Topic: Media
Propaganda in the American Free Press Newspaper and a Warning to Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty Documentary evidence proving that the American Free Press newspaper is: (1) biased (2) has an anti-Jewish agenda and (3) knowingly publishes false information to advance that agenda.by Andy Wilcoxson
(libertarian)
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
The American Free Press holds itself up as a "populist weekly newspaper that reports what the mainstream media will not." The articles it publishes promoting Ron Paul have given it currency among some people involved in the liberty movement. However, the publishers of the American Free Press possess an agenda that undermines the very cause of liberty they pretend to support.
The American Free Press, by its own admission, is biased and it knowingly publishes false information in order to advance an anti-Semitic agenda. To understand the rest of this article you'll need to read my correspondence with the American Free Press as well as the articles under discussion. So here's a link to the relevant documentation.
As you can see, the thesis of Vivian Bird's article is that the World Jewish Congress's 1933 campaign to boycott Germany caused the Nazi animosity towards the Jews. The headline of the article is literally "Animosity Created by WJC Declaration of War' Against Germany".
In the letter I wrote on behalf of my local chapter of the Campaign for Liberty, I accused the American Free Press of knowingly publishing false information. I argued that Ms. Bird's article can not be true because Mein Kampf (published 1926) as well as the 1920 Nazi/NSDAP platform demonstrate Nazi animosity towards Jews long before the World Jewish Congress's 1933 campaign to boycott Germany. Therefore, the 1933 boycott can not be the cause of the Nazi animosity.
In their response, the American Free Press conceded that the Nazis had "antipathy" towards the Jews in the 1920s because they blamed them for Germany's defeat in World War I. In spite of their knowledge of Nazi enmity towards the Jews before 1933, the American Free Press still published Vivian Bird's article claiming that the Nazi hatred of the Jews was *created* by the World Jewish Congress campaign of 1933 -- even though they knew it wasn't. They knowingly published false information.
The American Free Press's decision to knowingly publish false information can only be explained by a desire to lead their readers to the wrongheaded conclusion that the Jews deserved, or at least provoked, the treatment they suffered under the Nazi regime -- treatment which was wholly incompatible with the principles of individual liberty advocated by Ron Paul.
The second article I discussed in my letter to the American Free Press was entitled "White Guilt & the Black Slave Trade". The thesis of that article was that the "White race" needn't feel guilty about slavery because Jewish traders brought the slaves here.
I accused the American Free Press editorial staff of making an appeal to racism by excluding Jews from the so-called "White race," wrongly singling them out, and implying that they were uniquely sinister people whose ethno-religious affiliation played a role in the participation of certain individuals in the slave trade.
I explained the Campaign for Liberty's belief in individual liberty and individual accountability, and the American Free Press responded in a candid manner. They stated their position clearly: they are "fundamentally opposed to multiculturalism and racial integration" and believe that "Jewish people have been active as a cohesive group in countries since before Greece and have always demanded special treatment."
The American Free Press confirmed my worst suspicions. They fervently believe that Jewish people are a "cohesive group" who act with a common sinister purpose. It is precisely that kind of delusional thinking that led to the wholesale violations of liberty and the horrific crimes perpetrated against the Jews by the Nazi regime.
Although the American Free Press promotes Ron Paul in some of its articles, it clearly does not share his belief in individual liberty; seeking instead to lay collective blame on the Jewish people for the alleged acts of a few Jewish individuals.
In addition to confirming my allegations that they possess an anti-Semitic agenda and that they knowingly publish false information in order to advance that agenda, they confirmed another point that my letter didn't even accuse them of: editorial bias.
In a pathetic attempt to lay a rhetorical trap for me (and for the record I reject Holocaust denial) the American Free Press boasted that it gave "favorable coverage" to a "primary Holocaust denier". Not impartial or fair coverage -- *favorable* coverage.
By its own admission, the American Free Press is biased. It openly promotes an agenda of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism and it unapologetically publishes false information in the pursuit of that agenda. It is a racist propaganda newspaper that is even worse than the "mainstream media" it decries.
AFP Highlights a Paradox Faced by the Liberty Movement
Unfortunately, the event that precipitated my correspondence with the American Free Press was the distribution of their newspaper at my local chapter of the Campaign for Liberty. Once I brought the contents of the newspaper to the attention of the group we banned the paper pending their response to my accusations (we will make a final decision at our next meeting).
The mission of the Campaign for Liberty is to "promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity." You will note that the promotion of Holocaust denial and racism are NOT part of the Campaign for Liberty's mission.
