13 Responses to “Some Reading Material”

1. revenire Says:
   March 22nd, 2008 at 6:23 am

   this is delicious, thank you for this one

   larouche was not arrested for fraud though

   go get the charges and post them

   but then again this blog isn’t about truth is it? it is about your opinion and when there were no blogs your opinion was read by no one and now maybe 20 people read it… not including larouche, lol

   —————————————-

   Yet, the ties to LaRouche and Intel were quite real. As King further notes, he had enjoyed the private counsel, and maintained relationships with the likes of such people as Rear Admiral Robert Inman, former head of the National Security Agency (NSA) and second-in-command of the CIA under William Casey (Reagan administration).

   Yet LaRouche had other connections, among them former National Security Council (NSC) Senior Director Norman Bailey, who told an NBC documentary crew that the LaRouchies were “one of the best private intelligence agencies in the world.” They also had the ear of Richard Morris, executive assistant of Judge William Clark, President Reagan’s National Security Advisor. Morris introduced LaRouche to other NSC officials, among them Dr. Ray Pollock. He even had the admiration of Intel officials outside of the United States. Brigadier General Paul-Albert Scherer, former West German counterintelligence chief, became impressed with their inside dope on such diverse topics as Eastern European military movements and the drug trade.

   In his federal trial, LaRouche’s legal team tried to convince a jury that he was, in fact, a CIA asset, whom the Company dumped as expendable once his usefulness dried up. While he didn’t convince a jury, his mouthpieces remained convinced that the Agency set him up. In a 1995 letter to then-Attorney General Janet Reno, one of the lawyers handling his appeal, former US Attorney General Ramsay Clark, wrote that his conviction represented “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.”

   In fact, anyone who has known LaRouche has seen his connections first hand. When sharing a cell with him at the Federal Medical Center in Rochester, Minnesota, former televangelist Jim Bakker observed the daily calls LaRouche received in prison, conversations held in German to keep them confidential. Bakker witnessed how LaRouche knew detailed information about world affairs that would be officially announced days later, and wrote about this and other LaRouche-inspired intrigues in his autobiography, I Was Wrong.

   The reverend speaks the truth concerning Mr. Marcus.

2. Rachel Holmes Says:
   March 22nd, 2008 at 2:31 pm

   Hi, rev–

   Ooh, you are so wrong. In the 1988 Alexandria Federal trial, LaRouche was indicted, tried, and convicted for scheme to defraud and mail fraud, as well as conspiring to defraud the IRS.

   Fraud was all over it.

   First two charges, relating to ripping off people through loans that went unpaid, were:

   1. Conspiring to commit loan fraud (conspiracy to utter fraudulent solicitations and mailings).
   2. Scheming to use the U.S. mails to commit loan fraud.

   Third charge, relating to his lying about his income tax status:

   3. Conspiring to cover up his tax liability (also expressed as defrauding the IRS).

   Count I covers the conspiracy. Counts II through XII were the mail fraud counts (LaRouche was charged in every one of these counts).

   Count XIII pertains to LaRouche alone–that’s the tax count, defrauding the IRS.

   This information comes from LaRouche’s own totally biased, utterly dishonest, and entirely self-serving publication “Railroad,” supposedly put out by the Commission to Investigate Human Rights Violations, a short-lived LaRouche front group with a P.O. box in–you guessed it–Leesburg, VA. It was published in 1989, and was “compiled and edited by Edward Spannaus.”

   Of course, in 1989 both Lyn and Ed were in the slammer.

   The information I cited above comes from the Opening Statement of prosecutor Kent Robinson (p. 411ff in this book) and the Closing Statement of prosecutor John Markham (p. 443ff).

   So, we see fraud specified in each of the 13 counts with which LaRouche was charged and for which he was convicted.

   And this is from LaRouche’s own book, amigo (for which a $10 contribution was being asked in 1989–talk about fraud!).

   So, as you ask–charges gotten, charges posted. lol.

3. revenire Says:
   March 22nd, 2008 at 8:43 pm

   u know what happened in the boston trials…

   larouche won

   then the govt venue shopped to the rocket docket and walla!

   you’re a liar, jumper brigade girl and u know it too

   go give molly a hug…

   or maybe duggan’s poor mother

   if the truth came directly from god u would deny it & u know it jumper

4. revenire Says:
   March 22nd, 2008 at 8:47 pm

   post the court docs jumper

   the specific charges against the old man… alone

   lol, then u will be seen as the moron u r

5. Dennis King Says:
   March 23rd, 2008 at 11:38 am

   Rev. Bakker was probably right that LaRouche knew about some events around the world before they appeared in the U.S. media. But the reason is very simple–members of the EIR staff were multilingual and read many of the world’s major newspapers on a daily basis along with many relatively obscure newspapers from Argentina to Slovakia. (I saw this when I visited their NY intelligence offices in 1977, and they made no bones about it.) Thus, given the lag between when an event occurs and the time when the parochial U.S. media deigns to recognize its significance (if indeed they ever do), it is inevitable that LaRouche would appear to have access to secret information. Of course, in the early 1990s he still had a lot of EIR staffers traveling around interviewing obscure but well informed government officials, labor leaders, etc. in such countries as Brazil and Malaysia, so this gave him an additional source of information. Since then, many of the brightest of these EIR writers have left his organization, taking their “sources” with them. So now Lyn has to just make up his intelligence analyses out of whole cloth, but the end result is still pretty much the same: Even when he had a vigorous flow of raw intelligence, he would distort it so wildly in his interpretations that it might as well never have been collected.

6. Rachel Holmes Says:
   March 23rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm

   Hey, rev–

   I say, dear boy (or whatever), what I quoted from was court documents (at least according to the LaRouche people). Are you taking the position that the LaRouche people lied in putting together “Railroad”? Because they’ll tell you they took that material straight from the court transcripts.

   As to LaRouche “winning” Boston–not quite. A mistrial was declared. And despite Lyn’s assertions, the plan was to try him again in Boston after Alexandria (see that idiotic briefing lead Lyn wrote in December 2007 on how Molly railroaded him personally).

   But after Alexandria, he was so thoroughly discredited, why waste more money? I mean, he wasn’t the most important man in the world, you know?

   I see you have internalized Lyn’s maniacal hypersensitivity about the fraud core of the case. He insisted in his memorably awful testimony in the New York trial in August 1989 that he had not been convicted of fraud.

   That, my friend, was the moment at which the prosecutor was able to introduce the ENTIRE Alexandria indictment as evidence for the purpose of impeaching Lyn’s ridiculous testimony about how “I was never convicted of fraud.”

   Lyn (dumbfounded, and I do think that’s the right word) retaliated by calling the prosecutor a “dyke” in subsequent ravings taped from the Rochester Federal prison and dutifully transcribed for the briefing.

   Some day we’ll hear more about New York, but for now, ask Barb.

   The specific charges against the “Old Man” (sounding like a real “insider” there) were precisely what was enumerated above. He was charged in all the counts.

   He was the (fanfare, flourish) Nexus. All the others were just the pseudopods.

7. revenire Says:
   March 23rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm

   oh dennis,

   how do u know who were the most gifted people in the king of the universe’s org?

   vulcan mind meld? or were you doing a piece for high times and sampled some of the drugs they had available

   HE WANTS TO TAKE YOUR DRUGS AWAY, lol

   good headline and gives you amazing credibility

   i would lose the mustache or does it catch certain items and i am not talking about food?

   you’d look so much better i’d even pay for the shave! honest

   anyway

   didn’t cia guys and nsa guys testify that larouche met with them? was it for his delicious spaghetti recipes? i believe norman bailey had a few things to say about the old man & your own book states larouche had foreign intelligence contacts doesn’t it? want the page number?

   i forget all this ancient history… it is always a new crisis and the quotas are killing me… i work 34 hour days and there are only 24 hours in a day! how does that happen? i get paid in old eirs… the print copy editions (very valuable on eBay BTW… i sold one for 50 trillion canadian dollars the other day > don’t tell the IRS please)

   considering larouche works with leadership in several nations… i sort of doubt he has to read newspapers published in other nations > i read the turkish journal of gastroenterology (that is my assignment from frau helga — after getting her dogs filet mignon of course and some nice outfits for those cold winters at the castle)

   i mean larouche and his willing slaves (the best kind) talking to every nation’s leadership from a-z does tend to discredit your above statement that all larouche’s slaves do is read papers & those papers have junk in them that isn’t important (like kissinger being indicted in connection with the murder of aldo moro)

   the USA media didn’t consider that one importan

   i could cite story after story that IS news but the usa media blacks out because they don’t want the people here to know

   portillo’s meeting with old man larouche is a prime example — i mean larouche meets with portillo and then portillo goes ahead and nationalizes mexican banks (taking the advice of larouche)… a little thing like that doesn’t belong in the news with the stories about all those cats up trees

   take care dennis — i understand you are undergoing some sort of emotional trauma at the moment and i wish you the best

   WHATEVER YOU DO — DON’T JUMP IN FRONT OF A CAR LIKE JEREMIAH DID… AND PLEASE DON’T JUMP OFF A BRIDGE EITHER, LIKE KEN DID (OR DID MOLLY PUSH HIM?)

   i am just a lowly drone so i wouldn’t know

   nice to see you hear with the other 20 people that read this blog

   how do you like the effectiveness of larouche’s act to save the people’s homes from being foreclosed on? i know you dream of larouche too (i do, everyone does) so you know what he’s up to and it still bugs you… wonder why?

   my opinion? i think you are jealous he made the best dressed list this year & sexiest man alive on people magazine’s cover

   it just riles you up

8. revenire Says:
   March 23rd, 2008 at 5:25 pm

   oh yeah, Nexus is a GREAT comic book

   thanks for reminding me of that… and it is being published again

   i love it!

9. revenire Says:
   March 23rd, 2008 at 5:29 pm

   lol, i forgot… larouche let me wash my clothes today and he even allowed me to use spellcheck on the above

   computers are geniuses and alive!

10. Rachel Holmes Says:
    March 24th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    Mustache food-catchers:

    ‘Fess up, you’re standing on your head again to eat, aren’t you?

11. Justin Says:
    March 25th, 2008 at 6:24 pm

    I suppose I might as well mention, as much for the sake of straightening out a thoroughline of the 20 people reading this, that King responded over here:

    http://www.factnet.org/vbforum/showthread.php?p=343642#post343642

    But that might have been rev’s most tedious post.

12. Rachel Holmes Says:
    March 26th, 2008 at 8:03 am

    Hi, revenire–

    A piece of luck for you! In comments posted above you wrote:

    “post the court docs jumper
    the specific charges against the old man… alone
    lol, then u will be seen as the moron u r”

    Not sure if this referred to me or to Justin or to all of us as one great hostile collectivity, BUT–

    I notice that today over on FactNet, Eaglebeak has posted Kent Robinson’s opening statement in the 1988 Alexandria trial of LaRouche et al., and whaddya know? The charges are all about fraud, just as I said, and LaRouche is charged in every single count, and every single count is a fraud count.

    I guess Eaglebeak’s been reading Skull/Bones.

    I guess you’ll have to put off that startling expose of all of us as the morons we are.

13. Rachel Holmes Says:
    March 27th, 2008 at 9:12 am

    Yoo-hoo, revenire! Where are yoooo?

    More stuff posted over on FactNet by Eaglebeak: John Markham’s closing statement in the 1988 Alexandria Federal trial.

    Dyn-o-mite. Lists a lot of expenditures on “Ibykus,” LaRouche’s “residence,” at the time LaRouche was writing to lender Elizabeth Sexton telling her that Henry Kissinger was the reason she wasn’t getting repaid.

    You know, it’s exactly what they said–ripping off little old ladies to pay for LaRouche’s lavish lifestyle.

    The hilarious thing about all this is that MOST MEMBERS don’t know A THING about what happened in Alexandria–Well, whoops! Now they do!

    I’ll bet there are some member eyebrows being raised by all that $$$ on Lyn’s fishponds.

    They built a MOAT at Ibykus for Pete’s sake. A moat for the frogmen, no doubt. To keep their little froggy skins moist while they waited for the appropriate moment to attack the most important man on the planet.

    And my goodness, they’ve waited a long time. 34 years, and counting.

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Δ