July 25, 2006
Dear David,
Thank you for your letter of July 15th. You certainly confirm what I stated in my earlier letter to you. You write, “I appreciate your concern over my appearing to be inconsistent with my statements concerning the actions taken to relieve Vance Smith of his office in JBS, but I have to say that the various communications which I had received from everyone went a long way to causing a change in understanding as to what was happening.”
What was happening was that a leftist-style smear campaign, orchestrated over several months (Art Crino admitted being involved as early as April 2005), was attacking G. Vance Smith. In your letter, you admit that you went against your own good judgment and instead swallowed “the various communications which I had received from everyone….”
You state, “…I am not so pig-headed that I would continue to defend an incorrect position once I was proven wrong.” Well, Dave, you have been proven wrong over and over again, even though you will find some way of dismissing it — call it “pig-headed” if you like. I’ll illustrate with an example or two.
You make this interesting statement, “My exchange of letters and phone calls with Jack made me feel that Jack was not an anti-Semite. Jack has not been allowed to continue speaking in such a manner.” What in the world are you saying? If Jack was not speaking in an anti-Semitic tone, then why was he “not allowed to continue speaking in such a manner”?
You further state, “What Jack had said about the Jews did not imply that the Jewish religion is deadly.”
In a speech entitled “Conspiracy Against the Catholic Church” written and delivered by Jack on a number of occasions, including the videotaped program at the St. Benedict Center in 1997, Jack stated, “From the year 33, when Christ did found His Church onward the Jewish Religion was dead from that day forward, but not deadly. After the year 70, the Jewish religion became not only dead, but deadly.” Jack then went on to try and explain how the militant Jews behind the Masons were the real Conspiracy.
I have been told that you have a copy of the video excerpts with this clip on it. You must have seen, as well as heard, Jack making those statements. How can you still say that Jack did not say these things? Dave, you might be the only Jew alive who would excuse that comment away as not being anti-Semitic.
When the former Executive Committee learned of Jack’s conduct in 2000, we did censure Jack and put him on probation. In 2003, after Jack continued to speak at forums where these kinds of comments were being made by other speakers at the events, we finally took from him the title of “President” and started to phase him out of the JBS public eye.
Later, we were to find out that during the summer of 2005, Jack brazenly admitted that he was slated to speak at this same forum. Please don’t try to tell me that “Jack has not been allowed to continue speaking in such a manner.” I have the evidence that proves otherwise.
You ask, “... taking into consideration your statement that you are doing all you can to restore the JBS.... WHY HAVE YOU STOPPED YOUR ADS IN TNA? Do you wish to bankrupt JBS in order to be able to reclaim it?”
You should know that prior to our resignations from the Executive Committee the current leaders were well aware that our continued financial support was on the table. They clearly considered our support unimportant, and even expressed that opinion, when they chose to attack us and go ahead with their scheme to seize power.
Walt, Keith, and I are certainly eager to support the JBS under sound leadership. But don’t expect us to fund the folly of foolish, irresponsible men, who don’t even have the sense to anticipate the consequences of their actions.
After withdrawing our advertising support, these men you now favor rewarded our long-standing loyalty to JBS by breaking into RWU and stupidly ignoring the established corporate governance structure. Then they filed a lawsuit against us filled with vindictive nonsense. Their reckless, irresponsible actions have already cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Would you have wanted us to fund their attack against us, too? Give me a break!
I could continue to go point-by-point through your letter, but to do so would be unnecessarily redundant. I have already presented the truth to you in my letter of July 12, 2006.
David, do the right thing. Do what your instincts told you to do in the first place. Swallow your pride, admit you have been wrong, link arms with other Council members and insist the former Executive Committee be put back in place and let them, with the former Council members, deal with these problems. A new, neutered Executive Committee is no remedy if it is manned by Jack and Art cronies with no real authority to select the leader, serving only at the pleasure of Jack’s Board of Incorporators. It only supplies window dressing to appease the uninformed.
I do not suppose you will do any of that, but what you have done very clearly is to make a public statement that will resonate for years to come. You, as one entrusted to stand for right, have aligned yourself with those who will go down in history for destroying The John Birch Society.
This is the last I have to say to you on this matter.
Sincerely,
Wayne C. Rickert
|
|
