Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Postby chiggerbit » Sun Sep 06, 2009 6:02 pm ... s_bill.htm

Support Conyers' Health-Care Reform!
Printer-friendly versionSend to friend

Support Conyers' Health-Care Reform!

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

April 21, 2006

I formally endorse the following draft billas my policy.

The actual or virtual obliteration of pre-existing, private pension and related contractual agreements, demonstrates the folly of inducing large numbers of our citizens to place their trust, and the hope of their families' future, in the substitution of the dubious protection of private pension and health-care systems for public measures as durably permanent as our constitutional republic itself.

The extraction of financier profits in layer upon layer of the private health-care and pension systems, and the degree of reckless mismanagement shown by the successive waves of actual, and virtual bankruptcy, and mismanagement of more and more of the privately constructed programs, should be taken as a lesson which, in the light of recent experience, no prudent heads of family households could conceivably overlook.

The most essential, mandatory quality of any pension or health-care system, is that the protection it promises must be delivered in a full and promptly timely way when the time for the redemption of that promise has arrived.
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Sun Sep 06, 2009 7:27 pm

Sorry, but I have to post the wiki article on LaRouche before it changes:

(born September 8, 1922) is an American self-styled economist, political activist, and the founder of several political organizations known collectively as the LaRouche movement.[1] He has been a perennial candidate for President of the United States, having run in eight elections since 1976, once as a U.S. Labor Party candidate and seven times as a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination. He is the founder and contributing editor of the Executive Intelligence Review News Service,[2] and has written prolifically on economic, scientific, and political topics, as well as on history, philosophy, and psychoanalysis.

He was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment in 1988 for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and tax code violations, but continued his political activities from behind bars until his release in 1994 on parole. His appelate attorney, Ramsey Clark, a former U.S. Attorney General, argued that the case represented an unprecedented abuse of power by the U.S. government in an effort to destroy the LaRouche organizations.[3] LaRouche and his defenders believe the prosecution was a politically motivated conspiracy involving government officials and a mass-media brainwashing campaign.[4]

LaRouche provokes sharply contrasting views. Antony Lerman writes that his ideology is so extreme and bizarre that it is difficult to categorize.[5] His supporters see him as the greatest living economist, and a political leader in the tradition of Roosevelt and Martin Luther King, while critics regard him as a cult leader, conspiracy theorist, fascist, and antisemite.[6] Norman Bailey, formerly with the National Security Council, described LaRouche's staff in 1984 as one of the best private intelligence services in the world, while the Heritage Foundation has said he leads what is possibly one of the strangest political groups in American history.[7]Contents [hide]
1 Early life
1.1 1922–1940: School, alienation, philosophy
1.2 1941: Expulsion from the Quakers
1.3 1942: University and the army
1.4 1948–1954: Socialist Workers Party, and first marriage
2 1960s
2.1 1960–1965: LaRouche and Trotskyism, divorce
2.2 1967–1969: Formation of the National Caucus of Labor Committees
3 1970s
3.1 1971–1972: New Solidarity, U.S. Labor Party
3.2 1973: "Operation Mop-Up"
3.3 1974: Founding of Executive Intelligence Review; allegations of brainwashing
3.4 1974–1977: Presidential campaign and second marriage
3.5 1979: Allegations that the U.S. Labor Party was a cult
3.6 Mid-1970s: Allegations of fascism, overt and "coded" anti-Semitism
4 1980s
4.1 "October Surprise" allegations
4.2 1982: Dispute with U.S. News and World Report
4.3 Strategic Defense Initiative
4.4 Promotion of space colonization
4.5 1984: Founding of Schiller Institute; reported meetings with NSA
4.6 Other events in the 1980s
4.7 1984–1986: Lawsuit against NBC
4.8 1986: AIDS, opposition to gay rights, and electoral success
4.9 1988: Criminal conviction
5 1990s: Imprisonment, campaigning
5.1 1989–1994: Imprisonment
5.2 1994: Release from prison
6 2000s
6.1 2000: Founding of the Worldwide LaRouche Youth Movement
6.2 2003: Death of Jeremiah Duggan
6.3 2004–2005: Electoral and lobbying activities
6.4 2005–2009: Chinese and Russian press coverage
6.5 2007: Death of Kenneth Kronberg
6.6 2007–2009: LaRouche on the financial crisis
6.7 2009: LaRouche on Obama
7 Books by LaRouche
8 Notes
9 References
9.1 General
9.2 LaRouche publications
10 Further reading

Early lifeLaRouche movement

Lyndon LaRouche
Views of Lyndon LaRouche
LaRouche criminal trials
U.S. Presidential campaigns

Citizens Electoral Council
European Workers Party
Executive Intelligence Review
LaRouche Youth Movement
Schiller Institute

Michael Billington
Anton Chaitkin
Jacques Cheminade
Jeremiah Duggan
Janice Hart
Kenneth Kronberg
Amelia Boynton Robinson
Webster Tarpley

California Proposition 64
North American Labour Party
Party for the
Commonwealth of Canada
U.S. Labor Party
This box: view • talk • edit

1922–1940: School, alienation, philosophy

LaRouche was born in Rochester, New Hampshire, the eldest of three children, to Lyndon H. LaRouche, Sr. (June 1, 1896–December 1983)[8] and Jessie Lenore Weir (November 12, 1893–August 1978).[9] His father was the son of a French-Canadian immigrant from Quebec, and his mother a descendant of Elder Brewster from the Mayflower and other prominent Yankee families.“ I survived socially by making chiefly Descartes, Leibniz, and Kant my principal peers, looking at myself, my thoughts, my commitments to practice in terms of a kind of collectivity of them constructed in my own mind.[10] ”

He attended the School Street elementary school until 1936, when the family moved to Lynn, Massachusetts, after his father resigned from his job as a shoe salesman at the United Shoe Machinery Corporation in Rochester to set up his own business. He described his childhood as that of "an egregious child, I wouldn't say an ugly duckling but a nasty duckling."[11] According to his 1979 autobiography, The Power of Reason, he began to read at "about age five" and was called "Big Head" by the other children at school.[12] He was told by his parents, both of them Quakers (his father had converted from Roman Catholicism to marry his mother), that under no circumstances could he fight with other children even in self-defense.[13] This advice led to "years of hell" for him from bullies at school.[13] As a result, he spent much of his time alone, taking long walks through the woods[14] and identifying in his mind with great philosophers. In contrast, he joked, the childhood peers from whom he had felt so alienated had been "unwitting followers of David Hume."[10]

He elaborated on his early intellectual development in a second autobiography (1987) in which he reports that, between the ages of twelve and fourteen, he read philosophy extensively, embracing the ideas of Leibniz and rejecting those of Hume, Bacon, Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley, Rousseau, and Kant.[15] He graduated from Lynn English High School in 1940.[16]

1941: Expulsion from the Quakers

By 1940, the Lynn Monthly Meeting of Friends (Quaker) was discussing censuring LaRouche for spreading libelous material and gossip about other members, and in 1941, the Lynn Meeting agreed to expel him: "We believe Lyndon H. LaRouche [Jr.] is guilty of stirring up discord in this meeting; that he is responsible for circulating material injurious to the reputation of valued Christian workers; and believe that his conduct brings the Christian religion into public disrepute. We recommend the appointment of a committee to deal with him and to endeavor to reclaim him in a spirit of Christian love." His family resigned in sympathy. LaRouche describes the dispute as a quarrel about financial and theological issues.

His parents later formed and led their own congregation in Boston, the Village Street Monthly Meeting, which met from 1964 to 1979, and in which LaRouche was an active member.[17] According to New England Quaker documents, "This was ostensibly as a Quaker meeting, though its relations with New England Yearly Meeting seem to have been decidedly unfriendly. They were never listed in the Yearly Meeting minutes, as most independent meetings were. Lyndon LaRouche seems to have been a key member."[18]

1942: University and the army

LaRouche enrolled at Northeastern University, but left in 1942 after receiving poor grades.[citation needed] As a Quaker, he was at first a conscientious objector during World War II, joining a Civilian Public Service camp, where Dennis King, author of Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism, writes that he "promptly joined a small faction at odds with the administrators."[19] In 1944, he decided instead to join the United States Army as a non-combatant, serving in India and Burma with medical units and ending the war as an ordnance clerk. LaRouche describes his decision to serve as one of the most important in his life.[20] While in India, he developed an interest in and sympathy for the Indian Independence movement. He reports in his autobiography that many GIs feared that they would be asked to support British forces in actions against Indian independence forces, a prospect that he says "was revolting to most of us."[21]

While still in the CO camp, LaRouche had begun discussing Marxism with fellow camp inmates and soon became a Marxist. While traveling home from India on the troopship SS General Bradley in 1946, he met Don Merrill, a fellow soldier, who was also from Lynn. Merrill won LaRouche over to Trotskyism on the journey home. Back in the U.S., LaRouche attempted to resume his education at Northeastern, intending to major in physics, but left again because of what he called academic "philistinism."[22]

1948–1954: Socialist Workers Party, and first marriage

In 1948, LaRouche returned to Lynn after dropping out of college and began attending meetings of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP)'s Lynn branch. He joined the party the next year, adopting the pseudonym Lyn Marcus for his political work.[23] He found work as a management consultant in New York City, advising companies on how to use computers to maximise efficiency and speed up production. In 1954, he married fellow SWP member Janice Neuberger. Their son, Daniel, was born in 1956.


1960–1965: LaRouche and Trotskyism, divorce

By 1961, the LaRouches were living in a large apartment on Central Park West. His activity in the internal life of the SWP was minimal due to his preoccupation with his career. In 1964, while still in the SWP, he became associated with a faction called the Revolutionary Tendency, which had been expelled from the SWP and was under the influence of the British Trotskyist leader Gerry Healy, leader of the British Socialist Labour League.[24] For six months, he worked closely with American Healyite leader Tim Wohlforth, who later wrote:

LaRouche had a gargantuan ego. Convinced he was a genius, he combined his strong conviction in his own abilities with an arrogance expressed in the cadences of upper-class New England. He assumed that the comment in the Communist Manifesto that "a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class..." was written specifically for him. And he believed that the working class were lucky to obtain his services. LaRouche possessed a marvelous ability to place any world happening in a larger context, which seemed to give the event additional meaning, but his thinking was schematic, lacking factual detail and depth. It was contradictory. His explanations were a bit too pat, and his mind worked so quickly that I always suspected his bravado covered over superficiality. He had an answer for everything. Sessions with him reminded me of a parlor game: present a problem, no matter how petty, and without so much as blinking his eye, LaRouche would dream up the solution.[25]

He remained in the SWP until his expulsion in 1965. He maintains that he was soon disillusioned with Marxism, dropped out of the SWP in the mid-1950s, and resumed his activism only at the prompting of the FBI citing national security concerns. In an interview on the Pacifica Radio network, LaRouche said that he returned to the SWP because he believed that only the Left was likely to combat what he called the "utopian" danger coming from the Right, typified by the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Vietnam War.[26] His ex-wife and other SWP members from that time dispute this.[27] During these years, LaRouche developed an interest in economics, cybernetics, psychoanalysis, business management, and other subjects. He and his wife separated in 1963 and were subsequently divorced.

In 1965, LaRouche left Wohlforth's group and joined the Spartacist League, which had split from Wohlforth. He left after a few months and wrote a letter to the SWP declaring that all factions and sections of the Trotskyist Fourth International were dead and announcing that he and his new partner, Carol Larrabee (also known as Carol Schnitzer), were going to build the Fifth International.[28] In 1966, the couple joined the Committee for Independent Political Action (CIPA), a New Left/Old Left coalition that was running independent anti-war candidates in New York City elections, and formed a branch in Manhattan's West Village.

1967–1969: Formation of the National Caucus of Labor Committees

He began teaching classes at New York City's Free School on dialectical materialism,[citation needed] and attracted around him a group of undergraduates and graduate students from Columbia University and the City College of New York, several of whom were involved with the Maoist Progressive Labor Party (PLP), itself prominent in the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In the 1988 version of his autobiography, he writes that he was not really a Marxist when he gave his lectures at the Free School, but that he used his familiarity with Marxism to win students away from the New Left counterculture, though he wrote in 1974 that he had been a Marxist since 1945.[29] However, what LaRouche began to write and teach in the late 1960s differed from orthodox Marxism, supplementing the doctrine of class struggle with a strong emphasis on the dangers of a supposedly parasitical finance capital as opposed to industrial capital.[citation needed] He would continue with this latter emphasis in the following decade while abandoning, for the most part, the use of Marxist jargon.

LaRouche's followers were heavily involved in the 1968 student strike and occupation of Columbia University, and attempted to win control of the university's PLP and SDS branches by putting forward a political program linking student struggles with those of Harlem residents, transit workers, and the tenant movement.[30] Once his following was large enough, LaRouche created his own "tendency" or faction within the Columbia SDS. There were other factions: the "action faction," which became the Weather Underground, and the "praxis axis," which saw students as the vanguard of the revolution.[31] LaRouche called his faction the "SDS Labor Committee," which became influential within SDS chapters in Philadelphia. He criticized the SDS and the New Left in general, for allowing itself to be influenced by the counterculture, which he abhorred, and for not emphasizing work with trade unionists and tenants. Tim Wohlforth attended one of LaRouche's meetings in New York during this period:

Twenty to 30 students would gather in a large apartment and sit on the floor surrounding LaRouche, who now sported a very shaggy beard. The meeting would sometimes go on as long as seven hours. It was difficult to tell where discussions of tactics left off and educational presentation began. Encouraging the students, LaRouche gave them esoteric assignments, such as searching through the writings of Georges Sorel to discover Rudd's anarchistic origins, or studying Rosa Luxemburg's The Accumulation of Capital. Since SDS was strong on spirit and action but rather bereft of theory, the students appeared to thoroughly enjoy this work.[25]

LaRouche's faction was expelled from the SDS in 1969 for supporting the New York City teachers' strike, and so the SDS Labor Committee became the National Caucus of Labor Committees (NCLC), while continuing to function in some SDS chapters outside New York. Despite its name, it had no significant connection with the labor movement and viewed intellectuals as the revolutionary vanguard. According to Dennis King, NCLC's internal life became highly regimented over the next few years. Members gave up their jobs and private lives and became entirely devoted to the group and its leader. The movement developed an internal discipline technique, "ego stripping", intended to reinforce conformity and loyalty to LaRouche.[32][33]

According to LaRouche's autobiography, it was at this point, in 1969, that violent altercations began between his members and New Left groups. He writes that Mark Rudd's faction began attacking LaRouche's faction at Columbia University. "Other organized physical attacks against my friends would follow, inside the United States and abroad. Communist Party goon-squad attacks began in Chicago, in summer 1972, and continued sporadically up to the concerted assault launched during March 1973. During 1972, there was also a goon-attack on associates of mine by the SWP."[34]


1971–1972: New Solidarity, U.S. Labor Party

In 1971, LaRouche set up the New Solidarity International Press Service (NSIPS) as a wire service for his publications,[citation needed] and in 1972, he founded the U.S. Labor Party as the political arm of the NCLC.[35] He also co-founded the Fusion Energy Foundation.<--which is?-->

1973: "Operation Mop-Up"

A 1973 internal FBI letter.

