Talk:Anti-Defamation League

LaRouche

Lyndon LaRouche. OMG, here we go again. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 12:52, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Was he wrong, though? —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 12:58, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

For one, LaRouche was the real American conservative the whole time, representing the continuation of Hamiltonian economics in contrast to the Anglo-Masonic scam of "laissez-faire" "free-market capitalist" fascistic financial enslavement. Modern "conservatives" are economically illiterate, not realizing that the rabidly pro-slavery Jacksonian Democrats were laissez-faire because zero government regulation meant no obstacle stopping their (economic) slave trade. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:01, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Also, EIR was proven right about neo-Nazi "James Anderson" being none other than ADL agent provocateur Jimmy Rosenberg. Jeffrey Kaplan confirmed this in "The Cultic Milieu." —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:03, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

(ec) larouchpub and the Schiller Institute (and anybody associated with it) are virtually universally blacklisted by Big Tech. It's a long story. You'll get CP backlisted if you start linking to the stuff, probably quicker than RT or the Kremlin. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:04, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Oh well, Conservapedia is dead anyways. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:04, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Well, heads up. It's got to come out sooner or later.

Most "Larouche editors" have gone underground (Wikipedia, which is the entity that developed community standards for content and behavior copied and tweeked by all other major social media platforms, developed its standards for blocking and censorship based on what they collectively termed, "larouche editors". Once you get branded that, your goose is cooked. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:12, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

it reminds the "palestine" organized anti-Israel club at Wikipedia.Telling (talk)

What years was that? I was sort of peripherally aware of it in 2005 but never knew its informal name.

In those days the Church of Scientology and LaRouche organization were the main targets for censorship. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:38, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Fine. The record nonetheless stands that the LaRouchies are factually vindicated. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:17, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

That's not a debate I'm going to get into now. My point is, if the Executive Intelligence Review or larouchepubs have any factual evidence or information, it should be corroborated and available by other reputable publishers not directly linked to the LaRouche organization (even if it it's the same author). That's what I mean by going underground, and those are the sources that should be linked to (even if the material is somewhat speculative).

Right now, two reporters and commentators on the Donbas war, Eva K. Bartlett and Col Richard Black, are suffering extreme censorship due to their associations with the Schiller Institute. If anything they say is factual or true, it should be available from other online publishers. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:27, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

[EC] That is a somewhat fair point—I'm having trouble finding outside sources (as in outside the EIR/NCLC circle) corroborating, for instance, the LaRouche claim that Judah Benjamin was a founder of the Ku Klux Klan. The sources are probably found in extensive archival documents difficult to be accessed publicly. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:32, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

What would motivated Larouche even to say that?Telling (talk) 13:39, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

[EC] Long story short, the idea is that Judah Benjamin, the Kabbalist A. E. Frankland, and B'nai B'rith were tied to the violently pro-secessionist Knights of the Golden Circle (KGC), the antebellum precursor of the KKK, which was apparently funded by the British and Rothschilds. RobSmith says I cannot link to EIR/Schiller here, but Chaitkin explains it in his EIR entry "Cabalism, slavery, and the B'nai B'rith: the case of A.E. Frankland." —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:42, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Oh boy. How twisted of a "theory" in how to blame Da-jooz lesson... was jusah evrn religious ? lolTelling (talk) 13:54, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Well, notwithstanding whether Judah P. Benjamin is listed "officially" as religious, the implied point is that the Benjamin/Frankland goons were part of the B'nai B'rith/Kabbalist-Masonic circle operating in parallel with Scottish Rite Masonry to prop up the British agenda of driving a regional wedge in the United States. Also, Chaitkin explicitly distinguishes between Kabbalism with Mosaic Judaism, pointing out that the "Kabbalistic researcher" A. E. Frankland despised Old Testament values, so it's really a defense of true Judaism against apostate perversions. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:57, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Bhathorn may be out best source on Judah Benjamin. I just added something the other day that said he worked for British intelligence. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:48, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Speaking of British intelligence, just a few days ago marked the 143th anniversary of Garfield being shot by Guiteau. There's a long story with that involving the Frelinghuysen–Belmont collusion, as a Wall Street pet scheme, to undermine James G. Blaine's Pan-American foreign policy that posed a threat to British empiricist aims in especially Peru. EIR lists August Belmont (father of Perry Belmont, who led the congressional witchhunt against Blaine that was endorsed by Frederick T. Frelinghuysen, whose son George G., if I recall correctly, was a law firm partner of Perry) as a Rothschild agent on behalf of the British, which makes sense, considering the Democratic Party back then were Anglophilic supporters of "free trade" policy that singularly benefited the imperialist conquests of the British Empire at the economic level. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 14:03, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Honsetly, I haven't delved into the substance of the argument in this article.

I will vouch for one thing, I know some EIR material related to Bill Barr and Iran Contra is true; and I can't find online corroboration to it anywhere. (But stuff going back to the 1930s is probably based on Larouche, now dead, own personal research). RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 13:48, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

I believe Anton Chaitkin contributed to much of the history content. As I said in the article, his father was the legal counsel for the AJCongress's boycott against Nazi Germany, so he's clearly familiar firsthand with the B'nai B'rith/AJC/ADL cabal's pro-Hitlerite background. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 13:54, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Was jusah even religious in practice ? And who said he studied and promoted Kaballah?Telling (talk)

I don't know if Benjamin in particular was Kabbalistic, but A. E. Frankland definitely was. Chaitkin brilliantly explains it in this lecture. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 14:06, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Okay, so it's a policy question in 1937-38, "How do we deal with Hitler?"

