Terry Mauro
-
Posts
1,791 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Terry Mauro
-
-
This idea that the CIA controls the "US Media" is another red herring. Take a look for example at Lord Conrad Black's "Hollinger Corporation"
Internationally, Hollinger became the world’s third-largest newspaper empire, with more than 500 titles. As well as the Telegraph Group, it included the Chicago Sun-Times, the Jerusalem Post, numerous American papers, and newspapers with more than half of all Canadian daily newspaper circulation.
Black controlled all of this, including the newspaper group’s publicly listed company, Hollinger Inc., via Ravelston, Black’s own private equity vehicle, which owned 78 percent of Hollinger Inc., Hollinger International’s parent company. Through a complicated minority share holding, he also controlled Hollinger International.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/sep2004/holl-s16.shtml
The case of Lord Beaverbrook has even more profound and enduring implications, given that two of the leading financial-political propagandists for today's neo-conservative revolution in Washington -- press magnates Lord Conrad Black and Rupert Murdoch -- are Beaverbrook proteges. The Australian Murdoch, on graduating Oxford, did an apprenticeship at Beaverbrook's London Daily Express, which Murdoch referred affectionately to as "Beaverbrook's brothel."
For Black, the connection ran deeper -- through the wartime British secret intelligence high command. Conrad Black's father, George Montagu Black, worked directly under the Beaverbrook chain of command during World War II, when Beaverbrook was Minister of Aircraft Production, and when Black and Edward Plunkett Taylor ran the Canadian front company War Supplies, Ltd. out of the Willard Hotel in Washington, coordinating all British-American-Canadian military procurement arrangements. The $1.3 billion garnered by Taylor and Black from their wartime "private" arms deals provided the seed money for G.M. Black's postwar launching of the Argus Corp., which, today, is the Hollinger Corp. media cartel of Conrad Black.
-
You don't see what it has to do with the views I put forth? Perhaps you need to read the letter to the editor!
And if that doesnt clarify the issue for you then let me suggest that you watch this video.
I am amazed that you continue to post these ridiculous attacks on the NHS. Why are you in favour of the multinational drug and insurance corporations? Are they the new funders of the LaRouche organisation?
The NHS is far from being perfect. It is under-funded and I would like to see more money spent on health-care and less on nuclear weapons and the invasion and occupation of foreign countries. However, as a means of protecting people, regardless of income, it takes some beating. Anyway, it appears to be far superior to the one that exists in the United States. For example, the World Health Organisation ranks Britain's healthcare as 18th in the world, while the US is in 37th place.
I see you have turned this debate into a silly attack on Len Colby's father. Why don't you address this question?
I'm sorry John I did not see your question. You asked: Why are you in favour of the multinational drug and insurance corporations? Are they the new funders of the LaRouche organisation?
No.
LaRouche is in favor of a bankruptcy reorganization of the financial and monetary system, replacing the system with an American System-Credit System- to replace the "bankrupt" British Monetary System.
He is in favor of a return to an FDR "Hill-Burton" approach for health care.
If you're interested in finding out what is really happening then I suggest you watch Lyndon LaRouche's speech presented yesterday in Washington DC. His presentation was titled "Death of the British Empire".
Good Lord - the evils of the entire world are down to a 'British conspiracy' - how delightfully daft!
Andy, are you quoting from the late Lord Palmerston?
-
You don't see what it has to do with the views I put forth? Perhaps you need to read the letter to the editor!
And if that doesnt clarify the issue for you then let me suggest that you watch this video.
I am amazed that you continue to post these ridiculous attacks on the NHS. Why are you in favour of the multinational drug and insurance corporations? Are they the new funders of the LaRouche organisation?
The NHS is far from being perfect. It is under-funded and I would like to see more money spent on health-care and less on nuclear weapons and the invasion and occupation of foreign countries. However, as a means of protecting people, regardless of income, it takes some beating. Anyway, it appears to be far superior to the one that exists in the United States. For example, the World Health Organisation ranks Britain's healthcare as 18th in the world, while the US is in 37th place.
I see you have turned this debate into a silly attack on Len Colby's father. Why don't you address this question?
I'm sorry John I did not see your question. You asked: Why are you in favour of the multinational drug and insurance corporations? Are they the new funders of the LaRouche organisation?
No.
LaRouche is in favor of a bankruptcy reorganization of the current financial and monetary system; replacing it with an American System -Credit System- .