Antony Lerman writes that, from 1973, LaRouche began to abandon Marxism and, with little warning, adopted far-right, even neo-Nazi, ideas, a process accompanied by a campaign of violence against his opponents on the left. The violence was accompanied by the development of conspiracy theories and paranoia about his personal safety, often involving alleged attempts to assassinate him.[5]

In 1972, in what LaRouche called "Operation Mop-Up," NCLC members physically attacked meetings of the Communist Party and later of the SWP, and other groups who were classed by LaRouche as "left-protofascists." They attacked Communist Party members on the streets, using nunchaku sticks as weapons.[36] The NCLC argued that they were acting in self-defense, but King writes that their rhetoric suggested otherwise. "From here on in", LaRouche said at a meeting on the east coast, "the CP cannot hold a meeting on the East Coast... We'll mop them up in two months."[37] A New Solidarity editorial said: "We must dispose of this stinking corpse to ensure that it cannot act as a host for maggots and other parasites... Our job is to pulverize the Communist Party."[38] According to King, LaRouche halted the operation after police in New York City, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and Boston arrested several of his followers on assault charges, and after the Communist Party, the SWP, and other leftist groups formed joint defense teams and began to win battles against the Mop-Up squads.[39]

LaRouche wrote in 2000 that the FBI was using the Communist Party U.S.A. to bring about his "personal 'elimination'."[40] He cited a 1973 document obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 1992, which noted that the Communist Party USA was conducting a background investigation "for the purpose of ultimately eliminating" LaRouche and the NCLC as a threat to the CPUSA, and suggested helping that the FBI help them anonymously. LaRouche alleges that this was part of COINTELPRO, a series of covert, and often illegal, FBI projects aimed at investigating and disrupting dissident political organizations within the United States.[41]

1974: Founding of Executive Intelligence Review; allegations of brainwashing
Further information: Executive Intelligence Review

LaRouche founded the weekly newsmagazine, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) in 1974. EIR and the New Solidarity International Press Service were among several publications or wire services LaRouche came to run; others are The New Federalist; 21st Century Science and Technology; Nouvelle Solidarité in France; Neue Solidarität, published by Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität, a LaRouche group in Germany; and Fidelio, the quarterly magazine of the Schiller Institute.

John Rausch writes that EIR was part of LaRouche's plan in the 1970s to form a global intelligence network. He organized the network as if it consisted of news services and magazines, which allowed the LaRouche movement to gain access to government officials and others under press cover. EIR came to be known for its conspiracy theories. It has published inter alia that Queen Elizabeth II is the head of an international drug-smuggling cartel, and that the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 was the first strike in a British attempt to take over the United States.[42]

Also in 1974, LaRouche sued the City of New York, saying that CIA and British spies had brainwashed his associates into attempting to kill him in a Manchurian Candidate–style assassination.[32][43]The LaRouche group announced at a national conference that the plot involved the CIA and KGB and that the brainwashed would-be assassin was Christopher (Chris) White, a 26-year-old British national who had married LaRouche's ex-girlfriend, Carol Schnitzer, before moving with her to London to organize a British branch of the NCLC.[44][45] LaRouche said that White had been tortured and brainwashed in a London basement by the CIA and British intelligence, who had programmed him to kill his wife upon the utterance of a trigger word, then to finger LaRouche for assassination by Cuban exile frogmen.

LaRouche mobilized the entire NCLC. They passed out fliers in New York and other cities, describing White's alleged torture in lurid detail. The NCLC national office issued more than forty press releases in a two-week period. LaRouche and the Whites filed a complaint with the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and launched a lawsuit against the CIA.[46]

1974–1977: Presidential campaign and second marriage
Further information: Lyndon LaRouche U.S. Presidential campaigns

LaRouche married Helga Zepp in 1977; Zepp-LaRouche pictured here in 2006

According to the Los Angeles Times, LaRouche said he met with representatives of the Soviet Union at the United Nations in 1974 and 1975 in order to discuss attacks by the Communist Party USA on the NCLC, and to propose that the CPUSA be merged into the NCLC. He denied receiving assistance from the Soviets.[47] He visited Baghdad in 1975, during which he made a presentation to the Baath Party conference about what he called his "Oasis Plan", a proposal for Arab-Israeli peace based on the construction of massive water projects. In the same year, New Solidarity began running articles favorable to Iraq and extensively quoting Saddam Hussein, at that time Iraq's vice-president.

In 1976, he ran for President of the United States as a U.S. Labor Party candidate, polling 40,043 votes (0.05 percent). The campaign was the first to broadcast a paid half-hour television address, which gave LaRouche the opportunity to air his views before a national audience, something that became a regular feature of his later campaigns. There were protests about the television address: Stephen Rosenfeld wrote in The Washington Post that, "A duplicitous violence-prone group with fascistic proclivities should not be presented to the public unless there is reason to present it in those terms."[48]

A year later, in 1977, LaRouche married for the second time. His new wife, Helga Zepp, was a leading activist in the German branch of his organization. She went on to work closely with LaRouche for the rest of his career, and founded a branch of his movement, the Schiller Institute in Wiesbaden, Germany in 1984.

1979: Allegations that the U.S. Labor Party was a cult

In 1979, a two-part article by Howard Blum and Paul Montgomery appeared in the New York Times that accused LaRouche of running a cult.[49] Blum wrote that LaRouche had turned the U.S. Labor Party—the political arm of the NCLC, with 1,000 members listed in 37 offices in North America, and 26 in Europe and Latin America—into an extreme-right, anti-Semitic organization, despite the presence of Jewish members. The Times alleged that members had taken courses in how to use knives and rifles, and had produced reports for South Africa on anti-apartheid groups in the United States. A farm in upstate New York was allegedly being used for guerilla training, attended by LaRouche movement members from Germany and Mexico. Several members also underwent a six-day anti-terrorist training course, at a cost of $200 per person per day, at a camp in Powder Springs, Georgia, run by Mitchell L. Werbell, an international arms dealer, who had served as an advisor to several Latin American dictators and who said he was connected to the CIA.[50]

The Times reported that U.S. Labor Party members were playing a dominant role in a number of companies in Manhattan: Computron Technologies Corporation, which included Mobil Oil and Citibank among its clients; World Composition Services, which the Times wrote had one of the most advanced typesetting complexes in the city and had the Ford Foundation among its clients; and PMR Associates, a printing shop that produced the party's publications and some high school newspapers.[50]

Blum wrote that, from 1976 onwards, party members were transmitting intelligence reports on left-wing members to the FBI and local police. In 1977, he wrote, commercial reports on U.S. anti-apartheid groups were prepared by LaRouche members for the South African government, student dissidents were reported to the Shah of Iran's Savak secret police, and the anti-nuclear movement was investigated on behalf of power companies. The Times also reported that LaRouche was telling his membership several times a year that he was being targeted for assassination, including by the Queen, "big-time Zionist mobsters," the Council on Foreign Relations, the Justice Department, and the Mossad.[50]

Blum also wrote that U.S. Labor Party members were exchanging almost daily information with Roy Frankhouser, who called himself the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan in Pennsylvania, and who had been accused of being a member of the American Nazi Party. Frankhouser had been convicted in 1975 of conspiring to sell half a ton of dynamite and had marched on Fifth Avenue in New York wearing a Gestapo uniform. LaRouche reportedly called Frankhouser a "high intelligence source,"[50] though he later denied this, saying that in fact he had a low opinion of Frankhouser.

Mid-1970s: Allegations of fascism, overt and "coded" anti-Semitism

From the mid-1970s onwards, it was repeatedly alleged that LaRouche and his movement had fascist tendencies.For example, in 1976, Julian Bond called the U.S. Labor Party a group of "leftwing fascists."[51][45][52] LaRouche has argued strongly against fascism, and religious or racial hatred. He wrote in 2006, "Religious and racial hatred, such as anti-Semitism, or hatred against Islam, or, hatred of Christians, is, on record of known history, the most evil expression of criminality to be seen on the planet today."[53] His publications say that descriptions of him as a neo-fascist or anti-Semite stem from "the drug lobby or the Soviet operation—which is sometimes the same thing."[54] Tim Wohlforth and Dennis Tourish write:

The parallel between LaRouche's thinking and that of the classical fascist model is striking. LaRouche, like Mussolini and Hitler before him, borrowed from Marx yet changed his theories fundamentally. Most important, Marx's internationalist outlook was abandoned in favor of a narrow nation-state perspective. Marx's goal of abolishing capitalism was replaced by the model of a totalitarian state that directs an economy where ownership of the means of production is still largely in public hands. The corporations and their owners remain in place but have to take their orders from LaRouche. Hitler called the schema "national socialism". LaRouche hopes the term "the American System" will be more acceptable.[55]

Antony Lerman writes that LaRouche's overriding ideology is that, as LaRouche put it, "History is nothing but conspiracies," and that the main group behind the conspiracies are the Jews, mostly wealthy ones such as the Rothschilds. According to Lerman, LaRouche uses "the British" as a code for Jews to avoid being accused of antisemitism. LaRouche refers to this group as the "Zionist-British organism," and sees them as having, "evolved through moral depravity and inbreeding into a separate species outside the human race," writes Lerman; the British, led by the Jews, are in control of terrorism and drug networks, and it is the mission of LaRouche's National Caucus of Labor Committees to wipe them out.[56]

Dennis King and Chip Berlet say that anti-Semitic writings by LaRouche trace back to 1973, when he wrote that Jewish culture is "merely the residue left to the Jewish home after everything saleable has been marketed to the Goyim."[57] King writes that some Jewish members quit the movement because of anti-Semitic jokes, Holocaust denial, and a perceived resemblance between LaRouche's writings and Mein Kampf. To placate others, King writes, LaRouche redefined the meaning of "Jew": "To be a real Jew, [LaRouche] suggested, one must repudiate the State of Israel, Zionism, and the mainstream leadership of the Jewish community."[58] King compares LaRouche's writings to Nazi and other anti-Semitic tracts going back to the 1890s, where there is a common theme of connecting Jewish power with the British Empire. He points to what he says are assertions by LaRouche that all the main power centers in Britain are controlled by Jewish families,[59] and cites a 1978 illustration in New Solidarity of Queen Elizabeth at the top of a Star of David as an example of what he sees as coded anti-Semitism.[60]

George Johnson writes in The New York Times that King's argument fails to take into account that several members of LaRouche's inner circle are themselves Jewish.[61] Daniel Pipes argues that LaRouche's references to the British really are to the British, though he agrees that an alleged British-Jewish alliance lies at the heart of LaRouche's conspiracism.[62]


The Wheat Building in Leesburg, Virginia, a national office of the LaRouche movement in the 1980s

Since the autumn of 1979, the LaRouche movement has conducted most of its U.S. electoral activities within the framework of the National Democratic Policy Committee, a political action committee whose name drew complaints from the Democratic National Committee. Party leaders have refused to recognize LaRouche as a party member, or to seat the few delegates he received in his seven primary campaigns as a Democrat.[63]

"October Surprise" allegations

Steven Emerson writes that, in the early 1980s, LaRouche and his followers started the widely discredited "October surprise conspiracy theory", namely that in 1980 Ronald Reagan's campaign staff conspired with the Iranian government to delay the release of 52 American hostages, in order to help defeat President Jimmy Carter
The Iranians agreed to this, according to the theory, in exchange for future weapons sales from the Reagan administration.[64]

1982: Dispute with U.S. News and World Report

In 1982, U.S. News and World Report sued New Solidarity International Press Service and Campaigner Publications for damages, alleging that LaRouche reporters were impersonating its reporters in phone calls. LaRouche and his aide, Jeffrey Steinberg, gave depositions which revealed their policy of pretending to be from non-existent publications and of infiltrating the campaigns of competing presidential nominees. Without admitting guilt, the LaRouche group agreed not to impersonate U.S. News reporters in the future.[65]

Strategic Defense Initiative

In the mid-1980s the LaRouche campaign was noted for its support of Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, known as "SDI" or "Star Wars". A LaRouche supporter and former head of West German Military Counterintelligence (MAD), General Paul-Albert Scherer, said in 1992 that LaRouche, whom he described as a "scientific-technological strategic expert", had been the "originator" of the SDI. Scherer also said that LaRouche had been involved in "backchannel" communications between the Reagan administration and the Russian embassy, during the year before Reagan's announcement of the policy in March 1983.[66]

Physicist Edward Teller, a principal proponent of SDI and X-ray lasers, told reporters in 1984 that he had been courted by LaRouche but kept his distance. LaRouche began calling his plan the "LaRouche-Teller proposal" even though they had never met. In Teller's words, LaRouche was "a poorly informed man with fantastic conceptions".[67][68] LaRouche later attributed the collapse of the Soviet Union to its refusal to follow his advice to accept Reagan's offer to share the technology.[69]

Promotion of space colonization

LaRouche's promotion of space colonization included dealings with German scientists and engineers who had worked under the Nazi government of Germany during the Second World War, some of whom emigrated to the U.S. after the war under Operation Paperclip, and ended up with NASA. They included Arthur Rudolph, and several other Peenemunde rocket experts, including Krafft Arnold Ehricke, Adolf Busemann, Konrad Dannenberg, and Hermann Oberth. LaRouche collaborated with Ehricke on ideas about the colonization of the moon and Mars.[70] After Ehricke's death, LaRouche sponsored the "Krafft Ehricke Memorial Conference" and in 1988 delivered a national TV broadcast entitled "The Woman on Mars."[71] LaRouche also had a relationship with Karl-Adolf Zenker and Paul-Albert Scherer, West German Admiral and former head of West German Military Intelligence, respectively, who both served in the German military in World War II.[72][73] When Rudolph was forced to renounce his U.S.citizenship after an investigation into his past, LaRouche supporters formed a defense fund for him.[74]

1984: Founding of Schiller Institute; reported meetings with NSA
Further information: Schiller Institute

In 1984, Helga Zepp-LaRouche founded the Schiller Institute in Germany, with LaRouche, Amelia Boynton Robinson and Marie-Madeleine Fourcade.[75][76] In the same year, LaRouche was able to raise enough money to purchase 14 television spots. In one of them, he called Walter Mondale, the Democratic Party's Presidential candidate, "an agent of influence" of the Soviet intelligence services, triggering over 1,000 complaints about the spot, which CBS was legally obliged to air.[77] On April 19, 1986, Saturday Night Live aired a skit satirizing the ads; it portrayed Queen Elizabeth II and Henry Kissinger as drug dealers.

