—as an instrument of political controversy.

To suppose that we can suffer private gestapos to operate, to steal into men's homes and offices, to open their mail, tap their telephones—this is abhorrent to our system of life. Yet they are amongst us. Derounian went to a man's home as a guest, was entertained overnight and in the morning, while the victim's wife prepared breakfast, he stole into the library to search for papers. The Anti-Nazi League planted a paid employee of its own as an employee of a reputably American organization, headed by respected citizens. As a messenger, she carried documents from its offices' to the private offices of the organization's officials. On the way she stopped at the office of the Anti-Nazi League where the mail was opened, the contents photostated before being returned to the envelopes and delivered to the lawful recipients.

Richard Rollins of the Anti-Nazi League wrote that when he took a job with a government agency he found himself handicapped in his police operations because when he wanted to see papers he had to get a warrant whereas while a private snooper he could sneak into a man's place of business and take them.

I once had three private spies planted in my office—the office of an organization of which I was a chairman—the three hired and paid by an infamous private agency which I have had no space to deal with here and which from time to time serves those smear organizations which I have described. I have had my office entered, my files examined, my telephone tapped. As a citizen I have a right to claim the protection of my government against these infamous practices. I am not particularly interested in the man or men who entered my office. But I am interested in knowing who paid them and I think my government owes to me and every other citizen the fullest protection under the Constitutional guarantee to be secure from unreasonable seizures and searches. The first step therefore, must be a full congressional investigation which will call every one of these organizations to Washington, which will compel them to reveal their methods of operations, the records and performances of their operatives and the sources of their moral and financial support.

2. The American people are entitled to protection against the use of the radio for the abuse of private citizens. The radio has been one of the chief instruments of these gestapos for spreading their smears, often through recently arrived refugees steaming with the hatreds of the feuds from which they fled in Europe, while the defamed citizen has no means of defense.

3. Most of our Jewish leaders took a step in the right direction when they withdrew their support from Kenneth Leslie's Protestant. Those in the strongest position to stop this thing are the Jewish organizations which have a right to speak for Jews. Moreover it is our Jewish citizens who are being most terribly injured by these activities.

I was heartened when I saw a public statement by Rabbi Solomon Fineberg in a recent issue of the Commentary, published by the American Jewish Committee, in which he said that most anti-semitic rabble-rousers were one-man shows, without any important following and that it was a grave mistake to treat them as if they were "great and powerful figures holding the center of the stage." These smear gestapos actually pick up these insignificant creatures and provide them with a public limelight without which they would never be heard of. Dr. Fineberg says the only people who profit by this are the Communists who want to "provide plenty of limelight for the rabble-rousers" and who want "to involve the entire American public in a quarrel."

Anti-semitism has never been able to find reputable leaders, but these smear organizations have actually made it appear that senators, congressmen, writers and other persons of importance are now leading the anti-semitic movement in America. For this reason, therefore, I urge that Jews, Catholics, Protestants be the first to repudiate the services of any smearers who pretend to speak in their names.

However accomplished, this thing must be ended. Is America to be governed by boycotters and smearers? Are public questions to be discussed in terms of libel and slander? If this is to be the method of debate, we must expect to see the other side come into the arena to challenge the smearers with their own weapons—smear against smear, boycott against boycott. What sane man in this country wants to see that? What honest lover of tolerance for all religions and all races can contemplate that without anxiety? And when the argument gets around to that pass, can anyone doubt that it will be the minority groups that will be the greatest sufferers?