On Thu, 29 Jan 1998, Daniel Pearlman wrote: > When you say that Robertson's paraphrase of Mullins' and > Webster's rot is a "devastating analysis," I'm not sure > what you mean. Could you clarify? ==Dan P Oops -- pronoun slippage. "It" was supposed to refer to Lind, not Robertson. My point was that Lind clearly demonstrates that Robertson was simply tarting up the same old anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Bill Freind > > At 11:23 AM 1/29/98 -0800, you wrote: > >A few days ago, someone (sorry, forgot who) mentioned Michael Lind's book > >_Up from Conservatism_, which suggests Pound financed some of Mullins' > >work. I was surprised it wasn't mentioned *why* Lind talks about Mullins. > > > >Briefly, Lind is showing the sources for televangelist and erstwhile > >presidential candidate Pat Robertson's book _The New World Order_. > >Robertson used *extremely* close paraphrases of both Mullins and Webster > >to develop theory of a global conspiracy of Masons and bankers that goes > >back to the 18th Century and financed the French and Russian Revolutions, > >both world wars and the cold wars. > > > >About the only substantial change Robertson makes to his sources is > >switching "Jewish bankers" to "European bankers." It's an > >interesting and devastating analysis which he first presented in the NY > >Review of Books a few years back. > > > >_New World Order_ was a bestseller, by the way. Some conspiracy theories > >never go out of style. > > > >Bill Freind > > > Dan Pearlman > Department of English > University of Rhode Island > Kingston, RI 02881 > > [Latest book: novel, BLACK FLAMES, White Pine Press, 1997] > > Tel.: (home) 401 453-3027 > (office) 401 874-4659 > Fax: 401 874-2580 > Internet: [log in to unmask] >