Ronald Radosh and Dennis King alleged in November 1984 that LaRouche and his aides had been meeting with officials of the Reagan Administration, including several meetings and phone calls with Norman Bailey, then the senior director of international economic affairs for the National Security Council (NSC), and with Richard Morris, then a special assistant to former National Security Adviser William P. Clark, Jr.[78] There were also contacts with the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency.[79] The LaRouche campaign said the report was full of errors.[78] According to Bailey, the contacts were broken off after they became public. Bailey himself praised LaRouche's intelligence gathering operation, calling it "one of the best private intelligence services in the world", though he disagreed with the movement's theories and tactics.[80][81] Three years later, LaRouche blamed his criminal indictment on the NSC.[82]

Other events in the 1980s

LaRouche met with Argentine President Raul Alfonsin, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and Mexican President Jose Lopez Portillo.[80] (A Mexican official told the New York Times that LaRouche had arranged the meeting by representing himself as an official of the Democratic Party. At the time, one of LaRouche's organizations was the National Democratic Policy Committee, which had no connection to the Democratic Party.[83] However, Portillo continued to maintain a relationship with LaRouche and his movement, and went on to endorse LaRouche's candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1999, according to the LaRouche movement.[84])

1984–1986: Lawsuit against NBC

"Ibykus Farm", LaRouche's home in the mid-1980s.

The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) aired a news segment and a "First Camera" report on LaRouche in 1984. Produced by Pat Lynch, the reports included interviews with former members of the movement who gave details about their fundraising practices and alleged that LaRouche had spoken about assassinating U.S. President Jimmy Carter. The report said that an investigation by the IRS would lead to an indictment.

LaRouche filed a defamation suit in federal court against NBC, the Anti Defamation League (ADL), and others. Judge James C. Cacheris presided. One of the main issues was a statement by ADL fact-finding director Irwin Suall on national TV calling LaRouche a "small-time Hitler." The LaRouche organization later alleged that the NBC programs were the result of a series of meetings that were said to have planned a "campaign of defamation against LaRouche".[85][86] On the first day of the trial, Judge Cacheris ruled that Pat Lynch would not be required to name her sources for the "First Camera" program.

LaRouche lost his case and NBC won its countersuit, with the jury awarding it $3 million in damages in what has been called one of the more celebrated countersuits by a libel defendant.[87] The award was reduced by Judge Cacheris to an eventual payment of $258,459.[65][88][89] LaRouche failed to pay the damages, pleading poverty. Federal District Judge Claude M. Hilton described LaRouche's testimony about being almost penniless as "completely lacking in credibility".[90] In 1986, in the same case, LaRouche said that he did not know who had paid the rent on the estate, or for his food, lodging, clothing, transportation, bodyguards, or lawyers since 1973. The judge fined him for failing to answer.[91] After the judge signed an order to allow discovery of LaRouche's personal finances, a cashier's check was handed over to the court to end the case.[92] When LaRouche appealed the outcome of the trial, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, in rejecting his arguments, set forth a three-prong test (later called the "LaRouche test") to decide when anonymous sources must be named in libel cases, and concluded that revealing NBC's sources had not been necessary in the LaRouche-NBC case.[4][93][94]

1986: AIDS, opposition to gay rights, and electoral success

Sponsored by the "Prevent AIDS Now Initiative Committee" (PANIC), the so-called "LaRouche Initiative" qualified for the California ballot in 1986, with the signature gatherers mostly paid for by LaRouche's Campaigner Publications.[95]Proposition 64 would have placed AIDS on the state's List of Communicable Diseases. Opponents said the measure could have required universal testing and the quarantine of infected individuals, while proponents denied those would be requirements and said it simply allowed for public health measures to be taken. After its defeat, it was reintroduced two years later and again defeated.

LaRouche has given speeches and written articles in opposition to gay rights that his critics consider homophobic.[96][97] AIDS was a leading plank in his political platform during his 1988 presidential campaign.[95] Saying that "the AIDS issue is going to make me a national folk hero", he vowed to quarantine its "aberrant" victims who are "guilty of bringing this pandemic upon us."[98]

In March 1986, NDPC candidates Janice Hart and Mark Fairchild won the Democratic primary for state-wide offices in Illinois. Their success surprised the political establishment and brought LaRouche national attention.[99] The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Adlai Stevenson III, temporarily left the Democratic Party rather than run on the same slate as LaRouche movement members, and the LaRouche candidates lost in November.[100]

1988: Criminal conviction
Main article: LaRouche criminal trials

Federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia

The LaRouche criminal trials in the mid-1980s stemmed from federal and state investigations into the activities LaRouche and members of his movement. They were charged with conspiring to commit fraud and soliciting loans they had no intention of repaying.[101] LaRouche and his supporters disputed the charges, claiming the trials were politically motivated.[101]

In 1986, hundreds of state and federal officers raided LaRouche offices in Virginia and Massachusetts. A federal grand jury in Boston, Massachusetts, indicted LaRouche and 12 associates on credit card fraud and obstruction of justice. The subsequent trial, described as an "extravaganza," was repeatedly delayed and ended in mistrial. Following the mistrial, a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, indicted LaRouche and six associates.

On December 16, 1988, LaRouche was convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud involving more than $30 million in defaulted loans; 11 counts of actual mail fraud involving $294,000 in defaulted loans; and one count of conspiring to defraud the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. He was sentenced to prison for fifteen years. The judge said that the claim of a vendetta was "arrant nonsense", and that, "the idea that this organization is a sufficient threat to anything that would warrant the government bringing a prosecution to silence them just defies human experience."[102]

At the same trial, his associates received lesser sentences for mail fraud and conspiracy.[101] Jury foreman Buster Horton told the Washington Post (17 December 1988) that it was the failure of LaRouche aides to repay loans that swayed the jury in the Virginia case, and that the jury "all agreed [LaRouche] was not on trial for his political beliefs. We did not convict him for that. He was convicted for those 13 counts he was on trial for." In separate state trials in Virginia and New York, 13 associates received terms ranging from one month to 77 years. The Virginia state trials were described as the highest-profile cases that the state Attorney General's office had ever prosecuted.[103] Fourteen states issued injunctions against LaRouche-related organizations. Three LaRouche-related organizations were forced into bankruptcy after failing to pay contempt of court fines.

Defense lawyers filed numerous unsuccessful appeals that challenged the conduct of the grand jury, the contempt fines, the execution of the search warrants and various trial procedures. At least ten appeals were heard by the United States court of appeals, and three were appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark joined the defense team for two appeals. Clark wrote that that the case involved "a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge."[3] Following the convictions, the LaRouche movement mounted failed attempts at exoneration.[104]

1990s: Imprisonment, campaigning

1989–1994: Imprisonment

LaRouche began his jail sentence in 1989, and was released on parole in 1994. He campaigned while imprisoned at the Federal Medical Center, Rochester in Minnesota. He ran for Congress in 1990, seeking to represent the 10th District of Virginia, but received less than one percent of the vote. He ran for President again in 1992. Reverend James Bevel, a civil rights activist who had represented the LaRouche movement in its pursuit of the Franklin child prostitution ring allegations, was LaRouche's running mate, and did most of the campaigning.[105]

1994: Release from prison

LaRouche continued his political activity upon his release. In 1994, his followers joined members of the Nation of Islam to condemn the Anti-Defamation League for its alleged crimes against African Americans, reportedly one of several such joint meetings held since 1992.[106] In 1996, LaRouche was invited to speak at a convention organized by the Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan and Ben Chavis, then of the National African American Leadership Summit. As soon as LaRouche began speaking, he was booed off the stage; one delegate said it was because of his actions against African Americans in the past.[107]

In the 1996 Democratic presidential primaries, LaRouche received enough votes in Louisiana and Virginia to get one delegate from each state. However, before the primaries began the Democratic National Committee chair, Donald Fowler, had determined that LaRouche was not a "bona fide Democrat" because of his "expressed political beliefs... which are explicitly racist and anti-Semitic," and because of his "past activities including exploitation of and defrauding contributors and voters." Fowler instructed state parties to disregard votes for LaRouche.[108][109] LaRouche sued in federal court, claiming a violation of the Voting Rights Act. After losing in the district court the case was appealed to the First District Court of Appeals, which upheld the lower court's decision.[110]

According to the LaRouche movement, he mobilized his supporters in defense of President Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, forming a group called the "Committee to Save the Presidency."[111] In 1999, Chinese media reported that LaRouche had criticized the Cox Report, a congressional investigation that accused the Chinese of stealing U.S. nuclear weapons secrets.[112] LaRouche called the report "intrinsically fraudulent" and "a reflection of the kind of scientific illiteracy" of its writers.[113]


2000: Founding of the Worldwide LaRouche Youth Movement

LaRouche supporters in Chicago, 2007
Further information: Worldwide LaRouche Youth Movement

During the 2000 Democratic primaries, LaRouche scored in double digits in multiple states, with his best showing in Arkansas, where he received 22 percent of the vote to Vice President Al Gore's 78 percent. In the Kentucky primary, LaRouche placed third with 11 percent, behind Gore and Bill Bradley.

He found the Worldwide LaRouche Youth Movement (WLYM) in 2000.[114], saying it had hundreds of members in the U.S. by 2004, and a "lesser number abroad".[115]

In 2002, in a speech to the Zayed Center for Coordination and Follow-Up, he discussed his proposal for a Eurasian Land Bridge.[116] Afterwards, he said that the September 11 attacks could not have taken place without connivance from someone inside the Bush administration. He also referred to "Jewish gangsters" and "Christian Zionists" "bought by money, the so-called Zionist money," according to the Anti-Defamation League.[117]

2003: Death of Jeremiah Duggan
Main article: Jeremiah Duggan

LaRouche came to international attention in 2003 when Jeremiah Duggan, a Jewish student from the UK attending a conference organized by the Schiller Institute and LaRouche Youth Movement, died in mysterious circumstances in Wiesbaden, Germany. The German police said his death appeared to be suicide; Duggan was hit by several cars after running onto a busy road. A British court ruled out suicide and decided that Duggan had died while "in a state of terror."[118] Duggan's mother believes he died in connection with an attempt to recruit him to the LaRouche movement; a spokesman for the German public prosecution service has said the mother simply cannot accept that her son committed suicide.[119]

2004–2005: Electoral and lobbying activities

LaRouche entered the primary elections for the Democratic Party's nomination in 2004, setting the record for the number of consecutive presidential campaigns. LaRouche was present in Boston during the 2004 Democratic National Convention but did not attend the convention itself. He held a press conference in which he declared his support for John Kerry and pledged to mobilize his organization to help defeat George W. Bush in the November presidential election. In 2005, he campaigned against the privatization of Social Security, asserting that this was an issue that could successfully mobilize the population against the policies of the Bush administration.[120]

2005–2009: Chinese and Russian press coverage

In November 2005, an eight-part interview with LaRouche was published in the People's Daily of China, covering his economic forecasts, his battles with the American media, and his assessment of the neoconservatives.[121] In 2006, Economic Daily, a Chinese newspaper run directly by the Chinese State Council published a biographical article.[122] In December 2008, he was interviewed by China Central Television and Chinese Biz News about his economic forecasts,[123] and in 2009, China Youth Daily reported that he had forecast the 2008 financial collapse in July 2007.[124] LaRouche publications report that he addressed both the Economics Committee of the Russian State Duma and the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2007; also that year, a paper by LaRouche was presented by Jonathan Tennenbaum, a member of the LaRouche movement, at an April 24 conference in Moscow on the Russian plan to build a tunnel under the Bering Strait.[125] On May 15, 2007, he addressed the Russian Academy of Sciences to commemorate the 80th birthday of Stanislav Menshikov.[126]

