Lyndon LaRouche has intensified his campaign against environmentalists. Now he calls them nazis, and since they are nazis they should be put in prison!
"It's like the whole environmentalist movement. The whole environmentalist movement is one gigantic, anti-scientific fraud! There's not a single bit of truth in any of it. It's a faker. A guy says "I'm an ecologist, a scientific ecologist." All right, you're that? Well, I guess that's better than being a toadstool, I guess, huh? Because they're not worth anything. They're liars! Any guy who says, "I'm a scientist," and who says this free-energy policy is good, you know he's a faker. He's a fraudster. He belongs in prison. He's committed fraud. Shouldn't he go to prison? He's committing a fraud which is causing people to suffer. Shouldn't he go to prison? Well, put him in prison! They want to be institutional? Fine."
http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2009/webcasts/3615april11_qanda.html
Please look at this report of a LYM campaign, calling environmentalists nazis, on the universities in USA too!
http://forum.wwu.edu/node/4176
http://www.factnet.org/vbforum/showpost.php?p=378284&postcount=1834
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y185/brittn826/LaRouche.jpg
Do you still doubt whether LaRouche is a fascist or not, and whether the LaRouche Youtmovement (LYM) is a fascist cult or not?
/T
Fraud is a crime. If someone, in a responsible position promotes an energy policy that would destroy the USA, etc, and says that it will "help people," then they are committing fraud. That is a crime. If they want to sacrifice to Gaia, the Earth-Mother that is a personal religious matter for them, not a license to lie, commit fraud and steal.
ReplyDeleteYes, fraud is a violation of existing US law (which I suppose LaRouche is talking about (?)). But one has to be careful. A scientific theory, like global warming, can be a fraud, and a lethal fraud. But banning a theory makes more damage than gain. It is differnet when someone cheats with facts.
ReplyDeleteThere is much to say about LaRouches relationship to freedom of speech. But European should be more careful with his comments in some instances. When I read the quotes in http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/do-you-want-larouche-to-censor-internet.html/ there was rhetoric about destroying My Space etc, but no clear mention of banning it by law. On www.larouche.se they propose to ban violent computer games, that is true. But there is an ocean of difference between banning sorts of computer games and banning My Space and Facebook!
Here is a quote from "Dope, Inc", third edition, page 577 (Part of "A Proposed Multi-National Strategic Operation Against the Drug Trafficfor the Western Hemisphere"):
"b) Any person purchasing unlawful substances, or advocating the legalization of traffic in such substances, or advocating leniency in anti-drug military or law enforcement policy towards the production or trafficking in drugs, is guilty of the crime of giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war."
Here, there is no doubt that laRouche is speaking about legal guilt, not merely moral guilt. While I strongly oppose this policy, this alone is not enough to call anyone a fascist. However, when speaking with some people in the movement, I got quite diverging reactions. Some said that LaRouche was a little bit extreme sometimes, while a few LYM members not only supported this, but were quite general in their support of censorship.
To Howie G,
ReplyDeleteI know you really want to believe that LaR is the world's greatest thinker - and if only the rest of the world would "get smarter"....
You are living in "la-la land". You think you are a great humanist when in reality you are just a "slave" to LaR. Explain to me why LaR's last VP candidate was convicted of incest. Explain to me why LaR has never been able to "recruit" one single family to his cause - it's always been mostly college kids that drop out of school under extreme pressure by a group of his fanatical believers. Explain to me with all the writing LaR has done, with everyone on the Internet having access to his writings, after 40 years, and taking into account supposedly such a great genius and humanist he is, he can't make any money off his writings - except for the hundreds of blind fanatics (and I take pity on these people) he has
pushing his stuff on other people - maybe taking in $20 a day and probably contributing another $20 of their own money (thus maybe $40,000 a day going to LaR) which they make on a low-end part-time job. In other words, why hasn't he even come close to having a best-seller book - he's the world's greatest thinker - right? And don't tell me that enough people don't know about him because of the "dirty tricks" against him - because according to his own words when someone told him "nobody knows who you are" - he said "everybody knows who I am". OK - if everybody knows who he is - why wouldn't he be able to have a book published and have it make the best seller's List? I'm sure you'll respond to this with some type of insult - which includes some type of sexual reference - which you think is clever - but you look so ridiculous when you say stuff like that. - Is
that how you speak to your parents? - or have you written them off as worthless baby-boomers? If you are a "tweenie" - I'm afraid you stopped maturing when you joined the cult - and someday you will realize you were simply in a cult - not the world's greatest humanist movement - it's a nice dream - and not easy to break away from.
LaR's claims to greatness are simply false. He did not "invent" SDI anymore than Al Gore "invented" the internet. There were plenty of people predicting the fall of the Soviet Union before he supposedly instigated it. I'm sure you can argue both of those points - if you have an urge to do so - can you see how ridiculous that is - the fact that you would want to argue about such points? Your logic is whacky. Enviromentalists want to hurt people? There's a wide spectrum of beliefs among enviromentalists - they don't all agree with each other - and I don't agree with all of them - some "enviromental policies" would be helpful I believe - I'd also liked to see fusion and the newer "cleaner" nuclear reactors come on line - but enviromentalists are not going to destroy this country - there will be a mixture of technoligies used - which will reduce greenhouse gases while increasing energy - and if you believe man made greenhouse gases are blown out of proportion - I suggest you review all the scientific literature out there about it again - but I know - you already have the answers - right? If you are so smart - why not then have a career, a spouse, and children - and even with that - still have time to passionately help change the world?
A lot of the world is not perfect - and downright ugly. But there's a lot of good people in the world - I urge you to join with them - I can understand you wanting someone to step up and have all the answers to the world's problems - but the reality is - not one person does - anyone who claims to do so - is a fraud.
Erik!
ReplyDeleteI am making a list of all things, organizations and peoples that LaRouche has wanted to ban during his time. And that list is looooong. Environmentalists that commit fraud (and that is all environmentalists) should be in jail. Free market economists, "hedonists", Henry Kissinger, etc...
Not only that. he talks about so many things as "like Hitler", "genocidial", "murderous". And how do you treat a murderer? Jail!
I have changed my mind. I came to the conclusion more and more that I was doing something really, really wrong, when I was in the organization. But I satyed because I had hope that LaRouche had something different in mind, and that the LYM could change things.
Yes, I was a coward. I did not voice my opposition to some things very much and I helped the organization to recruit a lot of people. I did wrong. I was naive!
And now I see it as it is! Lyndon is not the worlds greatest genius. He is just another one of these political madmen the world has seen over the century!
Too bad. But I was wrong about the organization and Lyndon!
/T
PS
ReplyDeleteErik. For me the crucial moment was that november day in 2003 when Helga told me that it was Lyndon LaRouche that had decided that the older US members SHOULD oranize politically in the org. seven days a week. They did so for two years. Then they reduced it to six and a half days. The youth has in factall the time worked six and a half to seven days (but the call one day a reading day).
Do the still do so in the USA?
And don blame American working ethics for this. Blame the lousy and evil commander: LaRouche!
http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/seven-days-week.html
http://american-lycurgus.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-on-combat-fatigue-and-military.html
I remember that he has wanted to censor the scientific debate too. Did he not say that Newton belonged at the mental asylum?
ReplyDeleteThe result of this kind of fascist hatred would be the same as in the 30s. LaRouche has called for the imprisonment of many people in his days.
ReplyDeleteWell, yes! Newton as well as a bunch of other scientists are mad, according to him. Look at the webbsite of Lyndon: larouchepub.com and do a search on "Newston" and see for yourself!
ReplyDeleteOnce again, the world is seen as black and white only, no greyscales and no colours!
/T
Are you for or against genocide?
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous in response to genocide question:
ReplyDeleteI suppose LaR "the greatest humanist and economist that has ever lived" and claims to "hate genocide" - yet he wants to lock up every "worthless" enviromentalist in prison...
From Socrates - "know thyself".
B4