How many people knew or believed the German head of state and German government were going to go on a murderous rampage?

Do economic sanctions work? Are economic sanctions "appeasement"? Is opposing economic sanctions being pro-war or anti-war? If John McCain was so convinced of the righteousness of his cause to remove Putin in 2014, why didn't he rally the American people to war then to defend "democracy", freedom, and gay rights rather than impose Russian sanctions via the Magnitsky Act? Seems a little cowardly, when you know you're gonna lose.

My point is, it's historical revisionism when we know the end of the story, and pass over a simple, but important policy discussion, "Do sanctions work?" And "What's the point of imposing sanctions when you know in advance they do not work?" (Look at Germany right now). RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 14:10, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

According to Chaitkin, the B'nai B'rith/AJC/ADL opposition to the anti-Nazi boycott is entirely attributable to their operations serving as intentionally pro-Hitlerite Anglo-Masonic front organizations, not as if they were sincerely concerned with effectiveness. The ADL/AJC "liberal" apparatus is completely farcical when you consider that they refused to oppose the internment of Japanese Americans and in the post-WWII era refused to defend American Jews targeted by the Smith Act. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 14:15, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Okey, fair response. Now, in context for contemporary audiences, does the term "pro-Hitler" have a different meaning pre-1938 and post-1945?

You know, there was a diplomatic boycott of Hitler, as well. Hitler was never invited to Paris. So maybe it pee-ed him off so much being ostracized he invited himself to tour Paris in the spring of 1940. Nowadays they have regular, routine summits of heads of state and government (G-7, etc) cause these brilliant geniuses learned their lesson the hard way.

Point is, there were voices saying we must find some way of dealing with Hitler & Germany, Charles Lindbergh for example, short of war and short of sanctions, by people who were not pro-genocide. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 14:37, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

The point I'm trying to get at is simple: these so-called "mainstream Jewish advocacy groups" are Anglo-Masonic propagators of an outside agenda with no real concern for Jewry. The AJCongress/NSANL's economic boycott against Nazi Germany was sabotaged from two fronts: the right-wing B'nai B'rith/ADL/AJC pro-Hitlerite opposition from the U.S., and the left-wing Labour/WZO's infamous Haavara (Transfer) Agreement facilitating a massive export of Nazi goods into Palestine that boosted the Third Reich's economic status. IOWs, the Zionists and various "Jewish advocacy groups" were clearly part of a Hitlerite agenda to make sure the Nazis ascended to power. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 18:25, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Anyways, you gotta pardon me for the next 2-3 hours we'll be getting French election results in the Macron/LePen smackdown and first impressions set the tone of the narrative. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 14:45, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Very complicated if to boycott to enrage Nazis more or If this is the right step. From that to "pro Hitler", is apples and oranges.

__

Now to French elections. Watch the hype fear at MSM over la pen... it's actually about safety. As the Fench fear crime.Telling (talk) 15:14, July 7, 2024 (EDT) Telling (talk) 15:14, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

Alright, I'm going to excise the LaRouche info and place it here for further discussion, after which I may add a few comments.

==Sabotaging the AJCongress's anti-Nazi boycott on behalf of Anglo-Hitlerites, 1933–38==

The Anti-Defamation League, in the years preceding World War II, was aligned with the reactionary efforts by its parent organization B'nai B'rith—as well as the American Jewish Committee—to undermine the economic boycott against Nazi Germany organized by the American Jewish Congress and the Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League. According to Jewish historian Anton Chaitkin, whose father worked as the legal counsel to the AJCongress:

“

The AJC and B'nai B'rith/ADL worked to block the boycott against Nazi Germany led by the non-British controlled American Jewish Congress. For years, the Congress movement, led by Rabbi Stephen Wise and Nahum Goldmann, fought to overcome the sabotage of the British-sponsored AJC-B'nai B'rith combination. Only when Britain did an about-face in 1937-39 and began to officially oppose Hitler, did Britain's American Jewish faction 'support the boycott.'

”

On March 31, 1933, a joint statement was issued by B'nai B'rith and the AJC, "that no American boycott against Germany be encouraged."

Two brief comments from someone who's hardly knowledgeable:

1. LaRouche being a "conservative" I always thought was criticism aimed at him from his enemies in the Democrat party; LaRouche was using the FDR & New Deal rhetoric about "economic Royalists" in the 1980 presidential election, leaving most conservatives wondering what the hell he was talking about;
2. as to the March 31 1933 joint statement: perhaps they didn't want to encourage a boycott against Hitler's Germany cause that would only add fuel to Nazi propaganda. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 00:02, July 13, 2024 (EDT)

More on "economic Royalists":

• https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/economic-royalists (looks like a Wiki mirror)

"President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his speech accepting the Democratic nomination for a second term, delivered at Philadelphia on 27 June 1936, said, "The economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power." He was referring to persons prominent in finance and industry who in general opposed his tendency to centralize the government and to put it into competition with private enterprise."

• Smash the ‘Economic Royalists’ at Last - LaRouchePUB editorial

"Wall Street, the “economic royalists,” as FDR understood, is killing us."

Comment: Doesn't sound much like a "real American conservative". Maybe it's debatable. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 00:23, July 13, 2024 (EDT)

LaRouche was defending the classical-conservative Hamiltonian economic tradition, which the modern right-wing apparatus of "laissez-faire" of course is going to dub "socialistic." —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 21:43, July 13, 2024 (EDT)