2007: Death of Kenneth Kronberg

Kenneth and Molly Kronberg in 2001
Main article: Kenneth Kronberg

On April 11, 2007 a longtime LaRouche associate, Kenneth Kronberg, 58, committed suicide. Kronberg was the co-founder and an editor of Fidelio, the now-defunct magazine of the Schiller Institute.[127] Kronberg's printing business was reportedly in "serious arrears in tax payments, including employee withholding, due largely to lack of payment for printing jobs by other LaRouche entities."[128] Following his death the LaRouche movement sources made comments about Kronberg's widow, Molly Kronberg, who had also been a long time member and who had been compelled to testify in LaRouche's 1988 criminal trial. LaRouche implied in an internal memo that Mrs. Kronberg's support for the re-election of George W. Bush may have contributed to her husband's decision take his own life, and also said that Kronberg "provided false testimony" in order to help frame LaRouche.[129][130] In August 2009, Molly Kronberg sued in federal court, alleging that LaRouche harassed and libeled her.[129] A co-counsel for Kronberg is John Markham, one of the federal prosecutors who investigated and prosecuted LaRouche in the 1980s.[131]

2007–2009: LaRouche on the financial crisis

LaRouche was credited by press in Italy, and by a congressman in Mexico, as having forecast the financial crisis of 2007–2009. On December 17, 2008, Ivo Caizzi of Corriere della Sera referred to LaRouche as "the guru politician who, since the nineties, has announced the crash of speculative finances and the need for a New Bretton Woods." The article asserts that Italian Economics Minister Giulio Tremonti is "an attentive reader" of LaRouche's anti-Free Market and anti-Marxist writings.[132] In a translation on a LaRouche website, Italian Europarliamentarian Mario Borghezio of the Northern League Borghezio is quoted as calling LaRouche, "an heretical economist who had forecast the financial crisis much in advance, and who has long since developed a lucid and deep analysis of the distortions in the world economic system."[133] Italian Senator Oskar Peterlini, in a July 2009 speech before the Senate, called LaRouche an expert in the field who had predicted the crisis.[134]

2009: LaRouche on Obama

LaRouchePAC poster, Alhambra, California, 2009

In 2009, LaRouche compared U.S. President Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler, and the proposed health-insurance reform to Hitler's Action T4 euthanasia program.[135] LaRouche supports a Single-payer health care policy, as opposed to the Obama plan. He has said that Americans must, "quickly and suddenly change the behavior of this president ... for no lesser reason than that your sister might not end up in somebody's gas oven".[136] The movement has printed pamphlets showing Obama and Hitler laughing together, and posters of Obama wearing a Hitler-style mustache.[137] In Seattle, police have been called twice in response to people threatening to tear the posters apart, or to assault the LaRouche supporters holding them.[138] At one widely reported event, Congressman Barney Frank referred to the posters as "vile, contemptible nonsense."[139]
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:51 pm

Hmmmmmmmm, this one is interesting as it involves....wait a minute for this....LaRouche and Frank Morales, of the Theresa Duncan saga. Remember her? (No? Try starting here: ... 43&start=0 ) I need to check this site out more, but for now, here it is: ... a-bin.html

Tuesday, September 16, 2008
UP FRONT News September 18, 2008
Published by Tom Weiss
Editorial Advisor: Willard Whittingham
"The paper that can't be bought and can't be sold." ... ssionforum

By Tom Weiss

Although I try to avoid making snap judgements on political matters, I am pretty much convinced that just about anything of a political nature, certainly including 9/11, emanating from either Les Jamieson or Frank Morales, regardlessly of how leftishly expressed, is at best poop and at worst a part of the "inside job" that they accuse various Americans of being involved in.

I won't go through the entire history of Jamieson's and Morales' repeated suppressions of for example my free speech rights at their dictatorially controlled "9/11 Truth" meetings at St. Mark's-in-the-Bowery Church in Manhattan. Much of the information as to how Jamieson and Morales have served as at least ideological agents for the mega-conspiracy theorist himself, the fascist Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., is in my newspaper UP FRONT News at

Indeed Jamieson's first (whispered) threat against me came a few years ago when I suggested to him that guest speaker Webster Tarpley's experience as a major figure in the LaRouche cult should be made known to the "9/11 Truth" group as a whole. "You better keep your mouth shut about that", Jamieson hissed to me out of everyone's earshot. And then a few weeks later when at the post-Tarpley speech Q&A at St. Mark's, I included a LaRouche reference in my question to Tarpley, Jamieson desperately ran over and tried to physically push me away from the questioners' microphone.

Jamieson's and Morales' decision to invite the psychopath and neo-fascist LaRouche ideologue Geoffrey Blank as a guest speaker on December 4, 2005 almost led to political violence against me as Blank came with some reportedly club-bearing brownshirts of his such as the St. Mark's-regular wacko Karl Rosenstein, a seriously disturbed Blankie who has tried to assault me on three separate occasions. Other Blank brownshirts who threatened me that evening included the "Staten Island Stalker" Gary ("Enough") Phaneuf. Indeed these are some of the reasons why St. Mark's deserves its UP FRONT News-bestowed name of "Our Lady of LaRouche", at least as long as "Father Frank" Morales tries to LaRouche-ize Jesus.

As far as I am concerned, the cultist Jamieson - who as far as I am aware won't respond to questions about the sudden death of young Dan Wallace, a "9/11 Truth" participant who was also beleagured by LaRouchies and who had witnessed some of the Morales/Jamieson harassments against me and who did a video interview with me outside St. Mark's only to be found dead in his bed in Queens a few weeks later - is a part of the "inside job." With regard to the death of Dan Wallace, LaRouche victim Jeremiah Duggan comes to mind.

If Les Jamieson, citing the claimed expertise of Kevin Barrett, suggests that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11, that in itself adds to the evidence that bin Laden was involved.

I would be very interested in knowing about any communications between for example Lyndon LaRouche (who has long enjoyed ties to terrorists, genocide practitioners, drug traffickers, Jew haters and Holocaust deniers and murderers) and Osama bin Laden. Since Jamieson is so interested in finding out the truth and since Jamieson is well acquainted with high-level laRouche-ites such as Tarpley, maybe he can get the answers as to whether Lyndon LaRouche was - and is - part of the inside job.

I won't hold my breath.
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby nathan28 » Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:04 pm

chiggerbit wrote:

Support Conyers' Health-Care Reform!
Printer-friendly versionSend to friend

Support Conyers' Health-Care Reform!

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

April 21, 2006

I formally endorse the following draft billas my policy.

The actual or virtual obliteration of pre-existing, private pension and related contractual agreements, demonstrates the folly of inducing large numbers of our citizens to place their trust, and the hope of their families' future, in the substitution of the dubious protection of private pension and health-care systems for public measures as durably permanent as our constitutional republic itself.

The extraction of financier profits in layer upon layer of the private health-care and pension systems, and the degree of reckless mismanagement shown by the successive waves of actual, and virtual bankruptcy, and mismanagement of more and more of the privately constructed programs, should be taken as a lesson which, in the light of recent experience, no prudent heads of family households could conceivably overlook.

The most essential, mandatory quality of any pension or health-care system, is that the protection it promises must be delivered in a full and promptly timely way when the time for the redemption of that promise has arrived.

his ideology is so... bizarre that it is difficult to categorize.

Jesus H.R. Fucking Christ

User avatar
Posts: 2957
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:42 pm

LaRouche Political Action Committe Raises Ire of Some at Post Office
August 19 2009 5:51 am Tags: Anti-Obama, buffalo grove, disturbance, Lyndon LaRouche, post office, protest ShareThis (E-Mail, Facebook, Twitter & More)

Anti-Obama poster displayed at the Arlington Heights U.S. Post Office at Euclid Avenue and Kennicott Avenue Tuesday.

Police were called at least twice by LaRouche activists in Arlington Heights and once in Buffalo Grove Tuesday afternoon in response to people who were displaying anger over being offended by anti-Obama posters that depict President Barack Obama with a Hitler-style mustache. The posters were displayed at an information table concerning political activism against Obama’s health care plan and his administration’s economic bailout policies. The info booth and protest signs by LaRouche Political Action Committee constituents were setup at the United States post offices in those towns. People usually threaten to tear apart posters or to assault the LaRouche supporters holding them. The LaRouche activists called police when situations appeared ready to get out of control.

LaRouche’s comparisons of U.S. President Barack Obama to German dictator Adolf Hitler in 2009 have generated controversy. LaRouche has called Obama’s actions “impeachable,” without actually calling for impeachment, due to his support of health insurance reform that LaRouche says is comparable to Hitler’s Action T4 euthanasia program. Action T4 was a program, also called Euthanasia Program, in Nazi Germany spanning October 1939 until August 1941, during which physicians killed 70,273 people described in Hitler’s secret memo of September 1, 1939 as suffering patients “judged incurably sick, by critical medical examination”. The LaRouche movement has printed pamphlets with a picture on the front showing Obama and Hitler laughing together, and have made posters of Obama wearing a Hitler-style mustache. The activists at the post office offer informational booklets, request donations to the political action committee and inform people to check their website at

One booklet is entitled, ‘The People of the United States No Longer Accept their President or Congress’ and another ‘Act Now to Stop Obama’s Nazi Health Plan!’. Another flier is titled ‘LaRouche Demands Bankruptcy Reorganization Now’ calling for immediate bankruptcy reorganization of the entire Federal Reserve System before the dollar-based global financial system crashes. The flier claims that ‘President Obama is breaking down, his policies are collapsing — like so-called health care reforms which are nothing more than a mirror image of Hitler’s 1939 euthanasia policies.’ La Rouche claims that Obama’s policies are run from the British monarchy in London, not from anything in the United States.

Background …
LaRouche was credited by press in Italy, Argentina, and Mexico as the economist who successfully forecast the financial crisis of 2007–2009. Covering a press conference at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on December 17, 2008, Ivo Caizzi of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera referred to LaRouche as “the guru politician who, since the nineties, has announced the crash of speculative finances and the need for a New Bretton Woods.” The article asserts that Italian Economics Minister Giulio Tremonti is “an attentive reader” of LaRouche’s anti-Free Market and anti-Marxist writings.

In August 2007, LaRouche authored the “Homeowner and Banks Protection Act of 2007″, designed to freeze mortgage rates, halt foreclosures, and prevent banks from closing their doors due to insolvency. His organization and particularly his youth movement began lobbying both the congress and also state and local governments for the passage of this legislation, in what they characterize as an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the subprime mortgage crisis.

LaRouche drafted legislation in 2006 that would rescue the failing U.S. auto industry by having the federal government intervene to retool it for the purpose of building machinery for infrastructure development. This initiative was unsuccessful.

In 2005 LaRouche campaigned against the privatization of Social Security, asserting that this was an issue that could successfully mobilize the population against the policies of the Bush administration.

In its 2004 assessment of presidential candidates, the National Right to Life Committee gave LaRouche a grade of 75% and declared that he is “pro-life in every way (against euthanasia, capital punishment, etc).”

LaRouche was present in Boston during the 2004 Democratic National Convention but did not attend the convention itself. He held a press conference in which he declared his support for John Kerry and pledged to mobilize his organization to help defeat George W. Bush in the November presidential election. He also waged a campaign, begun in October 2002, to have Dick Cheney resign or be dropped from the Republican ticket.

In his January 3, 2001 webcast, LaRouche warned that the incoming Bush administration would attempt to govern by crisis management, “…in other words, just like the Reichstag fire in Germany.

In the 1980’s LaRouche was harshly critical of Jimmy Carter, who he competed against for the Democratic Party nomination in the 1980 primaries. LaRouche was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment in 1988 for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and tax code violations, but continued his political activities from behind bars until his release in 1994 on parole.

In 1976 LaRouche ran for President of the United States.

Since the 1970s, LaRouche and his organization have been criticized by politicians, political writers and the Anti-Defamation League. The group has been called left-wings facists and also a fascistic cult. LaRouche himself has been accused of some pro-Nazi sympathies with a government style that would have corporations following LaRouche’s instructions.

Supporters have described him as the greatest living economist, and a political leader in the tradition of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Martin Luther King. Critics have called him an extremist, a conspiracy theorist, a political cult leader, a fascist, and/or an antisemite. The Heritage Foundation has said that he “leads what may well be one of the strangest political groups in American history”.
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:29 pm

Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Maddy » Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:20 pm


One of these outside of my post office today, with a group of people around a table. I was in my car dropping off mail in the box, and it was pouring rain, so I didn't stop to check it out. But it gave me shivers.
Be kind - it costs nothing. ~ Maddy ~
User avatar
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:33 am
Location: The Borderlands
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby compared2what? » Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:06 am

I notice that F. William Engdahl's work has come up a few times recently. And, of course, that Webster Tarpley's never totally goes away.

First and foremost, personally speaking, in both cases, I fundamentally agree with what the guy who confirms that Engdahl's been out since 2001 here says, to the general effect of:

Everyone deserves a second chance. (To which I'd add, "especially people who had the bad luck to fall under the influence of Lyndon Larouche"). So judge a man's work on its merits.

But personally speaking, I also find the work of both of them wanting on its merits. Though I wish that I didn't, because it's not like either has none. They're both really talented, in fact. But they both tend to wreck their reporting and their intelligence by recurring to the unsupported extreme, going for the high drama, eliding two concept/events/themes that aren't really related to one another, and all the other stuff that they might have very understandably picked up just from being part of a movement that was dedicated mind, body and soul to bringing about a Trotskyite revolution in the United States in the '60s and '70s, never mind one that also practiced ego-stripping under the supervision of Lyndon Larouche.

Those were very, very different times vis-a-vis extreme political paranoia as a rational response to experience, and people tend to very understandably overlook that. So, since I don't think anyone's posted it recently, here's an excerpt covering part of that period from a book by an ex-Larouchie using the nom-de-internet Hylozoic Hedgehog.

It's just for general background, really. The merger between the extreme left and the extreme right during the late '70s and early '80s had more moving parts to it than the ones in the Larouche movement, for sure. But as a paradigm, if you only have time to read one, you can find it here if you feel like reading the whole thing.

And by "here," I mean: HERE.

Excerpt below, mentions Engdahl some.


