Subject: Re: Why The Statue of General Albert Pike Must be Destroyed

From: [email-masked] (marc.colten)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:39:58 GMT

I didn't include the original message here because you can go
back and read the original.  If anyone can read that message
and doubt for an instant that everything that's been said
about LaRouche being a foaming at the mouth, psychopathic,
anti-semitic lunatic is true, then there's no convincing.  I've seen
dozens of his idiotic messages on here but this one hits
every button there is.  I mean the only thing left for the
guy is for his brain to burn out like a lightbulb.

He starts with the statue of some guy and moves on to 
topics like:

B'nai Brith being the "Pro-slavery" arm of American Jews,
founding the Klan, sending neo-nazis and skinheads into
Germany.

The Klan being an arm of British Intelligence, and the
civil was actually a war against Britain.

the Masons being behind all this stuff as agents for
Britain.

After that he spins off into Aristotle (bad), Plato (good),
Henry Kissinger, the Warbugs, the Federal reserve, the
income tax and his 2500 year struggle between these dark
forces behind the scenes.   There's too many things in
that message to even catalog.

Jeez.  What would really be educational would be a video
of Larouche typing or dictating this insanity. It might
be very educational.

marc colten

---

From: [email-masked] (marc.colten)
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1992 12:32:28 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Steve Crocker) writes:
> 
> [email-masked] (marc.colten) writes:
> 
> I take this to mean LaRouche has said things that differ radically
> from the way you see the world and that you find this offensive.
> 

So far - very true.  I find it offensive that LaRouche writes all
these speeches in which Jews are the bad guys and they are simply
posted to the net as fact.

> The "guy" was named Albert Pike, a historical figure and very
> connected to the events discussed iin the rest of the speech.
> 
> If you think this charge is false, it would be useful to state why.
> 

You want ME to tell YOU why this is false?  Sure, right after I tell
you why I think that little green men from Mongo IV did NOT kill JFK.
He made the accusations - you prove it.

> British support for the Confederacy is a matter of unquestioned
> historical fact. As for the Klan connection, why don't you read
> some history before jumping to conclusions.
> 

The British supported the Confederacy and wanted it to win.  That's
a big jump to "The British shot Lincoln" to put their puppet
Andrew Johnson in the White House.  Where's your proof for all this?
None is mentioned in the speech.

> Well, he names names and cites circumstances. Why don't you look
> some of them up.
> 
He does not mention names and circumstances so much as he simply
states that the freemasons were behind everything and everybody
and that the Confederacy and most of Europe were puppets of
a Masonic conspiracy.

> I can see that this all seems very strange to you.
> 
I wonder if you can.  The question is - why doesn't any of this
sound a trifle bizarre to you?

> What would be educational would be to pick up a book or two
> and check out some of the people, organizations and events
> mentioned before starting to foam at the mouth. A response
> asking whether the person posting this material had any 
> further background material to support controversial
> statements made in LaRouche's speech would also have been
> appropriate.

The speech is filled with unprovable assertions on secret
conspiracies of Masons, Jews, and the English.  I've seen
books and other postings on this subject and they basically
parrot each other - making the same accusations - but never
any "proof".  If the poster had any "background material" he
should have posted it (or at least references) a long time
ago, instead of simply making thousands of insulting and
probably libelous remarks accusing Jews of slavery and
treason.

I truly couldn't care less what LaRouche, Covici, you
or anything thinks about these things.  Think away.  But
I can't just sit around silently while crap like this
is poured onto the net.  You expect to make accusations
linking people to slavery, assasination, violence in
Europe and not to be called on it.  The speech had not
one single shred of what might be called proof.

marc colten

---

From: [email-masked] (Steve Crocker)
Date: 21 Sep 1992 00:05:14 GMT

Anybody interested in more background about the references in LaRouche's
speech, be sure and see the article KKK: A Scottish Rite Project posted
here in alt.activism by John Covici. It is an edited version of a speech
given at the same conference by Tony Chaitkin, a LaRouche affiliated 
writer specializing in American History and author of the book "Treason
in America - From Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman". Should anyone be
tempted to raise the specter of anti-semitism based on Mr. Chaitkin's
references to various Jewish individuals and organizations, it is 
interesting to note that in his book he is described as "... the son
of Jacob Chaitkin, an attorney who spent the 1930's fighting Nazi
Germany's corporate and legal collaborators in the United States."
-Steve