Talk:Dennis King

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search

Bob Burton has repeatedly edited this page, not to correct inaccuracies in the text, but to cover up truthful information that he evidently feels would be embarassing to Mr. King. He also seems to wish to hysterically deny that High Times magazine has anything to do with drugs.

Unfortunatly it seems most of this page DOES seem rather unsubstantiated, and lacking in citations, particuarly on some of the broader accusations. While I am no supporter of LaRouche, some of the statements sound a little TOO race baiting at times, particuarly near the end, with some comments that sound too vaguely anti-semetic (of course the irony of mentioning a Jewish family supporting someone LaRouche was in league with is not lost on me).


Of course High Times is pro-marijuana, that is obvious from the title of this well-known magazine. Who doesn't know it? But LaRouche supporters have kept trying to link High Times (and by implication King) to support for heroin, cocaine, meth, etc. through use of the phrase "magazine of recreational drug users" (just look up the definition of "recreational drug" on the web). And by falsely stating that King wrote an article entitled "They Want to Take Away Your Drugs" (by implication, they want to take away your heroin). It is curious that certain people keep harping on High Times and refuse to acknowledge the well-documented facts about LaRouche's relationship to mobsters and Manuel Noriega in the 1980s. Certain people claim this was not substantiated, but King's book is cited, which has extensive chapter notes for the listed chapters which anyone can check for themselves. When lawyers for Teamster leader Ron Carey were suing some ex-LaRouche Teamster officials in the 1990s, they took depositions that confirmed everything King was saying about LaRouche and midwest hoodlums. Even the people they were deposing praised and cited King's book. But to LaRouche apologists anything written by King (or Chip Berlet or any other nonapologist) and even the sources cited by them are not credible. Even Dan Moldea, arguably the country's most eminent crime reporter, and the source of much of King's background material on LaRouche's hoodlum allies, becomes noncredible. The LaRouche apologists create a closed loop in which it's impossible to assert anything unless it's based on sources LaRouche approves of. (In the jargon of the anti-cult movement, this is called "bounded choice.")As to the statement about the Tisch family, how is this anti-Semitic? Should a wealthy Jewish family be allowed to fund someone like LaRouche--for whatever short-term or naive reason--without being held accountable? Is the Voice anti-Semitic for having pointed it out? In writing his book, King and his researcher Kalev Pehme made at least a half dozen calls to the foundation in question, which refused to give any answer whatsoever. Perhaps some of the foundation money in 1981 was used in LaRouche's intense harassment campaign against King; for instance, to pay KKK grand dragon Roy Frankhauser to follow him around? What would Bob Tisch have cared? He was safe in his well guarded home from the likes of LaRouche and Frankhouser. And his family continues to remain safe because people like King and Chip Berlet and Dan Levitas and Leonard Zeskin (anti-extremist researchers and activists whom LaRouche calls "gutter agents")have fought in the trenches to stop the attempts of hate groups to gain a major foothold in our society.

Question: How is it "race baiting" to criticize Barnes & Noble for selling "The Turner Diaries," which is arguably the most racist (AND anti-Semitic) tract ever written in the United States???

The problem remains however that few of the statements made in the article here are referenced. If there are online references they should be added or if they can only be cited to books they too should be added. (I have a copy of Kings book so can check is necessary).

The reason we need references is twofold - so readers can be reassured that statements in articles here have some basis in fact and secondly so that those who want more detail can go back to the primary or secondary sources. Without references readers can quite reasonably wonder whether they should take the article at face value. --Bob Burton 14:04, 30 Dec 2004 (EST)

Still no references on the bulk of the claims in this article. I'm inclined to reduce this article to stub and shift the bulk of the text over here to the talk page unless some references are added for the key points in the next day or so.--Bob Burton 20:25, 11 Apr 2005 (EDT)

References requested by Bob Burton have now been added.--06 June 2005

Need to Update Links

I have updated the web address contacts for Dennis King's site but there are other links in SW to other specific articles. In an email King wrote "If you encounter links on google or elsewhere to my old site, simply replace "dennisking" with "lyndonlarouche" in the address bar; the file names to the right of the domain name have not changed". I don't have time to do this at the moment but will post a note to the community portal. --Bob Burton 20:35, 23 September 2007 (EDT)

Edit note

I have relocated this unreferenced material from the article page pending a reference.--Bob Burton 23:42, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Rudolph was acquitted of all charges upon return to Germany.