    On 3 January 1974, Lyndon LaRouche ("Lyn Marcus") gave an extraordinary speech laying out the details of what he claimed was the plot to brainwash NCLC member Christopher White in order to assassinate LaRouche. In the midst of his speech he launched into a strange tirade against Michael Vale, an American expatriate living in Sweden who had long been associated with Gl deserter networks there:

      "And Mike Vale, the bastard who, as Chris said, got poor slobs like us into this mess. Vale is the guy who ruined a lot of good men, a real crud - who probably is responsible for McGourty.
      You know why McGourty is in jail? I know why McGourty is in jail. We put what we know on the [Konstantin] George case together with what we know about McGourty, and we have the scoop on one of the nastiest, most vicious CIA operations -the brainwashing institutes of Sweden. It's a great place to go for a vacation. But don't eat anything, don't drink anything. You may not come back a man, or a woman.

      Now, we know why McGourty was victimized when we cracked the George case - to protect Bo Burlingham, Mike Vale,
      Andrew Kopkind, and other scum - Spender, and that type. Real scum."

    LaRouche returned to Vale later on in his speech when discussing the plight of William Engdahl, the NCLC member who had lived in Sweden and who had suffered a temporary nervous breakdown during the Chris White affair:

      Well, we are going to save them. Engdahl's going to be tough. They did a vicious job on him, and it was done many years ago, the first job. It was done by the CIA with that pig Michael Vale involved. Bo Burlingham, editor of.. [Ramparts magazine and Central Committee member of the Weathermen] you know who Bo Burlingham is. We told you. And he's involved in this stuff. He was involved in it. Stephen Spender, the "poet" -- he's one of the same type. He's involved in it. CIA. Andrew Kopkind of Ramparts. He's involved. Tony Cliff of IS in Great Britain, he's involved in it.
      This isn't speculation. No guessing. This is hard fact. We know it. We've got a trail, a firm hard fact trail. 1

    LaRouche's rant was based on his paranoid need to see connections and plots. Yet behind his fantasy was the very real fact that Boston's The Real Paper was planning to do an expose on him that involved interviews with his parents and would have been the first serious examination of "Lyn Marcus's" background. LaRouche, as we have seen, was so afraid of this that he had his Security Staff threaten The Real Paper to such an extent that the article was actually published in the pages of The Boston Phoenix.

    The Real Paper's staff included Andrew Kopkind. Kopkind who seems to have known Robert "Bo" Burlingham, who had indeed briefly been a Central Committee member of the Weatherman in 1969 but who had long broken with its views. By 1973 Burlingham was working as an editor at Ramparts..

    Burlingham had spent 1968 living in Paris where he helped organize the draft resistance and Gl deserter movement there. During this period he worked with Michael Vale, who headed the Gl deserter movement in Sweden. Vale, in turn, would later organize The Next Step (TNS), a radical network of active service GIs in bases in Western Europe. In late 1971, TNS would join the NCLC en masse although sometime in 1972 Vale had a bitter falling out with LaRouche. In the Chris White affair, LaRouche (and his "Security Staff") once again put 2+2 together and once again got 22. He assumed that because Vale despised LaRouche and The Real Paper was writing a critical article on LaRouche that Vale, Kopkind, and Burlingham must have been secretly working together in some master plot that involved the CIA.

    With a lot of things Labor Committee-like, it is of course possible that Vale and Kopkind and Burlingham did keep in touch with each other. It is also possible that they shared an interest in the strange goings on inside the NCLC. After all, not all that long after Vale left the organization, LaRouche began launching attacks on members of the American Communist Party and other leftist groups. Many of Vale's former comrades inside TNS were members of the NCLC during this period and one of them, "Jim McGourty," was arrested in the summer of 1973 and charged with desertion from the Marines. It may be that Vale tried to follow developments in the United States and that he spoke with some of his former radical connections in Europe who were now back in the United States like Burlingham and Kopkind about the NCLC. Perhaps Vale also encouraged his contacts on the Left to investigate LaRouche after Mop Up.

    Vale would have an even more personal reason to be concerned about the McGourty arrest. It seems likely that for TNS deserters to be able both to return to the United States and to live in America under an alias, they needed a network that helped smuggle them back into America and provide them with false papers to live here undercover. If Vale's network did provide the "paper" that deserters. and draft resisters needed to survive "underground," the McGourty arrest potentially threatened broader Vale's network as well.

    To add to the confusion, Mike Vale was himself a highly controversial figure who had come under repeated attack for being a CIA agent! Vale had countess enemies on the Left, in part because as a Trotskyist, he made no secret of his fundamental hatred of the Soviet ruling elite. Vale seems to have been an 'Isaac Deutscher"-style Trotskyist as were many English New Left intellectuals around organizations like New Left Review and the Bertrand Russell Foundation. Therefore, accusations that Vale was a CIA agent could well have come from his rivals inside the Soviet-oriented Left and even from the CIA since as I will show the U.S. government took a great interest in disrupting the deserters movement. It is also possible, of course, that Vale may himself have been a CIA or KGB agent or simply an expatriate American Trotskyist intellectual. Whatever the reality, in 1974 the NCLC elaborated a Machiavellian theory that the CIA was using the deserter movement to launder false information back into the USSR.

    In this chapter, I wish to supply some basic information about Vale and The Next Step and the important and still somewhat mysterious role it played in the NCLC and in the Chris White affair. To truly understand the machinations involved, one would have to begin by declassifying numerous government documents both from the CIA and the U.S. military as well as conduct research in Sweden, England, France, and Germany while also placing the history of the ADC and The Next Step in the larger context of resistance to the Vietnam war.


    The NCLC's connection to Mike Vale grew out of the group's ties to The Next Step, a Gl-based anti-Vietnam war group that first emerged out of the American Deserters Committee (ADC) network in Sweden and France. The ADC's key organizer in Sweden was Vale. In the early 1970s, Vale attempted to go beyond the deserter scene and to try to politicize GIs on American bases in both Europe and Japan through a new organization called The Next Step (TNS) which published a widely circulated and openly socialist newspaper out of Heidelberg also called The Next Step.

    The NCLC's relationship with TNS first surfaced in June 1971 when TNS spokesman Roger Hartog addressed the NCLC's "Strategy for Socialism" in Manhattan. Hartog described TNS.
    as presenting a unifying working-class perspective to U.S. GIs in Europe. The paper comes out biweekly to over 15,000 soldiers on nearly all European bases. One objective of the paper's cadres was to hamstring the counterrevolutionary and strikebreaking potential of NATO forces, in solidarity with revolutionary workers in Greece, Italy, etc. 2.

    Almost a year later, New Solidarity devoted a special insert to the decision of The Next Step cadre to join the NCLC, reporting that "the entire staff of the Gl newspaper The Next Step (TNS) has joined the National Caucus of Labor Committees." 3 The article explained that.

      TNS originally coalesced at the end of the 1960s with the intersection of members of radical Gl-support organizations in Sweden and France and a handful of active-duty GIs. We all saw clearly that a new type of organization was necessary -not only in the Gl movement, where the main groups were apolitical and split along all-black and all-white lines, but in the larger socialist movement itself.

    The Next Step was distributed on the U.S. base at Heidelberg. It also produced papers for GIs in Europe including Can You Bear McNairand The Geissen Eagle. The article stated that TNS cadre promoted Lenin's What Is to be Done as well as the writings of Issac Deutscher, the biographer of Trotsky. The group reported a "six month exchange" with the NCLC with one TNS member visiting the U.S. to learn more about the group.

    At the time TNS announced it was joining the NCLC, LaRouche was in Europe and it is possible that he carried out discussions with Vale when LaRouche was visiting London. LaRouche was in Europe in part to attend a conference in Linz, Austria, sponsored by the Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation, which Vale seems to have been linked to as well.

    The Next Step network surfaced a year later in the midst of Operation Mop Up with the arrest of "Jim McGourty," an NCLC member who had been picked up and fingerprinted by the Philadelphia police on 6 May 1973. Although McGourty wasn't convicted of any offense, his fingerprints entered the system and on 26 June he was arrested by 4 FBI agents and charged with desertion from the Marine Corps. The NCLC claimed that.

      Since the government has made virtually no effort to apprehend or prosecute thousands of other deserters, it was clear from the beginning that the government's motivation for prosecuting McGourty was strictly political. His "crime" was. organizing for the National Caucus of Labor Committees, not his alleged desertion from the Marines. 4.

    McGourty had spent some time in Sweden after his desertion from the Marines. A New Solidarity article on the case revealed that the NCLC was panicked by the possibility that the FBI would discover the its possible covert activities involving The Next Step network:

      The government's new frame-up attempt - if it were allowed to proceed - would probably go as follows: McGourty's conviction plus lying testimony from FBI informers would be used in an attempt to prove that officers of the NCLC had knowledge of McGourty's "deserter" status. Other "deserters" might then surface to perjure themselves by testifying that leaders of the NCLC aided and abetted other "deserters" or offered assistance to "deserter" informers.
      The government could be expected to exploit to the hilt the relationship between the NCLC and The Next Step, a group of pro-working class Gl organizers who affiliated with the NCLC in 1971. Members of TNS group had organized in Sweden and in West Germany before many of its members joined the Labor Committee.

      The government would probably try to establish the fallacious charge that the "TNS connection" was used to channel deserters back into the U.S. In point of fact, no NCLC officers were aware of McGourty's alleged deserter status or of any other member on unauthorized absence from the armed forces. 5-

    An internal memo from NEC member Ed Spannaus to all NCLC locals written on 18 August 1973 also gives a sense of panic that the McGourty arrest aroused:

      There is a strong possibility that the government will attempt to use the McGourty case as a springboard to frame up the NCLC for aiding and abetting deserters. We have to know the following information immediately: 1) if anybody claiming to be a deserter has approached us asking for help or simply establishing contact with members of the NCLC; 2) if any members of the organization are known or thought to be known as deserters. If we can get this information at once, we may be able to expose the government's plans before they can carry them out.

    In a discussion in the 4 September 1973 NEC meeting, Spannaus reported that the government had offered McGourty a deal for only one year in jail. He then commented:

      Since such a light sentence is absolutely unprecedented, it amounts to proof that they are after a frame-up of the LC not McG. To frame-up the NCLC on "harboring deserters" for example, they require only a conviction of Jim, any conviction! They also, no doubt, would prefer not to have the trial.


    "McGourty" was arrested on desertion charges by the FBI on 26 June 1973 while LaRouche was in Germany. (He would eventually serve seven months in a Marine stockade before being released. ) About one month later, on 1 August 1973, the Konstantin George affair began. In his speech on 3 January 1974, LaRouche clearly. linked the McGourty case to the George case and both of them to the "brainwashing" of Chris White and Bill Engdahl.

    In her book Waiting out a War the Exile of Private John Picciano, Lucinda Franks provides an extensive profile of Vale and the Gl deserter movement in Sweden:

      The first stirrings of an organized exile movement in Europe came in Paris in the winter of 1967-68. A group of resisters who had fled to France, which at that time was granting residence permits to draft dodgers and deserters although not officially accepting them, formed the French Union of American Deserters and Draft Resisters (FUADDR). Another group, committed to urging GIs to resist, formed Resistance Inside the Army (RITA) and published a newspaper called ACT that was distributed in US military bases around Europe. .. By the spring of 1968, the deserters in Sweden . . . felt a strong need to organize themselves into a supportive union similar to the French Union of Deserters and Resisters.

    This Swedish group became the American Deserters Committee (ADC). Its leader was Mike Vale. Vale had been asked by the Swedish radical lawyer Hans Göran Franck to create the ADC even though Vale was neither a deserter nor draft resister. But he was "more than a leader, or an organizer, or an ideologue. He was the closest thing to a high priest that the deserter community had.".

[snip for space, but there's more examination of who various non-Larouche sources think might and might not have been COINTELPRO, plus notes at LINK], all of which is very interesting in its own right just as a depiction of how seriously far-left dissidents took their cause, themselves, and their intricate factional disputes back in the not-too-distant past, quite apart from the light it sheds on ex-Larouchies, leading to...]


    While SDS fell apart, the Deserter movement also was in the process of shattering for reasons both internal and external. In yet another press release at the time of the Chris White affair, this one dated 17 January 1974, the NCLC wrote that:
    In early December 1973 the Swedish magazine Folket i Bild exposed an international espionage ring of approximately 15 agents in Sweden, involving CIA coordination of the Swedish Security Police [SAPO], the West German Federated. Information Service [BND], and Israeli intelligence [Shin Bet]. This CIA-controlled counter-intelligence operation involved planting agent provocateurs in Swedish radical-left, Maoist, and refugee groups.

    One of the exposed CIA agents was a Mr. Sven Kempe, a close associate of Mike Vale during his work with the Swedish deserter community in 1969. Kempe donated thousands of dollars to the deserters' movement and purchased a farm where groups of deserters stayed in Torksaker, about 100 miles north of Stockholm.
    A wealthy "radical theologian," Kempe also housed several deserters in his house in Uppsala, where at least one deserter . . . committed suicide by setting himself on fire. 20

    The NCLC Security Staff has independently confirmed that Hans Göran Franck, a Social Democratic lawyer who supposedly was Vale's factional enemy in Sweden, in fact organized Vale into the deserters' movement and gave him instructions and cover. Vale, using the name "John Armfield" while in Sweden, made extended visits to Kempe's farm to deal with "psychological conflicts" among deserters and to take charge of their "political education."

    The July-August 1979 issue of Covert Action Information Bulletin ran a curious one page article about the CIA's role with the deserter movement by George Lennox who had carried out his own investigation of the NCLC.

    Lennox pops up in a 2 April 1976 New Solidarity article attacking Counterspy (the journal from which Covert Action emerged after an apparent split) by Paul Goldstein of the NCLC Security Staff.

    Goldstein claimed that Michael Vale was behind an attack on the NCLC in Folket i Bild, which had ties to Jan Myrdahl -- one of the initial sponsors of the Swedish Vietnam Committee (ScfV), which had first sponsored the ADC and Vale. Goldstein reported that Lennox had visited the ELC office in Stockholm and had hung around the ELC for three days. The day after he left, on 25 March 1975, apparently, there was an attack on the ELC in the Swedish newspaper Arbetet2^.