He is in favor of a return to the FDR "Hill-Burton" approach for health care.
If you're interested in finding out what is really happening then I suggest you watch Lyndon LaRouche's speech (Death of the British Empire) presented yesterday in Washington DC.
-
So far I have yet to see anyone claiming NHS policy has lead to the premature death of any specific patients. If it were true they should be able to cite numerous examples, e.g. "Ann Jones 79, of Liverpool died after she was denied care at Liverpool General Hospital"
I wonder also if the letter writers were correct why they had so little support from the geriatric medical community Dr. Cole is a pediatrician, Dr. Negus PHD is a Eng Lit teacher.
Like father like son.
You should stick to parroting your “master” when you chirp in your own thoughts you come across as bird brained. Your dumb adhom was obviously the response of someone otherwise unable to reply. You should also stick to the Deep Phertalizer Forum it’s more at your level.
"Unable to respond"? I'd say I hit the mark.
Not being able to refute my points you resorted to an irrelevant ad hom, as I said stick to what you do best, mindlessly repeating the pronouncements of your guru.
You should realize that no one here but you accepts the 'LaRouche says so, therefore it's so' standard of proof. He says "the program which murders 1 in 6 of the Britons who die, imposed by the National Health Service's NICE agency" but offers no evidence in support of this claim.
Wrong as usual. I pointed out that you were exactly like your father. This was the guy who could not find a shred of "evidence" linking his employers products to an increase in the death rates of their customers.
Now like your father (who was likely a more sophisticated and practiced sophist) you pee around the bush asking for names and address of those patients killed as a result of the rationing policy imposed by NICE.
You're like a little kid "no one here likes LaRouche". The last time you pulled that stunt , Douglas Caddy threw it right back in your face, showing how ignorant you are of the truth.
-
Hysterical New York Times Defends Obama's Euthanasia
September 7, 2009 (LPAC)--The New York Times dragged out
columnist Ross Douthat again yesterday for a defense of Obama's
Hitlerian health-care agenda. The latest Douthat column promotes
Obama's euthanasia counselor Ezekiel Emanuel as an opponent of
assisted suicide. Not bothered by logic, Douthat then proceeds to
attack the U.S. population for its blind allegiance to fighting
death.
Douthat acknowledges "the recent controversy over Great
Britain's Liverpool Care Pathway, whose ... approach to dying
patients may involve withdrawing care before their death is
actually certain." He says it might be connected to "a
particularly sinister form of rationing."
This is the program which murders 1 in 6 of the Britons who
die, imposed by the National Health Service's NICE agency Obama
touts as his model for the U.S.A.
But Douthat suggests that assisted suicide would likely be
{preferred} by Americans to this efficient British non-voluntary
approach -- because our population stubbornly seeks to control
death, spending extravagant amounts to save lives, and suicide is
one means of control!
Douthat writes that Americans' "goal is perfect autonomy,
perfect control, and absolute freedom of choice. And in each
case, the alternative approach, one that emphasizes the limits of
human agency, and the importance of humility in the face of
death's mysteries doesn't mesh with our national DNA."
And "in the profligate, Promethean United States, it
probably won't lead to rationing-by-euthanasia. ...[Assisted
suicide is] just as likely to become one more intervention that
we insist every health insurance plan should cover on our way,
perhaps, to a rendezvous with fiscal suicide."
Douthat (pronounced "yes mein Fuehrer, do-that") has
previously written with alarm about the LaRouche presence
everywhere in this debate, and proclaimed his disgust at the
spectacle of elderly people, a "sea of septuagenarians: some in
wheelchairs, some clutching walkers, some dragging dialysis
machines," clinging to life despite the cost, and sticking their
noses in the national debate.
-
So far I have yet to see anyone claiming NHS policy has lead to the premature death of any specific patients. If it were true they should be able to cite numerous examples, e.g. "Ann Jones 79, of Liverpool died after she was denied care at Liverpool General Hospital"
I wonder also if the letter writers were correct why they had so little support from the geriatric medical community Dr. Cole is a pediatrician, Dr. Negus PHD is a Eng Lit teacher.
Like father like son.
You should stick to parroting your “master” when you chirp in your own thoughts you come across as bird brained. Your dumb adhom was obviously the response of someone otherwise unable to reply. You should also stick to the Deep Phertalizer Forum it’s more at your level.
"Unable to respond"? I'd say I hit the mark.