Individual liberty includes the right to free speech, including conspiracy theories and offensive speech. The liberty-minded individual is obliged to defend the right of the conspiracy theorist, the racist, and even the Holocaust denier to speak their piece, even though he may vehemently disagree with their views, and even though such views will almost certainly offend the intellectual and moral sensibilities of most people. For its defense of the right to unpopular speech, the liberty movement tends to attract people with unpopular, offensive, and sometimes crazy ideas.
The Campaign for Liberty is faced with a paradox. It can not achieve its mission if it lacks credibility, and it won't have credibility if its members are seen as an assortment of racists, Holocaust deniers, and crackpots -- and a sure way to gain that reputation is to distribute literature such as the American Free Press.
Although it seems counter-intuitive to the liberty-minded individual, purging the Campaign for Liberty of undesirable members and banning the distribution of certain literature at Campaign for Liberty meetings might be necessary to create a viable liberty movement.
The First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The First Amendment is binding upon Congress, and the Campaign for Liberty isn't Congress. The Campaign for Liberty is obliged to defend the right of the conspiracy theorist, the White supremacist, and even the communist to speak and to publish literature without being harassed by the Government, but it is under no constitutional or moral obligation to provide any of those people with a forum to speak or distribute their literature from.
The Campaign for Liberty has the same right to restrict participation and speech in its meetings as a church, a business, or any other private organization.
Racists and Holocaust deniers have an agenda that has nothing to do with the Campaign for Liberty's mission. They are exploiting the movement that sprung up around Ron Paul to promote their own agenda.
Willis Carto, the gentleman from the American Free Press who responded to my letter, has a 50 year history of promoting Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism. He doesn't believe in the same libertarian principles as Ron Paul, if he did he wouldn't defend the Nazi regime and promote the idea of collective Jewish guilt. All he sees in the liberty movement is a group of people that he can exploit for his own purposes.
People, especially racists, who attach themselves to the liberty movement in order to promote an agenda other than the cause of liberty, undermine the movement. They draw attention away from the real issues, they provide political ammunition to those opposing the movement, and they drive good people away from the movement. Would you feel comfortable inviting a Black person or a Jewish person to a Campaign for Liberty meeting where the American Free Press was being handed out? I don't think so.
The obvious solution is to expel people who promote a racist agenda from the Campaign for Liberty, and to ban their literature from Campaign for Liberty functions. Although libertarians abhor censorship and exclusion, there is nothing noble about dying in battle because we fell on our own sword. It is foolish to turn the masses against us because we're afraid to lose the support of a racist fringe element.
As far as I'm concerned, the White supremacists and the Holocaust deniers can all go to Hell. If we don't purge them from our ranks they will become the public face of the Campaign for Liberty and they will destroy the movement. You can bet your bottom dollar that C4L's opposition will make sure those people are in the spotlight when it comes to media coverage. The media will be drawn to the racist in our midst like a moth to a flame. This will color the public's perception of the movement; it will isolate the Campaign for Liberty and turn it into a political liability for the causes and candidates it supports.
The overwhelming majority of Campaign for Liberty members abhor racism, but the American Free Press embodies a racist element that unfortunately does exist. We can not afford to burry our heads in the sand and pretend like this doesn't exist. It does exist and we need to eliminate it -- otherwise the movement has no future.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 26 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Andy Wilcoxson only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Andy Wilcoxson is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I have seen the AFP handed out at local Ron Paul Meetup meetings and wondered what it was about. The edition passed out was a 12 page Ron Paul Revolution booklet and looked great. However, I was not aware of the newspaper and its non-sensical views. Thanks for shedding light on this issue.
Someone posting on the Daily Paul asks this question:
Andy Wilcoxon, which campaign for liberty staffer gave you the right to send out letters from the campaign for liberty to outside organizations? As a local coordinator I know to never use the campaign for liberty logo unless okayed with my state coordinator.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2009-05-27 06:24:05
"Although it seems counter-intuitive to the liberty-minded individual, purging the Campaign for Liberty of undesirable members and banning the distribution of certain literature at Campaign for Liberty meetings might be necessary to create a viable liberty movement."
==================
Ha, ha, ha...thanks for the laugh. Here is how I read the above quote:
Purge the Herd! Some of the cattle are not like the rest.
Are there any individuals out there who are actively promoting individual liberty in their local communities? No, joining a friendly herd and chanting from the safety of their numbers doesn't count. In fact, it undermines any credibility that individual members of the herd may have had on their own.
It would be wonderful to occasionally hear from others who are doing constructive things in their local community to promote liberty instead of the incessant mooing in unison from the various flavors of bovine gangs who frequent the Nolan Chart dot com site.