    Goldstein further claimed that Lennox had been given "left cover" due to an article about him in the Myrdahl-aligned Folket i Bild that said that Lennox had been a deserter from the British Army in Cyprus and had been tortured by the SAS after his arrest. Goldstein further claimed that Lennox had visited New York to meet with members of the Daily World (namely Mike Zagarell, the Daily World's "Larouche expert") who, in turn, had interviewed former NCLC security staff member Greg Rose.

    As for Lennox, his 1979 Covert Action article reported that the Swedes were enraged at the United States.
    after the discovery of confidential documents and letters from the US Embassy found in the flat of a senior policeman from the aliens department of Stockholm's Police Headquarters. Police Commissioner Hans Melin was arrested on the 4th February by the Swedish Security Police (SAPO). Melin's arrest came after months of close scrutiny by SAPO who had suspected him of "freelancing" for Iraqi intelligence. . . . Melin was caught red-handed exchanging secret files on Iraqi and Palestinian refugees for three thousand dollars with an Iraqi "Foreign Official" who had flown in from Baghdad the same day.

    Lennox then continued:

      It is not clear whether Melin had the same monetary agreement with the CIA but what is clear is the fact that he was routinely passing classified personal files on American deserters who had come to Sweden to escape from fighting in Vietnam. The information from these personal files was certainly valuable to the CIA. When a deserter came to Sweden and asked for political asylum he was first interrogated in depth by the police from Melin's department. Specific details of his escape route to Sweden were recorded. And of course this was immediately passed on to the CIA. It is therefore not surprising that in the early seventies deserters had problems coming to Europe. 22

    Details of the deserters were not the only thing to interest the CIA during this time. From information contained in the material found in Melin's flat, the CIA were asking for details of Swedes who were ever active within the Vietnam movement. Apparently it is this which has really upset the Swedish authorities the most.

    Lennox then later writes about the ADC:

      It was this committee which was the main target of the CIA. And it was here that Hans Melin helped the CIA to infiltrate two of their own agents under cover as deserters. The Swedish press in the late sixties and early seventies wrote many stories of "alleged" CIA activity within the ADC. One such story featured two Americans who suddenly appeared in 1971 with their pockets full of hash and dollars. Shortly after their arrival many of the deserters were appearing at press conferences with huge joints in their hands. This did not go. down too well with the politically-minded Swedes. Nor surprisingly the image of the deserter soon turned sour.

      The two "deserters" were eventually neutralized by the more active members of the ADC in a press expose. Michael Vale and Bill Jones are their names and whether or not they were in fact officially CIA is still not clear. However, after the press expose, they left Sweden for Wiesbaden in West Germany where they became active in the European Labour Committee.

    Lennox's claims were absurd. 23 Vale and Jones hardly "showed up" in Sweden in 1971 and both hated the counterculture. As far as I can tell, Lennox got his facts completely backward. It was Vale and Jones who exposed the alleged CIA agents. Lennox may have been confused since he seems to have assumed that the NCLC itself must have been a CIA operation and that the 1971 incident was further proof of just this fact.

[And so on, leading to...]


    Two other members of the Vale-TNS network who would later play prominent roles inside the NCLC were Bill Engdahl and Warren Hammerman. A Texas-born Princeton graduate who had polio, Engdahl was living in Sweden in 1969 where he was doing graduate work at the University of Stockholm. During the Chris White affair, Engdahl famously had a breakdown and reportedly began screaming "Cancel Me." LaRouche, in turn, would use the Engdahl incident to claim that Engdahl had been brainwashed by Mike Vale in Sweden in 1969. In his February-March 1974 Campaigner editorial, LaRouche wrote:
    In the case of William Engdahl, we have located only five weeks (during July and August [1973]) during which he was programmed in Chicago, a less ambitious program, but one on a victim who had been previously programmed by the CIA in Sweden in late 1969.

    Since LaRouche had claimed that Chris White had been subjected to foul (no pun intended) tortures involving sex with barnyard animals like sheep, he had to come up with something equally exotic when it came to Engdahl. As part of LaRouche's "proof" that Engdahl had been brainwashed, LaRouche included in his 3 January speech the claim that Engdahl
    was sitting on a couch sucking a pig one morning recently.. Why was he actuating a pig? Because his control was in the Russian language, and "pig" in Russian is penis. He was receiving a reward - what's called "freedom" - "svoboda" - for having completed part of his assignment for the CIA.

    Exactly why Engdahl had his breakdown is unknown but during the 1974 crisis, some people did have mini-breakdowns. Others became so delusional that even LaRouche claimed that certain members were actually volunteering claims that they too had been brainwashed when they were not as a way of getting his approval! But did LaRouche and his Security Staff, already deep in a witch-hunt mindset, go after Engdahl in particular and hasten a breakdown?

    One possibility is that after the NCLC's Security Staff got wind of a possible The Real Paper story on LaRouche and linked it with Vale (for whatever reason), they began intensively interrogating anyone inside the organization who had any connection to him. Engdahl may have come under intensive interrogation to determine if he himself were part of the plot and that the pressure may have led him to have a nervous breakdown. Since the Security Staff advanced the notion that Chris White had been brainwashed to want to have sex with sheep, in classic witch-finder fashion they may have fed a similar fantasy to an already paranoid Engdahl. (As is well known, under intensive interrogation many people will confess to almost anything including murder.)

    The NCLCs Security Staff seems to have conducted a special investigation of anyone even remotely connected to TNS and Vale. In early January 1974, for example, a former member of the group's National Executive Committee and his wife were forbidden. to leave their apartment until Security "cleared" them because they had gone to Sweden on a vacation a few years earlier. The theory was that they could have been brainwashed in Sweden. The fact that they had no memory of being brainwashed only made it clear that they might have well have been brainwashed really brainwashed people weren't supposed to remember being brainwashed. It was as if George Orwell had met the Marx Brothers, Karl and Groucho.

    For someone like Engdahl, it would not be surprising that he had a paranoid temporary breakdown after the NCLC began interrogating him and accusing him and the TNS group of being filled with "agents." His ravings were then presented by LaRouche as further objective proof that there was indeed a vast plot against him.

Once again, there's much more at LINK.

Also, since the Chris White affair was such a watershed event in the Larouche movement's evolving nuttiness, and a very vivid example of the genre of experience that's likely to have at least contributed something to the worldviews of its ex-members, I highly, highly recommend that anyone who's interested check out the chapter that lays out the basics on that one, too. Which is at this link right HERE.
User avatar
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby wintler2 » Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:03 am


Lupercalis defying the world to prove LaRouche is an intel asset, as if that is the only thing that might be wrong with his slant on and activities in the world. In fact there is plenty to condemn LaRouche for regardless of who pays his bills, and there is every reason to treat all his allies and fellow travellers as bad data until proven otherwise.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby lupercal » Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:35 am

wintler2 wrote:Image
User avatar
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby wintler2 » Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:18 pm


LaRouche and Herb Quinde in Spain. Article from leading Madrid daily El Mundo (1995) describes LaRouche and Quinde's role in encouraging the Spanish government to set up mercenary death squads that kidnapped, tortured and/or killed many Basques--both members of the insurgent ETA and innocents--between 1983 and 1987. Article quotes from a CIA report and also from a book by the investigative journalists whose uncovering of the death squads was a major factor in bringing down Spain's Socialist government. Claims that Quinde offered to put Spanish officials in contact with "professional killers."

More on LaRouche, Quinde and the Spanish death squads. As compensation for providing information on Basque refugees in France, the LaRouchians obtained a dossier from the Spanish police on the finances of former Waffen SS officer Otto Skorzeny's family--i.e., the SS's "ODESSA" money. Apparently LaRouche felt that he himself was the proper heir to this rumored Nazi nest egg.

Quinde complained, in the Dec. 13, 1983 EIR, that his friends in the Spanish security forces weren't taking a hard enough line. How many killings would it have taken to satisfy Quinde and his master LaRouche? Hundreds? Thousands? And how much evidence will it take to persuade certain ex-LaRouchians in Europe and the United States to finally come forward and tell what they know about the LaRouche movement's role in human rights violations (including the events that resulted in the death of Jeremiah Duggan)?

A whiff of Nazism. BBC News reports (1998): "Correspondents say the Spanish people would have overlooked the government's involvement--had it not been that more than a third of the people killed by the GAL death squads had no connection to ETA." Also summarizes a report from El Mundo that "agents from the Spanish military intelligence organization CESID were involved in GAL" and that "CESID agents kidnapped a beggar and two drug addicts as medical guinea-pigs in preparation for the kidnapping of a leading Basque terrorist, and dubbed their kidnap plan Operation Mengele--after the Nazi doctor who carried out medical experiments on Jews, vagrants and other victims of the Holocaust."

Fascist-style rant by Herbe Quinde (1985). Excerpt from Quinde's speech "The Cancer of Pluralism" that trashes democracy (along with the Gnostics, Aristotle, the Beatles, Henry Kissinger, the Eastern Orthodox Church etc. etc.) and ends with the memorable statement: "[I]t may be time to start burning witches again." Apparently Quinde would have fit right in ideologically with the neo-Nazi "professional killers" hired by GAL.

LaRouche's game plan (fall 1982) for escalating the struggle against ETA. Article in EIR urges Spain to choose strong leaders in upcoming elections who will stand up to the "vicious financial oligarchy." Analyzes three possible groups on the right that could rouse Spanish "patriots." Two of these groups are dismissed as hopeless, but EIR singles out as the good guys "those individuals associated with the internal security and anti-terrorism forces around Interior Minister Roson." Describes this faction, supposedly called the Azules, as being "derived from the Francoist [Falangist] student movement." Says they are "committed to the fight against terrorism and deeply patriotic, but crippled by extremely poor intelligence about the 'outside world.'" (The LaRouchians apparently aspired to bring them up to speed.)

The article then goes into the subject of the "enemies of Spain," chiefly the Basque ETA, and claims the Azules are waging a "desperate, rear-guard battle" against the ETA, which is supposedly backed by the British, the Black Guelphs and the Jesuits. Suggests that the Azules get tough with France, which functions "as a rest and resort center for ETA killers on leave, as well as the main entry point for the drug traffic which sustains ETA, and the place where over $20 million a year in protection money is paid by Basque industrialists to ETA, under the blind eye of the French police." The plan for setting up GAL that emerged after the LaRouche-Quinde meetings with Spanish police officials fits rather well with the suggestions contained in this article, co-written by Elisabeth Hellenbroich, sister-in-law of Heribert Hellenbroich, a high official of West Germany's Federal Bureau of Constitutional Protection (BfV) and its director from 1983-1985 (he kindly removed the LaRouche organization from its watch list).

First official communique of the Spanish death squads (Dec. 14, 1983). Proclaims a strategy quite similar to what the LaRouchians were promoting in Executive Intelligence Review, i.e., do something about ETA's alleged "rest and resort center" in France.

EIR correspondents obtain interviews (1982) with Spanish Defense Minister Alberto Oliart and Interior Minister Juan Jose Roson. This suggests EIR was being taken seriously by the center-right government that preceded the Socialists. (The headlines of both interviews are coded allusions to the Basque problem.) Unfortunately, the Socialists who came to power later that year would also begin to listen to the seductive LaRouche line.

EIR proclaims (March 1983) that "the survival of the Spanish nation hangs on defeating the Basque operation." Alleges that U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz met with the Socialist Interior Minister, Jose Barrionuevo, and urged against rekindling a crackdown on the Basques. I am skeptical that Shultz ever gave such advice, but if he did, Barrionuevo should have listened. As it was, Barrionuevo ended up with a ten-year prison sentence for his role in setting up the death squads.

EIR (October 1984) panders to the ultranationalism of some elements in the Spanish security forces, while also demeaning the Basque culture and language. This article, appearing while the GAL mercenaries were on their rampage, could only have served to encourage and intensify the kidnappings and murders. And, hey, if the Basques are an inferior culture whose only goal is to destroy the Spanish nation on behalf of dope pushers, London bankers, and the KGB, well, why not torture a few more of them before delivering the final bullet to the brain?

LaRouche's EIR (1995) suggests ETA terrorists are active with the insurgency in the Mexican state of Chiapas. Since the LaRouchians could no longer induce the Spanish government to operate death squads against what they regarded as the Black Guelph-controlled, British-loving, Jesuit-brainwashed ETA, they decided to try to persuade the Mexican government to take up the task. The reader will note that this unsigned article focusses on accusing Basque emigres in Latin America of doing pretty much what the GAL did: kidnap and murder people on foreign soil. The propaganda tactic here is not dissimilar from when LaRouche in the mid-1980s accused his opponents of being drug traffickers while himself working for Manuel Noriega and the Panamanian Defense Forces' G-2 unit.

High Spanish officials are jailed for backing death squads (BBC News, 1998). Former Spanish Interior Minister Jose Barrionuevo, his security chief Rafael Vera, and former Civil Governor Julian Sancristobal were each sentenced to 10 years in prison by the Spanish Supreme Court for their role in the "dirty war." Supreme Court Justice Joaquin Delgado said there were "no mitigating circumstances." Article says that the death squads murdered 28 people they suspected of being ETA members. "It was later discovered that at least a third of them had no connection to the armed group [ETA]."

Herb Quinde a/k/a Herb Kinney, Herb Strong, Herb Goomi, Herb Kurtz, and David Feingold. He tried to fool NBC Nightly News by pretending to be a researcher for the Newark Star Ledger, but it didn't work.