-
So far I have yet to see anyone claiming NHS policy has lead to the premature death of any specific patients. If it were true they should be able to cite numerous examples, e.g. "Ann Jones 79, of Liverpool died after she was denied care at Liverpool General Hospital"
I wonder also if the letter writers were correct why they had so little support from the geriatric medical community Dr. Cole is a pediatrician, Dr. Negus PHD is a Eng Lit teacher.
Like father like son.
-
I'm afraid she's right, John. The article, which is truncated in the version she uses, did appear on the BBC new website and refers to a letter printed in the Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters...g-patients.html. I don't see what it has to do with the lunatic views she put forward in the first post, however. It seems to refer to a debate within the medical profession with regard to the correct form of palliative care for terminal patients. Presumably, "Barking University" refers to the Barking campus of the University of East London.
You don't see what it has to do with the views I put forth? Perhaps you need to read the letter to the editor!
And if that doesnt clarify the issue for you then let me suggest that you watch this video.
-
One Of Every 6 People Who Die In The UK Have Been Euthanized
Sept. 3 (LPAC)--
As reported in the Daily Telegraph in an article
entitled "Sentenced to death on the NHS," 16.5 percent, or one of
every 6 people, who died in the United Kingdom from 2007-2008,
had been subjected to "involuntary euthanasia." As Lyndon
LaRouche commented today, the fact that the truth is finally
coming out about the British healthcare policy, which is the
model for Obama's Nazi legislation, is the result of the fight
that LaRouche has led in the United States. This report comes at
the point that Obama's health care policy has been thoroughly
exposed in the U.S. and Obama is desperately trying to revive it.
The Daily Telegraph published a letter to the editor by
doctors and experts denouncing the NICE program called "Liverpool
Care Pathway," which was designed by the Marie Curie hospice in
Liverpool working with a team at the Royal Liverpool and
Broadgreen University Hospitals Trust. It was originally
developed as a way to care for cancer patients towards the end of
their life, but has been adapted to apply to all patients no
matter what their illness.
The signers of the letter denounce the program as giving
premature death sentences to patients by denying them fluids,
nutrition, medicine and treatment after making a determination
that they are close to death, a determination that is often
wrong. This program was recommended as a model by the NICE in
2004. It has been adopted nationwide and more the 300 hospitals,
130 hospices and 540 care homes in England currently use the
system.
The date 2004 is significant, because it means that the
program was put into effect by NICE during the regime of Tony
Blair. Blair's healthcare advisor from 2000-2004 was Simon
Stevens, who is now with United Health Care in the U.S., which
has the exclusive franchise to provide insurance for AARP
members, and is a strong supporter of the Obama plan.
The program is denounced because patients are wrongly put on
the pathway, which creates a self-fulfilling prophecy that they
would die. In 2007-2008, 16.5 percent of the deaths in Britain
came about after continuous deep sedation, according to
researchers at the Barts and the London School of Medicine and
Dentistry, twice as many as in Belgium and the Netherlands.
Criticism of the LCP has long been simmering beneath the
surface in the UK. Back in December 1999, even before the LCP
program was formerly recommended by NICE, Dr. Adrian Treloar, now
a psycho-geriatrician and senior lecturer at the Greenwich
Hospital and the Guys, Kings, and St. Thomas's Hospitals in
London, denounced the British NHS for involuntary euthanasia. At
that time the British Medical Association (BMA) had issued
guidelines that said that doctors should be allowed to authorize
withdrawal of food and water by tube for victims of severe stroke
and dementia who can no longer express their wishes. The guidance
said: "Doctors should have the final say over whether treatment
including feeding and giving water is in the patient's best
interest. It is not always appropriate to prolong life."
More recently on April 26, 2008, Dr. Adrian Treloar, warned
in a letter to the British Medical Journal, that the Liverpool
Care Pathway is a blueprint for systematic euthanasia of disabled
patients. "Combined with withdrawal of fluids, deep sedation
leads quickly to death. Treloar wrote that the LCP threatens
patients because its eligibility criteria do not ensure that only
people who are about to die are allowed on the pathway. They
allow people who are thought to be dying, are bed-bound, and are
unable to take tablets, onto the pathway. In chronic disease such
as dementia, dying may take years, but such patients may be
eligible. GPs often put patients on to such a pathway without
palliative care advice."
Treloar expressed concern that sedation is being used as an
inexpensive alternative to assessment and specialist treatment.
