Lyndon LaRouche, een man van controverse

[IlluSionS667]

Ik kwam toevallig op deze man uit tijdens een random browse-sessie. Als iemand van jullie hem kent, mag je altijd extra informatie geven.

Volgens Wikipedia :
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
http://www.larouchepub.com/graphics/display/larouche_portrait.gif

Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche, Jr. (born September 8, 1922 in Rochester, New Hampshire) is an American political activist and founder of several political organizations in the United States and elsewhere, jointly referred to as the LaRouche movement. He is known as 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.

There are sharply contrasting views of LaRouche. His supporters regard him as a brilliant and original thinker, whereas his critics see him as a conspiracy theorist, cult leader, and anti-Semite.[1] The Heritage Foundation has said that he "leads what may well be one of the strangest political groups in American history,"[2][3] described by Norman Bailey, a former senior staffer of the National Security Council, as "one of the best private intelligence services in the world."[3]

LaRouche was sentenced to fifteen 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. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who was one of LaRouche's attorneys, wrote that his case "involves 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."[4]

He is currently listed as a director and contributing editor of the Executive Intelligence Review News Service, part of the LaRouche movement. [31] He has written extensively on economic, scientific, and political topics as well as on history, philosophy, and psychoanalysis.

[...]
Political views of Lyndon LaRouche

The political views of Lyndon LaRouche are the source of much controversy. His critics and supporters often have difficulty agreeing on the meaning of statements he has made. This is complicated by the fact that his views have changed considerably over time, particularly during the 1970s when he abandoned much of his Marxist philosophy.
LaRouche has advocated a wide variety of conspiracy theories, including 9/11 conspiracy theories.[1] He has said that MI6 or senior advisers to the Queen of England have threatened to assassinate him,[2] and that the Queen is the "head of a gang that is pushing drugs" around the world.[3][4]

The following views are those presented by the LaRouche network as the most essential features of LaRouche's political and philosophical outlook.

LaRouche regards government as an expression of the highest aspirations of the citizenry. He believes that the material and cultural progress of humanity is the proper concern of government, and that the state does not serve a merely negative function, e.g., to ward off hostile foreign powers or restrain criminals. LaRouche regards "freedom" as the right to participate in what he sees as the progress of humanity, which requires certain minimum standards of material well-being and universal public education to equip the citizen to play that role. In LaRouche's view, the political system that best enables this is the republic.

The LaRouche network has taken a stand on a number of controversial issues:

They have called for a moratorium on Third World debt.
They have opposed the so-called counterculture, and the legalization of recreational drugs, arguing that these create a "bread and circuses"[5] culture of self-centered hedonism, and a highly manipulable population. LaRouche calls for a revival of classical culture, particularly in the domain of public education.
They have supported nuclear energy and other complex technologies often opposed by the environmentalist movement, arguing that human survival depends on a progression of technologies.
They believe that the idea of man-made global warming is a "fraud", and have referred to the Oscar-winning documentary film An Inconvenient Truth as "the Great Luddite Hoax."[6]
They defended President Bill Clinton during his impeachment scandal, claiming that those who called for Clinton's resignation or impeachment following the Monica Lewinsky scandal were hiding their true motives.
They opposed the 1991 Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq and supported Argentina in the 1982 Falklands/Malvinas war, arguing that under the Monroe Doctrine, the United States was obliged to oppose European colonies in the Western Hemisphere.
They opposed, from 1979 onwards, the deregulation of trucking, airlines, telecommunications, public utilities, and financial services in the U.S., during a period when deregulation was embraced by the leadership of both the Democratic and Republican parties.
They oppose the United Nations and other international organizations, particularly the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, in cases where LaRouche says they interfere with the concept of the Westphalian state and the Platonic ideal of a "perfectly sovereign nation-state republic".[citation needed] This holds especially true for their conduct toward the nations of the Third World, and LaRouche further argues that this conduct represents neo-colonialism.[...]

[Vorenus]

http://www.larouchepac.com/pages/z_other_files/about_lhl/lhl_biography.htm


Why We Keep Losing Wars
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

March 28, 2007

In the U.S.A.'s foolish plunge into an 1964-1972 Indo-China war, the U.S. forces won the battles, but lost the war for no more relevant reason than choosing that war. The war in Iraq which Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher foisted upon a credulous President George H.W. Bush, was much less a disaster, only because George H.W. Bush was wisely advised not to go deeper into Iraq. But, after the end of that war, Europe and the U.S.A. (both) promptly entered and lost the Balkan Wars which never should have been started. The new, spreading war in Southwest Asia, into which the British Blair government has lured such among its silly dupes as President Bush and its stooge Vice-President Cheney, has already been the worst folly of all, but is about to become much worse unless Cheney is quickly expelled from office.