Dennis King letter to Our Town (1982) on Quinde's tricks. "He bought a shuttle ticket and took a seat across the aisle from me. He introduced himself as an AFL-CIO official, gave a Jewish name, and pretended to be concerned about the 'LaRouche menace.'"

many embedded links @ ... -spain.htm
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Jun 21, 2011 6:25 am

lupercal wrote:
wintler2 wrote:Image


jules' rock


Joe Hillshoist
Posts: 9351
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby American Dream » Tue Apr 03, 2018 7:21 pm

This thread deserves a bump:

AUGUST 23, 2017

A “New Dawn” for Fascism: the Rise of the Anti-Establishment Capitalists



Regime Change Inc. and the New World Order

A further intriguing example of similar reactionary thinking vis-a-vis the dynamics of social change is provided in the work of F. William Engdahl, who in 2004 republished his 1992 book A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order with the left-wing publisher Pluto Press. Prior to Pluto’s not so inspired decision to publish this book, Engdahl had spent decades working as an editor for Lyndon LaRouche’s conspiracy network (at least until 1997), and his book merely recycled many LaRouchite narratives including that the 1960s counterculture New Age movement was a manufactured CIA-backed “project.” To be more specific, according to Engdahl the creation of the hippie movement had been overseen by the “Anglo-American liberal establishment” which was then used in conjunction with another “weapon” of the elite, the creation of a “manipulated ‘race war’”. As part of this fictional elite-orchestrated process of social change Engdahl went on to add more details to his heady conspiracy, noting that: “The May 1968 student riots in France, were the result of the vested London and New York financial interests in the one G-10 nation which continued to defy their mandate.” In a brief comment he then explained his idiotic belief that…

“modern Anglo-American liberalism bore a curious similarity to the Leninist concept of a ‘vanguard party,’ which imposed a ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ in the name of some future ideal of society. Both models were based on deception of the broader populace.”

Since publishing his first book Engdahl has continued his prolific publishing record by writing for New Age neo-fascist magazines like New Dawn. Building upon his credentials as an oil historian he now publicises his conversion to the latest right-wing conspiracy craze that asserts that oil is actually limitless and not actually a fossil fuel (in this Engdahl consciously drew upon Stalinist research carried out by Russian and Ukrainian scientists in the 1950s). Engdahl’s ability to read conspiracies into any subject are truly second to none: a couple of years ago he chose to misinterpret medical research that actually highlighted progress in the struggle to fight cancer in order to write an article asserting that scientific evidence proved that chemotherapy, not cancer, is the real killer!

Engdahl it seems is a man with a special mission, and in recent years he has served on the advisory boards of two neo-fascist journals that were published in Italy (Geopolitica which was edited by a leading member of Dugin’s International Eurasian Movement, and Eurasia, Rivista di Studi Geopolitici which was published and edited by Italian Nazi-Maoist Claudio Mutti). Engdahl is also a regular contributor (like Dr Bolton) to the articles and videos produced by the neo-fascist Russian think tank Katehon – a group funded by billionaire philanthropist Konstantin Malofeev (see later) whose work is overseen by the close Dugin-ally and homegrown Ukrainan esoteric fascist, Leonid Savin. In line with this political orientation, Engdahl additionally writes and acts as an advisor for Veterans Today, an organization that, in the name of opposing warmongering, does yeoman’s service to popularizing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.[2]

Engdahl’s railing against the globalist conspiracy was fully evident in his 2009 book Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order. Herein Engdahl focuses on the historic activities of liberal philanthropy and the NED in creating what he calls synthetic movements for ‘non-violent change.’ This book was well-received in certain Russian military circles, and was cited approvingly by fellow Katehon contributor Andrew Korybko in his 2015 book Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach To Regime Change which Korybko was able publish while he was a member of the expert council for the Institute of Strategic Studies and Predictions at the People’s Friendship University of Russia. Korybko is also privileged enough to be able to espouse his views to a global audience through his work as a journalist for Sputnik International. However, although people like Engdahl and Korybko do great work at popularizing disempowering theories, arguably the most effective proponent of the conspiracy surrounding the activities of the NED in Eurasia was undertaken by Putin’s former chief PR strategist, Gleb Pavlovsky.

Gleb Pavlovsky’s unique role in helping develop a reactive strategy to foreign “democracy” promoters like the NED has been referred to as “Putin’s Preventive Counter-Revolution” by Robert Horvath. He argues that his strategy was born of the regimes anxiety in the wake of the 2003 ‘Rose Revolution’ in Georgia, which marked “the first of the new wave of democratic revolutions in the post-Soviet space”. Pavlovsky is subsequently credited with having been the “mastermind of the Putin regime’s response” to these NED/Soros-backed democratic interventions. Moreover, Horvath adds a personal aside to this tale, observing that because Pavlovsky had served as “an advisor to the [Viktor] Yanukovych camp in the Ukrainian presidential election [in 2004], he had experienced the ‘Orange Revolution’ as a personal defeat.” Hence Pavlovsky’s went on to play a critical role in encouraging Putin to respond with a more thoroughgoing embrace of a conspiratorial interpretation of social uprisings.

No doubt taking hope from such conspiracies, Putin, during the 2007 Russian election, delivered his “most venomous tirade against the enemy within” for “counting ‘upon the support of foreign foundations and governments and not the support of their own people’. The following week these foreign enemies were then the focus of Arkadii Mamontov’s powerful conspiracy documentary (, which, as Horvath explained, “vilified leading opposition activists involved in the Other Russia coalition.” In this documentary F. William Engdahl found his voice yet again as the sole foreign expert to legitimate this open display of state propaganda. Echoing the aforementioned conspiracies surrounding the foreign funding of the Bolshevik Revolution, Mamontov maligned the anti-Putin political activism undertaken by the libertarian Russian-Croatian chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov, explaining to his viewers that Kasparov had “returned from America, like his colleague Trotsky once did”.

Bigotry in the Service of Tsardom

Perhaps styling himself after Fox News’ own once-powerful conspirator, Bill O’Reilly, Mamontov never misses a chance to launch vicious tirades against western liberalism. Mamontov thus puts his weekly sermons on the major national TV channel, Rossiya 1, to full use in the service of Putin’s anti-liberal brand of authoritarianism. In many ways the content of these Orwellian hate shows might be seen as an attempt to emulate Stalin’s famous show trials, allowing Mamontov and his conspirators to publicly try and convict all those guilty of tainting Russian patriotism. Just as Stalin persecuted Trotsky’s supporters as fascists (the enemy within), to Mamontov all critics of Putin (whether liberal or socialist) are fascist as far as he is concerned. That said, it is the alleged perversion and decadence of the West that features as Mamontov’s number one target, with one of his most vile contributions to date being his 2015 documentary Sodom, which is nothing other than a relentless attack on homosexuality. Keen to utilize ‘independent’ western critics to attack America’s latest so-called export, Sodom features the notorious anti-gay Christian activist Scott Lively, who in addition to being the author of bile-filled book The Pink Swastika, famously advised the Ugandan government on their notorious anti-homosexual legislation. Lively later went on to closely replicate Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill by working with Brian Brown to help the Russia state draft their own hateful Anti-Gay Laws. Notably, only last year Brian Brown went on to be elected president of the World Congress on Families – an international far-right coalition which has been correctly described as “one of the major driving forces behind the U.S. Religious Right’s global export of homophobia and sexism.” Joining arms with American funders, conservative Russian elites also played a central role in founding the World Congress on Families; and one billionaire who is to the fore of currently funding the Congresses activities is the loyal Putin-supporter, Konstantin Malofeev.

Much like the amazing Octopus-like reach of the Koch Brothers in America, Malofeev, as a devout extremist philanthropist, not only acts the president of his own neo-fascist think tank, Katehon, but has also founded his own his own Russian Orthodox TV channel with none other than Dugin sitting at its editorial helm. Another of Malofofeev’s explicitly elitist pet ambitions is to ensure that a new patriotic cadre is ready to rule Russia when (as he hopes) the Eurasian movement comes to complete domination of the state apparatus. To undertake this task Malofofeev created St Basil the Great School, which as he explained “in an interview with the Guardian, is meant to function as ‘an Orthodox Eton’, which will prepare the new elite for a future Russian monarchy.”

The fond memories that Russian oligarchs maintain for the alleged glory days of the pre-1917 reign of the Tsar are reactionary in the extreme, which, when combined with the mainstream media’s demonization of revolutionary social movements, has troubling consequences for the potential future growth of working-class struggle. Indeed the level of misunderstanding of Russia’s most significant political historical event is perplexing to anyone who has studied Russian history. One such liberal Bolshevik expert is Professor Alexander Rabinowitch, who, reflecting upon his recent visits to Russia explained how he…

“…was struck by the absolutely crazy questions I was being asked: Was there a February Revolution? Is it true that everything was great in Russia in February, and it was the Generals or the Masons or the intelligentsia that caused the Revolution? And this to some extent is being encouraged, the idea that the Empire – that Imperial Russia was strong and that is where Russia’s future lies – I think that is being encouraged by the [Putin] regime, which really cannot just ignore the Revolution, and so it is helping fund serious scholarly conferences [which Rabinowitch attends], but at a popular level that’s not what is happening, and crazy things are being published and crazy things are being said, and these lead to crazy questions…. I certainly get that as I read about popular thought in newspapers.”

Again one popularizer of such nonsense is F. William Engdahl who wrote in 2015 in the journal of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences that:

“Contrary to the mythology that passes for history at western universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, Princeton or Harvard, Russia in the years leading to outbreak of World War I was on the path to become a towering prosperous economic nation, something especially not welcome in London.”

This gobbledygook leads Engdahl to his latest conspiratorial revelation: “Wall Street and the City of London financed Leon Trotsky, Lenin, and the Bolshevik Revolution essentially as they did Boris Yeltsin after 1990, to open up Russia for looting and balkanization by favored western companies.”

Propagating Conspiracies and New Eurasianism

Contemplating the nature of the Russian media’s relentless misrepresentation of the colored revolutions as simply “organized and paid for by the Americans,” one mainstream commentator writing for The Atlantic earlier this year observed: “Now, we see the same kinds of theories pop up in state media portrayals of the Revolutions of 1917.” But strictly speaking this is not really a new development as evidenced by the putrid outpouring of the likes of Engdahl and Spence. But such false flag right-wing propaganda is not limited to journalists and academics, as Putin’s former key advisor, Gleb Pavlovsky, as mentioned earlier, also played a critical role in spreading such misinformation within Russian society. Pavlovsky was aided in this task through his role as the host of a news show (between 2005 and 2008) that was aired on RTV – a Russian television channel that has been owned by natural gas giant Gazprom since 2001.

Corporate networking events like the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum also play an important role in laundering the latest conspiracy theories amongst the Russian power elite. Last year, for example, Engdahl was featured on an all-star panel sponsored by energy giant Rusal that was titled “The Russian Economic Growth Agenda.” Speaking alongside Engdahl on this prestigious line-up was one of Putin’s primary economic advisors, Sergey Glaziev, who also sits on the advisory board of the right-wing think tank, Katehon. Glaziev likewise maintains his own close connections to Engdahl’s former boss, Lyndon LaRouche, whose shadowy conspiracy network published the English translation of Glaziev’s book in 1999 as Genocide: Russia and the New World Order.

These ominous links between LaRouche’s reactionary conspiracy network and Russian elites have been well-documented elsewhere, but needless to say LaRouchites often feature as “experts” on Russian television, particularly on Russia Today. LaRouche and his co-conspirators are even counted as close allies of one of Dugin’s key ideological supporters, Natalya Vitrenko, who is the leader of the misnamed Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine. Following in Stalin’s footsteps Vitrenko, with no hint of irony, regularly refers to her democratic opponents as fascists, just as LaRouche himself does. (Note: LaRouche has good form in supporting authoritarian leaders; a good example being the ideological aid his network bestowed upon the Marcos dictatorship in the Philippines during the peoples revolution of 1986.)

But while LaRouche with his endless supply of “alternative facts” has certainly provided further fuel for the explosion of conspiracy theories in Russia, the proselytizing of other homegrown intellectuals should be considered more important. This is especially the case with the reactionary neo-Eurasian ideas that have taken root within Putin’s increasingly authoritarian regime; a dark influence that reared its head during Putin’s annual address to the federal assembly in December 2012 when the president reminded his disciples of the contemporary relevance of the ideas of the late Lev Gumilyov’s (1912-1992). Gumilyov was a vehemently anti-Marxist theorist of the fledgling Eurasian movement who, amongst his other bizarre beliefs, was incensed that the Bolshevik Revolution had embodied “alien” western and Jewish values. It was Gumilyov’s intellectual legacy that has been rehashed and updated by both Dugin (who describes Gumilyov as his most important Russian mentor) and by a once-prominent professor at Moscow State University’s Faculty of Philosophy, Aleksandr Panarin (1940–2003). Although Dugin is best-known as the intellectual guru for the Eurasian movement, Panarin’s primary contribution to this developing paradigm was to insert the esoteric and fascist ideas of the philosophical leader of the French New Right, Alain de Benoist.

More at: ... pitalists/
American Dream
Posts: 19708
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby American Dream » Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:48 am

The LaRouche Movement

The LaRouchite Cult And Its Ideology
While Lyndon LaRouche and his movement are easily dismissed as being a ludicrous group of weird conspiracy theorists and cranks, researchers Chip Berlet, Matthew Lyons and Matthew Feldman say this outward image acts as a smokescreen for the real nature of this organization: a violent fascistic cult which is an inciter of hate against Jewish and British people as well as presently the prime worldwide distributor of coded anti-Jewish literature based on the anti-Semitic forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

The LaRouche Movement itself functions as a totalitarian cult with the aim of promoting Lyndon LaRouche, who exerts a dictatorial control over the whole movement, and is organized into a corporatist structure which is itself complemented by an intelligence division as well as multiple defunct and still-existent front groups and numerous publications.

The ideology of the LaRouche movement itself views the world as dominated by “an Anglo-Jewish oligarchy which is behind a conspiracy to weaken Western society through international banking, drug trafficking and Zionists, with the British being behind a plot to balkanize the US and the Queen as responsible for drug trafficking”. Their view of history is that one of an eternal war opposing good “Platonists” to evil “Aristotelians” according to which “good humanists” have been in a conflict for millennia against an “evil oligarchy” based initially in Babylon, then Venice and presently Britain’s House of Windsor, being effectively a form of anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, and they often target Jewish people in positions of power, such as Kenry Kissinger and the Rothschild family, as members of this alleged conspiracy. LaRouche’s answer to this supposed conspiracy lies in a “humanist” dictatorship who would rule on behalf of industrial capitalists, with Lyndon LaRouche himself of course at its head. The core of LaRouche’s ideology can be described as a coded form of Illuminati, Freemason and “Jewish banker” conspiracy theories which are internally consistent despite being their outlandish appearance.

