Monday, January 10, 2011

...and the conspiracy mongering continues

I noted yesterday that the conspiracy nuts had already started spinning their complex webs, spreading lies about purported hidden hands behind the Giffords assassination attempt within minutes via Twitter and blog posts. I neglected that endless font of mad conspiracy theories: Lyndon LaRouche, the longtime presidential candidate and political cult leader. LaRouche, who is revered by his followers as a virtual prophet, has an implausible and impenetrably complex answer for every question. Here's LaRouche's authoritative version of the Giffords shooting, via the website of his political action committee:

Lyndon LaRouche said today that the version of the story about the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona on Saturday presented thus far is not believable. On the one hand, it is clear that the perpetrator who was apprehended is a nutty kid. On the other hand, the targeting of Sarah Palin is a tip off that the story is a fake and that someone is using the kid who carried out the shooting.

There is a widespread effort on the part of the press to attempt to make a hero out of a woman, Rep. Giffords, who had the wrong policy on health care. An attempt is being made to use the case to attack Sarah Palin, who had targeted Giffords and 19 other Congressmen for defeat in the last election because of their vote for Obama's Nazi health bill.

LaRouche said that this is a tip off that something is phony in the story being put forward now by people who support the Obama T-4 policy. Giffords was on the wrong side morally. The kid who shot her and others is clearly a nut, a psychotic. But his action is now being used to attack Sarah Palin, who did nothing wrong in targeting supporters, including Giffords, of the Obama health bill for defeat in the last election.

LaRouche said that anyone who attacks Sarah Palin is implicitly pro-Hitler.


(T)he press build up of the attack on Sarah Palin is a tipoff that something is phony, that the attack is being used to promote something else.

The attack itself is a criminal atrocity. Then you have what the press is doing as an official line. LaRouche said that what the press is doing in attacking Sarah Palin is as bad a crime as the crime itself. It is criminal to try to put blame on people who are anti-genocide. The events in Arizona were not caused by people who attacked a pro-genocide policy. The actions of a nut case are being used to build up a witchhunt against people who correctly oppose the murderous, genocide policy epitomized by the Obama T-4 policy.

In effect there are two crimes. First the crime against the Congresswoman and second the crime against Sarah Palin.

LaRouche said it is a toss up as to which is a worse crime. Somebody is trying to use a crime as an after the fact justification for a pro-genocide line. The attack on Sarah Palin is the fraud. The Congresswoman's support for Obama's health policy was wrong.

Those who know the history of the Third Reich will recognize the T-4 policy as Hitler's program to exterminate those who the regime deemed medically unfit to live. It was the first phase of the Nazi genocide. LaRouche is claiming that the Obama medical program is a similar first phase in an incipient Holocaust and that the Giffords shooting is part of his plan.


Charles said...

Jared Loughner is a flower child of "the movement." He likely saw in Sarah Palin's crosshairs a target of opportunity. Yet, this was not an act of impulse. Rather, it was carefully planned, from the weapon and ammunition to the "Goodbye friends..." messages he posted on the Internet.

Giffords represented a terrific target for "the movement." She is the first Jewish Congresswoman from Arizona (Jared loves Hitler's "Mein Kampf"). She is a Democrat. She represents government. And "the movement" hates all things government.

You're correct that Loughner and "the movement" represent a fascist political movement, egged on by the Tea Party and other reactionary American elements. They don’t promote a political position because they have none. They want “less government, states’ rights and strict adherence to the Constitution.” Yet the Constitution clearly states that “Federal laws supersede state laws.” They want “less spending,” but lack the courage to attack entitlement programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Their heroes, Reagan and Bush II created the two greatest federal deficits in history, prior to today’s recession-required spending. Talk about a double-standard! They want America to be a “Christian nation.” yet the Constitution clearly prohibits that. They want an end to gun control legislation, including bans on assault weapons, even as their own proponents use guns and bombs to attack innocent Americans.

What people like Loughner and “the movement” really want is fascism. They despise our democratic way of life because it puts votes in the hands of minorities; and very soon, minorities will become the majority. They cannot abide by multiculturalism, immigration or anything that empowers minorities. And, they cannot abide the thought of a black man sleeping in the White House. All of this points toward a political and social movement that rejects our way of life.

So, how much difference is there between The Tea Party and ‘the movement?” Are they separate wings of the same American political movement? Does Sarah Palin place some Jewish Democrat Congresswoman in crosshairs so that the military wing can follow though? Is this the American version of Hamas or Hezbollah, fascists with a political wing and a military wing?

One thing is certain, our nation is polarized more so than at any time since the Civil War. And, antebellum society then was not nearly as well-armed as we are today. Talk show rhetoric fuels hatred into violent outbursts, such as the Arizona mass murder. Our fingers are on the trigger as hate-filled talk show hosts drive us to the very brink of sanity. And then, we simply do it.

It’s true that many of America’s home-grown terrorists have had weak minds, easily persuaded to produce mendacious acts of violence. And, if we’ve learned anything from Oklahoma City, Fort Hood and Arizona, it’s that far too many guns are in the hands of mentally disabled and emotionally driven people. Of course, guns are not the cause. But, they are way too handy.

What America needs today is to turn it down a notch. Talk show hosts can and should be held accountable for the damage done by individuals motivated by their hate-fueled rhetoric. Politicians must become more accountable for their actions, such as placing the faces of their peers inside of crosshairs and using that picture for the purpose of political public persuasion. Groups and individuals must pause before proffering messages of hatred towards opponents. Congressional leaders must foment a spirit of partisanship, not aggression.

The one thing we all have in common is that we are Americans. America stands for freedom and democracy. If you don’t like that, move to Venezuela. It is time for us to stand up for tolerance and oppose political rhetoric that foments dissention.

Charles Weinblatt
Author, Jacob’s Courage

Adam Holland said...


I don't know what "the movement" you refer to is. Should I? You somehow infer from my post about LaRouche's wacky ideas that I believe Loughner and "the movement" to be fascist. I honestly don't know why.

Your lengthy comment seems to be putting a very large cart before a very small and confused horse.


adamhollandblog [AT] gmail [DOT] com