This fact is underlined by reading of the meticulous March 26, 2007 After-Action Report by General Barry R. McCaffrey USA (ret). To sum up the essence of his report, the U.S. military forces are winning the battles, but our nation is being successfully destroyed by the criminality of London's Blair, a Blair Fabian government which has been leading Vice-President Cheney, and sundry other accomplices by their silly noses, leading our republic for "just one more step into the global strategic quicksand," into its imminently threatened self-destruction in the same fashion that London lured Napoleon Bonaparte into the guerrilla warfare trap in Spain.

Some of us are reminded of a grim joke, the Marine Colonel who led his regiment in the successful frontal attack on an opposing machine-gun nest, but lost the troops of his regiment in the attempt. The question asked of that colonel afterward, was: "Why didn't you flank them?" That colonel was a genius, compared with the Bush Administration's strategic planners of today.

The question the foolish U.S. Senators, and others, should be asking themselves, is: "Who is it who has virtually drugged our Congress, again and again, into battles which our forces win abroad, but lose at home?"

Who were the confounded idiots in the U.S. Senate, and elsewhere, who cheered for shutting down the U.S. economy permanently, at the behest of British agent Al Gore, all for the sake of abandoning our republic's sovereignty, to make us all slaves of a new world-empire, the new Tower of Babel called "globalization"?

Who are the idiots who are prepared to run for President of the U.S.A. under an alliance with those carrying that banner of treason which the Prince of Wales' patsy, and long-standing bearer of a deeply embedded family racist tradition; that of the Prince of Wales' intimate crony, the half-witted, but vicious, and babbling Malthusian Al Gore, whose lying "Global Warming" swindle is pushing all available, campus and other idiots among us, into bringing about the national suicide of the U.S. republic? That is the suicide which is being pushed by that Middlebury Monster and former associate of Chile's Pinochet and George Shultz, Felix Rohatyn.

The great lesson from the history of strategy since Greece was destroyed by its victory in the Peloponnesian War, is that the dangerously evil people in world history are those, like the British Empire, who have learned to win wars by getting other people to destroy themselves in fighting the kinds of wars designed to effect the mutual ruin of the combatants, such as our foolish plunge into the Indo-China war, the Balkan wars, and the Southwest Asia warfare unleashed by Britain's favorite, Henry A. Kissinger, in Lebanon, in April 1975, a war still raging today.

We do not need new enemies in Southwest Asia, when we have more than enough high-ranking scoundrels and fools successfully misleading us, in high-ranking circles here at home.

The great strategic issue facing the U.S.A., as the world as a whole today, is the conflict between the patriots, and those who defiled the U.S. Constitution on which our sovereignty is based, for foreign alliances and wars in complicity with those who wish to rid us of our sovereignty in favor of a global "Tower of Babel," and degrade us from a science-driven economy of progress, into a kind of people who self-respecting cave-men, and perhaps even monkeys, would justly regard with disgust.

[Ramón Gitannes]

LaRouche: "9/11 was an inside job"
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/lar_related/2007/1010_webcast_transcript.html
October 10, 2007
Washington, DC.

In early January of 2001, before the inauguration of George W. Bush as President, I warned that the general nature of the catastrophe would be, that the U.S. economy would be a failure—the policies of Bush would be a total failure: We were headed into a downslide, which in fact has happened, all throughout this period. And the thing we had to fear, from inside the U.S. government, was that someone would set off a form of terrorist incident within the year, which would shock the nation into submission.

In the Summer of that year, 2001, the recession was fully on. The collapse was on; the political systems were shaken by the collapse. And then, on the famous Sept. 11, someone, with cooperation from inside the highest levels of power in the United States, unleashed an incident which is called the 9/11 incident. That job was done with the complicity of the British Empire. It was done with complicity of elements in Saudi Arabia, as all the evidence would plainly tell you. That was a terrorist act, against the United States, done with complicity of people at a very high level inside the United States, with a coverup organized by people inside, a high level inside the United States.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyULc8y0ffQ