The organization’s methods of mass recruitment involve psychological manipulation by convincing its victims the whole world is a police-controlled environment perpetually feeding them misinformation, the result of which being a global collapse happening for which they are held responsible unless they submit fully to LaRouche, who will “teach them how to think”, and to his ideology which proclaims Lyndon LaRouche as the savior who will fix all this wrong. New members are made to undergo what amounts to psychological torture to erase their past and turn them into “new individuals” with new personalities subservient to the cult and younger members are forced into what amounts into indentured labor to raise funds. A Security Division is also present, responsible for supposedly protecting LaRouche and keeping dissident members in line, investigating members who appear disillusioned and making it difficult for anyone asking questions to to leave the organization.

The History of LaRouche
Lyndon LaRouche served as a non-combatant in the US army in the Second World War, after which he was briefly close to the Communist Party USA before joining the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party (SWP) in 1949. Within the SWP, LaRouche was part of a faction called the Revolutionary Tendency which was later expelled by the SWP in late 1963 and early 1964, following which he shortly joined the Spartacist League before founding the National Caucus for Labor Committees (NCLC) with the aim of gaining control of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) until the SDS expelled the NCLC in 1969.

Following this, the group expanded its activities, gaining adherents in Europe, and with its members becoming fanatically devoted to the group and its leader, and LaRouche himself adopting what Chip Berlet describes as “the same ideas and styles which took National Socialism and turned it into part of the European fascist movement”, and in 1973 the NCLC was responsible for a series of physical assaults called “Operation Mop-Up” on leftists in the United States including the CPUSA, SWP, the Progressive Labor Party and Black Power activists in an attempt to either gain political hegemony on the American left or destroy it, with the NCLC being compared to Hitler’s Brownshirts by US Communists. The NCLC from then on also adopted virulent sexism and homophobia in its theories while becoming more and more of a totalitarian cult-like group fully subordinate to LaRouche himself and adopting brainwashing techniques typically found in cults.

This same year LaRouche founded the US Labor Party (USLP) as a political wing of the NCLC and the next year first began to contact far-right groups while also devolving into conspiracy theories about a supposed global conspiracy by the Rockefellers. In 1976, during LaRouche’s first presidential campaign, he attempted to infiltrate far-right groups such as the American Conservative Union, the John Birch Society, the Young Americans for Freedom and the Ku Klux Klan while also forging links with Republican Party state organizations during the same decade. With the help of KKK grand dragon and American Nazi Party member Roy Frankhauser and former CIA officer Mitchell WerBell, with whom LaRouche arranged to provide the NCLC security force with armed training, he gained access to wider right-wing circles which included spies, mercenaries and intelligence operatives, and Frankhouser would later support LaRouche during his trial in the late 80s. LaRouche would start working through front groups such as the Schiller Institute (which was founded by Lyndon LaRouche’s wife Helga Zepp-LaRouche [archive]), Food for Peace and publications like Executive Intelligence Review, New Solidarity (later The New Federalist).

Around the time of the death of Nelson Rockefeller, LaRouche came under the influence of the Liberty Lobby of Willis Carto, himself a prominent Holocaust denier, admirer of Hitler and disciple of Francis Yockey. As he did in 1976, LaRouche again shifted, this time from conspiracy theories about Rockefeller to conspiracy theories of obvious anti-Semitic nature about a supposed worldwide conspiracy under the control of the “British Oligarchy”, with the Queen of England as their lackey. By the end of that same year, LaRouche had moved fully to the far-right, with his newspaper New Solidarity becoming more and more anti-Semitic and full of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories about international bankers, influential Jewish families, the KGB and secret societies.

As researcher Dennis King records, LaRouche’s attitude towards the Soviet Union changed around this time, going from praising Leonid Brezhnev to demonizing Moscow and calling it the “Third Rome” and a center of the Russian Orthodox Church, which he believed was controlled by the “British oligarchs”. LaRouche called Mikhail Gorbachev the Anti-Christ when he took power.

LaRouche’s activities in the 70s also included harassment campaigns against the United Auto Workers and the United Steelworkers of America, and he started collecting and disseminating intelligence on progressive groups at this point, selling them to US as well as foreign intelligence agencies so that, by the 1980s, LaRouche had already developed an extensive and sophisticated telecommunications network through which political and economic intelligence was collected and then re-shared. LaRouche worked with several states’ intelligence, police and militaries, among whom the Shah of Iran for whom they investigated student dissidents and gave reports to the SAVAK, Filipino dictator Ferdinand Marcos, Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, the South African apartheid regime for which they prepared reports on anti-apartheid groups, the Argentine Junta, the US Reagan administration until the mid-80s and with the KGB between 1974 to about 1983, the LaRouchites themselves claiming they acted as an open channel between the CIA and the KGB while also taking responsibility for Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defense program.

In many cases, LaRouche would defend the dictators with whom he worked through distortions such as by claiming Manuel Noriega was overthrown by the US because he resisted the US government’s cocaine trade [archive] even though Noriega had himself been a CIA collaborator involved with cocaine trade, and painting the brutal dictator Ferdinand Marcos as a sympathetic figure and denying his abuses [archive].

True to its virulent homophobia, the LaRouche Organization would in 1986 also sponsor Proposition 64, also known as the “LaRouche Initiative” in the US state of California, which would require any HIV positive individuals to be reported to state authorities and barred from schools and jobs in restaurants and possibly be quarantined. The proposition was defeated twice.

In the mid-80s however, following LaRouche candidates winning the Democratic primary in Illinois in 1986 (leading Democratic Party senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan to condemn his party for ignoring its infiltration by LaRouche) and subsequent investigations into LaRouche’s illegal fundraising bringing the organization to public light, the ties between the Reagan administration and LaRouche were severed. Many LaRouche Movement organizations were seized by the US government and LaRouche himself was imprisoned for fraud and conspiracy from 1989 to 1990, being defended by the former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, about whom I wrote more further below in this post.

With the loss of their US government connections, LaRouche instead moved to seek ties with other states’ political elites, and the collapse of the Soviet Union meant that LaRouche became interested in the Russian Federation, with the Schiller Institute for Science and Culture, a branch of the LaRouche organ the Schiller Institute, being established in Moscow in 1992. LaRouche himself would repeatedly visit Russia throughout the 90s while additionally trying to influence Russian economic policy-making, with the Schiller Institute presenting a LaRouche memorandum to the State Duma in 1995, and LaRouche himself presenting his own report to the Russian parliament that same year [archive], with his conspiracist economic theories being well-received by groups such as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), the Liberal-Democratic Party of Russia as well as other ultra-nationalists.

In Russia itself, LaRouche’s position is that of absolute praise and support for Vladimir Putin [archive] and his administration along with nostalgia for the Soviet Union. LaRouche’s support for Putin is driven both by Putin foreign policy hostile to the European Union and the United States as well as LaRouche and Putin having similar positions on internal policy, both promoting reactionary ideas such as an authoritarian state, the primacy of traditional culture and religion as well as infrastructure projects.

At the same time as his rapprochement with the Russian establishment, LaRouche moved from biological to cultural racism, and started shifting towards more ostensibly left-wing positions in the 90s, organizing anti-war demonstrations and rallies and attempting to insert themselves in anti-war coalitions during the Gulf War, attempting to form coalitions with and control African-American civil rights groups since the 70s, opposing the death penalty, praising the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, supporting social programs against the Republican Party’s budget cuts, criticizing neoconservatives and organizing anti-war conferences in the prelude to the imperialist invasion of Iraq by George W. Bush. It was in this context that, in 2003, a British student in Paris named Jeremiah Duggan found himself in one such rally believing it to be a legitimate anti-war event at the Schiller Institute which however turned out to be a recruitment session for LaRouche’s network. After Jeremiah stood up to the anti-Semitic conspiracism during the event and announced he was Jewish, his body was found hours later on a roadside, having died in a state of terror. Jeremiah’s mother received two interrupted phone calls shortly before his death where Jeremiah cried out loud that he feared for his safety. German authorities however hastily ruled it as a suicide and closed the case within three months without having recorded any formal witnesses, and the coroner who later ruled his death was not a suicide however refused to accept evidence that Jeremiah had been killed.

LaRouche has been a “pioneer” of presenting fascism through a facade of progressivism, and already in 1981, the Liberty Lobby was defending LaRouche by declaring that “No group has done so much to confuse, disorient, and disunify the Left as they have… the USLP should be encouraged, as should all similar breakaway groups from the Left, for this is the only way that the Left can be weakened and broken”. This is evident in how, more recently, LaRouche was one of the many far-right groups who attempted to infiltrate the Occupy Wall Street movement and were rejected by it. RT has also hosted LaRouche and his movement many times, promoting him as a misunderstood civil rights leader [archive], as “expert” on the Egyptian Revolution [archive], and to speak about the New Silk Road project [archive].

The Proximity Between LaRouche And The New Right
The above mentioned positions of LaRouche and his cult, such as a Manichean view of history as a perennial war (“Platonists” opposed to “Aristotelians” for LaRouche, and a “Land Power” opposed to a “Sea Power” for Dugin), cultural racism, and geopolitical support for Russia as the key to humanity’s salvation coupled with opposition to the US and UK, are something they share with other groups such as Aleksandr Dugin and his neo-Eurasianists as well other New Right groups and “red-brown” organizations such as the KPRF, hence leading to increased indirect contacts between these various reactionary groups. LaRouche and Dugin being very different from each other in that the former has a vision wrapped under a rhetoric of science and rationalism while the latter’s is based on Russian revival steeped in mysticism however prevent any substantial alliance between them.

The result is that LaRouche and Dugin share many common allies, which Matthew Lyons suggests might be open channels for sharing ideas between these two movements.

Sergey Glazyev
An interesting ally of both LaRouche and Dugin is Sergey Glazyev, who was Minister of External Economic Relations under the Yeltsin administration before resigning in protest over Yeltsin’s decision to dissolve the State Duma which led to the failed coup attempt of 1993. Glazyev was elected to the State Duma in 1994 and became chairman of the parliamentary Economic Affairs Committee, forming ties with LaRouche around this time and being praised by LaRouche “as a leading economist in opposition to Boris Yeltsin’s regime”. Glazyev’s interviews and writings were published on the LaRouchite publication Executive Intelligence Review, which also published [archive] the English translation of a conspiracist book by Glazyev. In 2001, LaRouche himself spoke [archive] a State Duma hearing on the Russian economy at the initiative of Glazyev, then chairman of the Duma Committee on Economic Policy and Entrepreneurship, who headed the hearing. In 2012, Sergey Glazyev was appointed by Putin as presidential aide to coordinate the work of federal agencies in developing the Customs Union between Belarus, Russia and Kazakhstan, a project which both LaRouche and Dugin happen to support.

Glazyev happens to be close to Aleksandr Dugin as well, though described as not an Eurasianist by the Duginists themselves, and assisted to the foundation of Dugin’s Eurasia Party in 2002 [archive] while Dugin was himself temporarily a member of Glazyev’s Rodina bloc in 2003. Glazyev and Dugin are both members of the Izborsky Club, a far-right-think tank founded and headed by Aleksandr Prokhanov [archive] which glorifies both the Tsar Peter the Great and Josef Stalin, and Sergey Glazyev also happens to be on the Supervisory Board of the far-right think tank Katehon [archive], as was Aleksandr Dugin until early 2017. The name Katehon appears to be a reference to the katechon, the Biblical restrainer of the Anti-Christ (a topic which Carl Schmit had written about), which Zurab Chavchavadze, who is on its Supervisory Board [archive], believes was the role of Tsarist Russia due to its position as a “worldwide bastion of Christianity” [archive]. Another member of its Supervisory Board is Andrey Klimov, who is a member of Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party and was a member of its General Council until 2016. ... stern-left
American Dream
Posts: 19708
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Postby American Dream » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:15 pm

CHAPTER 16 Mitch WerBell and the Hidden Origins of "Dope, Inc."

In late December 1978, the NCLC published Dope, Inc.: Britain's Opium War Against the U.S. The back cover of the book included this endorsement from Mitchell WerBell: "Dope, Inc. is a book of outstanding importance. It tells the history of a political strike against the United States in an undeclared war waged by Great Britain." Dope, Inc., in fact, was partly put together with the help of a WerBell associate named Walter Mackem, who regularly visited the NCLC's headquarters in New York to help in the "fact gathering" for the book. In his 1978 book Spooks, Jim Hougan describes Mackem as "a former CIA officer and expert in the international narcotics trade."1 The core thesis of Dope, Inc. revolved around the idea that the world drug trade – particularly the drug networks based in Asia – was part of a "British intelligence" plot against America allegedly centering on the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank (HKSB). The book attempted to link the narcotics business to the British aristocracy as well as to leading Jewish bankers. Most astonishing of all, the book even included a section endorsing the validity of the notorious anti-Semitic hoax, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

At the same time that the NCLC was producing Dope, Inc., WerBell and his cronies in U.S. military intelligence were deeply involved in the formation of their own "drug bank" known as Nugan Hand. Nugan Hand's trail would lead back to a group inside the United States intelligence community known as "Task Force 157." TF-157's members included some of the most notorious figures inside the secret world of American intelligence in the 1970s such as Frank Terpil and Ed Wilson. The creation of Dope, Inc. may even have been part of a strange "disinformation" attempt by elements inside the U.S. intelligence community to divert attention from their own involvement in the international narcotics trade.

Read more: ... UnityNow10
American Dream
Posts: 19708
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Data And Research

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest