I gotta say, people were annoying me this week.
From the asshat LaRouche supporters who harassed me outside the post office when I refused their literature (worry not, I unleashed hell on them), to Charlie Sheen refusing to STFU.

A fantastic week or two for some of the people on the Conspiratorial Junket.  Alex Jones.  His good friend, Charlie Sheen, made an appearance on his show.  It was Charlie Sheen’s first media appearance before moving on to every other program on Earth.  A lot can be said about the Charlie Sheen situation, somewhere along the lines of “What is wrong with our culture?” maybe.  Whatever your misgivings in leering over at a car-wreck, you did no worse than Jones — his interview, I think it’s fair to say, falls into the category of “enabling”,  [Note: someone who has to repeat over and over again that they’re ‘winning’ … isn’t really winning.]  was pretty well full of signs that he knew was going to get some further media attention worth capitalizing on in order to further the Alex Jones Brand — and on he went to The View to get in “Takedown of Building Seven!” and “Infowars.com” where he could find the space.

An item of collision has occured with Jones and Beck — meehaps.  Beck’s ratings are tanking, and for the basic reason of partisan political tribalism: Beck’s conspiracies plowed deepest to a political listenership identified with a political party at its low ebb — now that its had some electoral success, perhaps there’s hope after all.  Meantime, who’s Hitler now?

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown has apologized for a speech in which he invoked the names of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin while he criticized Republican efforts in Ohio and Wisconsin to curtail the power of public-employee unions to bargain with state and local governments.

Yes.  First they came for the Public Employee Unions… right after that, they opened the Concentration Camps.  Just like that!  I note that the Huffington Post comments are pretty much jam packed with “Agree wtih Brown’s original statement.”

For Beck, Mother Jones proposes this question.  It’s a familiar question that arises throughout history when viewing any number of demagouges.   Rolling Stone puts Alex Jones together with Glenn Beck.  The author should have figured that out before he released his Beck book, which is hep enough to stick changes in Cleon Skousen’s evolution with Carroll Quigley as a pivot point. 

Alex Jones and his guests have long covered the history of eugenics, including the role of George Bernard Shaw, the playwright and unabashed eugenicist. Alex’s 2007 documentary film Endgame takes an in-depth look at Shaw, who has been discussed on-air many times, including here. In January, 2010, Glenn Beck’s documentary The Revolutionary Holocaust included the exact same clips of Shaw as those discussed or shown on The Alex Jones Show. Later, Beck would revisit the subject to link eugenics and Fabian Socialists to the London School of Economics and his favorite new target, George Soros.
From the beginning of the recent unrest in Egypt, frequent Alex Jones guest Dr. Webster Tarpley was often on-air discussing the destabilization of Egypt and other nations in the region. In these interviews, Tarpley and Jones discussed the role of U.S., British and Israeli intelligence agencies in the creation and backing of the Muslim Brotherhood. Glenn Beck was soon on TV and the radio giving a similar explanation for the Egyptian protest, with one key and all-too typical twist: In Beck’s telling, it was a leftist-oriented and -inspired revolution led by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Hey.  Wait a minute…  Joel Skousen is a frequent guest on Jones, and he has the galls to go after the man who brought renewed popularity to his uncle.  And so it goes.

Louis Farrkhan spoke before a crowd of thousands for four hours in support of Qaddafi, L Ron Hubbard, in anticipation of popular uprisings in the US akin to the Middle East’s, and to attack pop musician Rihanna.  Say what you will about Farrakhan, but he did speak to a crowd of thousands.  When was the last time Lyndon Larouche gave a speech to thousands of people?
Interesting, as always, the attack on Rihanna garnered Farrakhan the most attention — and a response tweet from Rihanna.  Which suggests the way for a forgettable off-the-mainstream-grid politico to get some media attention is to snipe at a celebrity.  See also, Mike Huckabee and Natalie Portman.
Curious thing about Mike Huckabee’s other quotable for the week.  It’s counter-Larouchian.  Obama is displaying dangerous anti-colonial views in snubbing the British Empire.  He hates Winston Churchill, as his dismounting of a Churchill bust in favor of a Lincoln bust demonstrates.  This meme made its way into the tabloids with a supposed snub by the British family by not inviting him to Prince Philip’s wedding. 

The Queen of England has been in power for nearly sixty years, and nobody besides Lyndon Larouche seems to be complaining about her tenure. Well there are those anti-monarchists in Scotland, but I don’t unfortunately break haggis with those folks often enough to get a personal rant from that p.o.v.

Indeed, the cat is out of the bag from Mike Huckabee and presidential pre-candidate Newt Gingrich:  we’re slithering down the neck of the British Monarchy.  But the fight continues:  we are just days away from the next Lyndon Larouche webcast.  Unfortunately, the rush of web traffic that Alex Jones has garnered from his Charlie Sheen hit will have long subsided, so the usual bombardment of promotional comments on every prisonplanet site at the time of the webcast from larouchies will not get to as many people as it might have just a week ago.

If you think Lyndon LaRouche is crazy, check out a James Dobson newsletter sometime …
Maybe Gene Scott is to Pentecostalism what Lyndon Larouche is to the Democratic Party.

Maybe the Larouche org can gnab some attention with a webcast of Robert Beltran shouting “WINNING” over and over again?  Or, maybe not.

…………………………..
Wear two buttons over a Lyndon Larouche tank top?

  

@anunnaki2006 the Bush family? If the Bush family were Nazis, why would they be supporting illegal immigration? Why would they be supporting homosexuals? There are no Knights of Malta, but there are Bolshevik/Zionist. The Bush family is controlled by the illuminati, a Jewish imitation of Freemasonry. I bet you don’t know the difference. You’ve been reading too much articles by Lyndon LaRouche, he tries to sidetrack people from focusing on Zionist. it’s a Catholic conspiracy, what a joke

Either blame the pope, blame the healthcare industry, or blindly blame at another uninvolved public figure. Me? I’m going to blame Lyndon LaRouche. Why? I do this entirely at random, but with the confidence that my decision is more apt than blaming an ineffectual, weakling of a president.

looks like more of the general population are catching on to the british schemes….. but a little to late

A debate rages.  Ron Paul 2012… Ron Paul 2012… because, um, Lyndon Larouche is no longer running, and we can somehow ignore that Paul’s Austrian Economics are sort of opposite Roosevelt’s because Paul may be attractive to believers in the International Jewish Conspiracy? 

OBAMA IS A DESCENDENT OF CHARLEMAGNE TOO IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN(THE JEWS DIDN’T WANT THE BLACKS TO KNOW THAT OR THEY WOULD THINK HIM TO WHITE) . THAT IS NOT HIS PROBLEM. HIS PROBLEM IS THAT HE HAS BEEN HANGING OUT WITH TOO MANY JEWISH MANIPULATORS.
………………………………………..

Has Gadhafi Been Reading Lyndon LaRouche?
Dunno.  The more common game people have been playing is “Qaddafi or Sheen?” 
A blast from the past from the Lyndon Larouche Movement, September 1991.
Today, they’re… um… ripping off Solson Publications’ “Daffy Qaddafi” comic book (next up: Reagan’s Raiders!)

……………………..

Yeah, EITHER ONE. Donate all of your money to Lyndon LaRouche, grieving friends and family! That’s better than finding a cure for cancer.
“Hmm, how many puppies should we let be euthanized so we can donate this money to Lyndon LaRouche?”

Ask this guy.

In wikipedia news – 
Delia Peabody has finally been deleted (a couple of crude new creations were as well, but they were meant to be immediately deleted) — Cla68 remains as what appears to be the Larouchie Administrator (the other somewhat Larouche defending Administrator, self described anarchist, seems to have his own “wikipedia ideology”.)
Interestingly, Cla68 linked to the yahoo image of the LA “America Systems” office building from yahoo, in urging that maybe more than a handful of people are working there — so maybe the sock-puppets are all types of different people. Either Cla68 read my blog, or had the same impetus to look it up just a bit after I did.  Things get further amusing as s/he refers to the fact that EIR is in google news as a validation for that source.
In requesting the need to get “International Reception” in the article. When paired with getting “more recent” stories in, this leads to British articles over the last decade, Duggan-related. But I guess they have a stash of materials that each merits a sub-category.
For the standby “Must get term Economist in Lede” dispute, a reference is made to a citation from King’s book book for that purpose.  The “Economist in the lede” is currently “support” over “oppose” by a 3 to 2 margin, the balance being tipped by an anonymous isp # whose edits are composed entirely of Larouche items. 

Finally, for “International Reception”, Iranin Press TV continues bringing on Bill Jones of EIR.  If that means anything.  Comments abound: 
I would enjoy it if more reputable sources were found and engaged.
Probably can be argured into wikipedia.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 8th, 2011 at 6:56 am and is filed under The LaRouche Challenge, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.