One wonders whether Mr. Wilcoxson really understand classical liberalism and its implications. Instead of comdemning and attacking, should not not rather set an example, not the things agreed and disagreed on and work from there? The Ron Paul movement consider of a wide variety of people, including a few extremes that are all being brought together by a shared notion of liberty. AFP is within their property right fully allowed to excersize its liberty. Anyone is biased per se, Mr. Wilcoxson. It should be noted that Jews can be found in very different political ideologies, like Karl Marx, Ludwig von Mises, Irving Kristol, Rosa Luxembourg etc. etc. Jews are very diverse indeed, but there are also a certain group feeling among many, not all of them and in this sense there is soomething to be said for certain writer in AFP. Also, some Jews refer to themselves as whites, but at times some also refer to themselves as a minority, in differentiation from whites, blacks etc. We know after the dispersion there are Jews to be found that are mixed, some also with black people, Asians etc. Acknowledging this does not constitute racism, it is simply a realistic observation.
Many more people were killed under Stalin than under Hitler, more than twice and in the course of history there has been cases where entire peoples have been totally wiped out. It is also true that many such peoples have not received any financila compensation, unlike for example Jews after WW2. This is also a fact that should be acknowledged. It is perfectly legitimate for AFP to not believe in multiculturalism. Many in Europe also do not believe it. There is a dating site like J date for instance where only Jews can marry other Jews, it is not "open" for others and one is identified as Askenazi, Sepphardic etc., e.g. a "normal" white person (of non-Jewish descent) would not qualify. Is this going to be seen as racism (frankly, I feel not) or simply the urge to befriend people with a lot in common in ethnic background. Racism only occurs when differences are totally oberhyped and the all decisive dividing line in history and the one seen as superior than the others.
The Ron Paul movement has already become mainstream. it is impossible now to try to isolate it and play guilty by assocation etc. It would rather be advisable to bring extremist groups into the political discourse and process, communicate and develop trust...change will also be seen at some time, than to try to isolate them. One should differentiate between a person and his ideas as well.
Posted By: Andy Wilcoxson
Date: 2009-05-27 09:29:47
Bobby: The Whatcom County C4L (whose logo was used) and on whose behalf the letter was written, took a vote and gave me the task of writing that letter. The letter was written on behalf of Whatcom C4L with the full knowledge of everybody in the group. You will notice that the letter is addressed to the official Whatcom C4L P.O. Box as well. I don't even have a key to that mail box. The letter was written in full consultation with our local chairman in Whatcom County. Truth to tell, I didn't even want to write the letter. I simply wanted to ban the paper because it was printing obvious lies and it's political suicide to hand it out, but the majority of the group wanted to give AFP a chance to try and explain itself first and that's why the letter was written. It was written at the insistance of the group and that's where I derrive my authorization from.
American Free Press appears to be the successor to The Spotlight, the newspaper of the now-defunct Liberty Lobby. LL was founded more than 50 years ago by Carto and Col. Curtis B. Dall, a former son-in-law of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The group had an antisemitic agenda from its founding, and spun off other antisemitic/holocaust-denying groups including the National Youth Alliance (now the National Alliance) and the Institute for Historical Review.
LL's modus operandi was to glom onto legitimate pro-liberty groups and then subtly attempt to steer them in an antisemitic direction. Typically, someone would show up at a meeting with LL literature, which at first glance appeared to be quite innocent. It was only after delving into it that the hidden antisemitic agenda became apparent. I can see from your description and from Bobby's post that they are still up to their old tricks.
Another tactic was to attempt to tie themselves to intellectual leaders who had mainstream acceptance. For example, Carto named his Barnes Review after the late Harry Elmer Barnes, a revisionist historian whose writings were popular among libertarians in the '60s and '70s. (You can read the late Murray Rothbard's obituary for Barnes here.) Barnes was a critic of conventional views of the origins of both world wars, but he was not an antisemite.
It appears they are still attempting to use people who have mainstream acceptance to hide their true agenda. I see from AFP's Wikipedia entry that they publish articles by the likes of Joe Sobran, Paul Craig Roberts and Ron Paul. Perhaps someone should alert these individuals; I doubt they know they are lending their names to such a sinister enterprise.
Posted By: Andy Wilcoxson
Date: 2009-05-27 12:18:31
@ Jahfre Fire Eater: People are judged by the company they keep. If you fraternize with White supremacists, although you may not be one yourself, it will affect your standing in the community.
@ Stefan: You can not differentiate between a person and their ideas. Your ideas make you who you are. I agree that AFP is entitled to its views and that it is at liberty to publish, but that does not oblige C4L to distribute AFP. Refusal to distribute AFP at C4L functions in no way violates AFP's first amendment rights. C4L has the right to restrict the literature handed out at its meetings. C4L is not *bound* by the constitution it is *protected* by it, as is AFP. Nobody would argue that AFP is constitutionally bound to publish every article submitted to its editors, likewise C4L is under no obligation to distribute every piece of literature that somebody wants to bring to a meeting.
As you allude to in your post, there is a tremendous diversity among Jewish people. Ludwig von Mises and Paul Krugman, for example, share a Jewish herritage and have virtually nothing else in common. Jewish people are a collection of *INDIVIDUALS* each of whom are entitled to individual liberty and individual accountability. Jews are not a "cohesive group" who act with a common purpose. There is no Jewish conspiracy. There may be conspiracies that involve Jewish individuals, but those conspiracies involve non-Jews too. The ethno-religious affiliation of the conspirators is not a litmus test for participation in the conspiracy. I see nothing in the Jewish faith that would lead me to the idea that Judaism encourages conspiracy, nor do I accept the racist idea that Jewish people are genetically predisposed to conspiracy. Jews are individuals like everybody else, some of them are good people and some of them are bad people. Bernie Madoff, for example, didn't run that ponzi scheme because he was Jewish, he did it because he was a greedy criminal. If Jewish people really were a cohesive group, then none of them would have fallen victim to Madoff's scam, but a lot of them did.
@ Phil: You hit the nail on the head. You are exactly right. AFP is "glomming on" to the Ron Paul movement with the intent to steer it towards anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. I've seen some of the research you allude to in your post. There is long and interesting history here and I would encourage people to research Carto and the people behind AFP further. Hopefully this article will get the attention of the right people in the senior leadership of C4L.
One CAN potentially differentiate a person from some of his/her ideas: it is called persuasion after mutual trust has been established. It happens all the time, in fact, except with extremely rigid people. If you isolate a person and characterize him/her ONLY in a negative light, he/she is not likely to participate in the political process, would feel alienated and rejected by society, whereas such people can change their views on certain issues and also act healthy to society by focussing on neglected issues that may be very important to change in society.
I also do not see how you can judge ALL AFP journalists in the same light and pronounce ALL of them to be anti-semitic. They do have a youtube site and I have listened to a few of the interviews: very interesting as a matter of fact. I also know one of the journalists has written a book about an expelled ex Ohio congressman Jim Traficant (?), where he was apparently quite positive about him. Ron Paul also wrote positive about the maverick Democratic congressman. This -ex-congressman is also Jewish. I would not expect an anti-semite journalist to write positively about a Semite politician.
A conspiracy involves a secret discussion and strategy between two or more people, thus there are many conspiracy. Conspiracy has a negative perception, but it can simply involve a theory not adopted by most in society at the time, but can involve the truth.
AFP does cover the influence of AIPAC, that is indeed playing congress like a cheap harmony, as Ron Paul puts it. AIPAC has a tremendous role in US politics and no major newspaper covers it, and if someone does cover it, the effective but dishonest way is to brand him/her as an anti-semite. They do it with Michael Scheuer, Prof. Walt and Mearsheimer etc. etc. AIAPC also played a leading role leading to the US invasion of Iraq. The Iraq war has not only lead to US-Israel international isolation, it has also lead to a Holocaust of 1 million or more mostly innocent Iraqi's, 2,5 million people (many CHristians) being displaced etc. Is there any law internationally that would deny questioning this holocaust? Did or will these Iraqis receive any financial help to families of killed Iraqis, the way Jewish families affected by the Holocaust received? I think not. Exposing AIPAC is a legitimate role of AFP. Some of their journalists may publish statements not generally accepted, but then not all of them. The New York times also propogated the US Iraq invasion and never has one seen them boycotted. They had a pretty vile and false attack against Ron Paul also, for which they had to publish a distraction.
I agree with Jahfre Fire Eater. Andy, you seem to agree with those that said Ron Paul should have given back 500 USD he received. Well, Ron Paul already spent the 500 USD the time it came up and how could he know/identify Don Black with the picture that was taken with them? Does this mean he fraternize with white supremacists? Absolutely not. McCain and Obama also received votes and support from racists. Does each and every issue of AFP really contain material you object to? Ron Paul has taken the classic liberal approach of allowing white supremacists (only a very small minority), 911 troofers etc, their right to free speech, and yes they also have a right to vote for Ron Paul: one cannot deny that. One should of course avoid people with such views to lead the movement in every way, just as one should avoid allowing anyone who justifies the war in Iraq in any way. Some of Ron Paul supporters also voted in favor of the Iraq war, and they were convinced and swayed. The same way white supremacists, anti-semites etc, can be swayed. I have actually read about Matthew Perry I think, a Jewish American who organized a Jews for Ron Paul website who in his meetup group also had contact with a few anti-semites etc. and they developed a trust and common understanding eventually. As Ron Paul says, freedom brings people together. The 1st Amendment is also and especially for speech that is often not popular.
Huge difference between being antisemetic and anti-Israel / anti-Zionist. Unless, of course, in this country, you dare say anything bad about someone of the Jewish faith...then you are automatically antisemetic.
Posted By: Andy Wilcoxson
Date: 2009-05-28 10:57:45
@ Stefan - I don't think that Ron Paul should have given back the $500. As far as I am concerned that is $500 less for the neo-Nazi cause. Anybody who wants to support Ron Paul is free to do so, but that does not oblige Ron Paul to support them in return. I would have kept the money too, the only money I would ever return is stolen money.
Much of the support Israel receives in this country comes from evangelical Christians. You don't see Republicans from the Bible belt supporting Israel because they're pandering for Jewish votes, they're doing it to satisfy their evangelical base.
AIPAC and other lobbying groups have as much influence as our politicians let them have. The problem isn't the lobbyists, it's the politicians. If we elected leaders who had integrity, like Ron Paul, the lobbyist influence in Washington D.C. would be zero.
@ Mobius - I have been critical of Jewish individuals and I have never been accused of anti-Semitism. As long as you don't imply that they did something bad because of their ethno-Religious affiliation you won't be accused. For example, saying "Bernie Madoff is a thief" isn't anti-Semitic, but saying "Bernie Madoff is a thieving Jew" is anti-Semitic because it implies a link between Judaism and thievery.
The term "Islamic terrorist" for example is not anit-Muslim, if I say "Osama bin Laden is an Islamic terrorist" I am implying a link between terrorism and Islam. However, there is a link and all I need to do is cite Osama bin Laden's speeches to prove that his belief in Islam was a motivating factor behind his acts of terrorism.
If you can demonstrate a link between Judaism and an evil act where the perpetrator was motivated by his Jewish faith then it is permissable to bring-up his ethno-religious affiliation without being accused of anti-Semitism. But if you're trying to make a link where none exists that would make you an anti-Semite.
Posted By: Jake, the Champion of the Constitution
Date: 2009-05-28 11:57:36
Dear Andy -
Thanks for writing this piece. I had never heard of AFP before, so its good now that I am on the lookout. While I don't have time to look at them full bore (nor the desire after what I found), I took a brief look here - in case you need any more ammo.
They took Paul Craig Roberts' column (which I follow) and took this piece, entitled "The Era of American Leadership Is Over" and not only modified it, but most eggregiously renamed it - get this - "Zionist Militants Surround America’s New President"
Unbelievable. If you read the article, there is no basis for this title whatsoever - if you check our article submission rules, Walt should take some pride in that this small site has higher standards than many of his competitors.
Links are here, thx again for the warning and keep up the good fight in your local community!
Posted By: Andy Wilcoxson
Date: 2009-06-10 14:24:10
Justin, This is more than a local issue. C4L is a national organization and AFP is a national newspaper. There are other chapters of C4L where this is happening. Whatcom County isn't alone. This should be discussed in a national forum. There's no reason to keep any of this secret.
Andy: Thank you for your response. Yes, it seems to me one should as a libertarian judge each person individually, not always in terms of what ethnic group, organization etc. he/she belongs to. Historical context is also important. I understand that Jim Tucker is a nice and balanced person, I have watched a few youtube videos on him reporting on the Bilderberg meetings, and he does not sound extremist or unbalanced in any way to me. In the US, no established newspaper like NYT, WSJ etc. would allow him to piblish ont he Bilderberg group for instance, therefore he publishes on AFP. I do understand that the assistent editior Pat Shannon ont he other hand is quite unbalanced with some racial theories etc. and not a person to be associated with. Do you know about Canada Free Press? They seem to be more "neoconnish" and critical of Dr. Paul, also recently, and no good journalism. One wishes there could be a real good, balanced and independent newspaper magazine, perhaps especially online, which is cheaper and more efficient and perhaps only publish quality and only a few pages on issues mostly not reflected in other newspapers and about issues other newspapers write about from a libertarian view. The Republic magazine is probably quite good in this regard.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