The LCP recommends sedatives and opiates for all patients on an
`as required' basis, even when they are not agitated, in pain, or
distressed. An automatic pathway towards prescribing heavy
sedatives incurs risks. Moreover, the LCP recommends setting up a
syringe driver within four hours of a doctor's order. This is
laudable, if it is needed. But the pathway encourages the use of
syringe drivers even when symptoms can be managed without them.
The pathway doesn't mention the need for food and fluids.
In the letter, Treloar cites a Dutch study of the LCP:
"Reitjens et al. show that withholding artificial nutrition and
hydration is the norm. The LCPs omission of prompts to reconsider
nutrition and hydration may allow serious errors in the care of
dying patients. It is not acceptable, as Murray et al. suggest,
that assessing nutrition and hydration are not part of the
pathway. Sedation is right in some situations. But as Murray et
al. point out, the anticipated outcome of continuous deep
sedation is death. We must learn from Reitjens et al.'s
observation that continuous deep sedation may replace
euthanasia."
On Aug. 13, 2009, Adam Brimelow, BBC news health
correspondent, warned that there is evidence that some clinicians
may already be using continuous deep sedation (CDS), as a form of
slow euthanasia. Professor Clive Seale, at Barts and the London
School of Medicine and Dentistry, reports that in the UK the
prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death is very high
indeed, 16.5% of all UK deaths. (wfw)
Letter to the Editor of the Daily Telegraph Exposes NICE Murder
Policy
Sept. 3 (LPAC)--The following letter to the editor of the Daily
Telegraph is merely the latest, most explosive exposure of the
Nazi health policy implemented in Britain under Tony Blair and
his health adviser, Simon Stevens, who is now working with United
Health in collaboration with AARP. The report by the Patients'
Association referred to in the letter, exposed that one million
NHS patients received cruel or neglectful care. Another recent
report, by the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA), estimates
that the number of NHS patients who have been given the wrong
medicine has doubled in the last two years. A further report
indicates that a third of patients are being treated by nurses
rather than doctors at General Practioner surgeries.
This is the policy which Obama is desperately attempting to
impose on the population of the United States of America on
behalf of his British controllers.
The LaRouche PAC has been denounced and violently attacked
for denouncing Obama's policy as Nazi. Instead, opponents of this
Nazi policy at town meetings across the nation have been
denounced by the likes of Nancy Pelosi, among other allies of
Obama, as Nazis.
Here is the evidence of what is in store for Americans if
Obama were to succeed. You decide who is the Nazi.
"SIR The Patients Association has done well to expose the poor
treatment of elderly patients in some parts of the NHS (report,
August 27). We would like to draw attention to the new gold
standard treatment of those categorised as dying. Forecasting
death is an inexact science.
"Just as, in the financial world, so-called algorithmic
banking has caused problems by blindly following a computer
model, so a similar tick-box approach to the management of death
is causing a national crisis in care.
"The Government is rolling out a new treatment pattern of
palliative care into hospitals, nursing and residential homes. It
is based on experience in a Liverpool hospice. If you tick all
the right boxes in the Liverpool Care Pathway, the inevitable
outcome of the consequent treatment is death.
"As a result, a nationwide wave of discontent is building
up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food
to patients. Syringe drivers are being used to give continuous
terminal sedation, without regard to the fact that the diagnosis
could be wrong.
"It is disturbing that in the year 2007-2008, 16.5 per cent
of deaths came about after terminal sedation. Experienced doctors
know that sometimes, when all but essential drugs are stopped,
dying patients get better."
P. H. Millard
Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics University of London
Dr Anthony Cole
Chairman, Medical Ethics Alliance
Dr Peter Hargreaves
Consultant in Palliative Medicine
Dr David Hill
Fellow of the Faculty of Anaesthetists of the Royal College of
Surgeons
Dr Elizabeth Negus
Lecturer, Barking University
Dowager Lady Salisbury
Chairman, Choose Life
This is clearly a hoax. Britain does not have a Barking University.
John, you should contact the BBC and inform them. They distributed the story .
Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in palliative medicine, Dr David Hill, fellow of the Faculty of Anaesthetists of the Royal College of Surgeons, Dr Elizabeth Negus, a lecturer at Barking University, and Dowager Lady Salisbury, chairman of Choose Life, were the other signatories
http://www.rocketnews.com/2009/09/crisis-o...nally-ill-care/
Dr Elizabeth Negus ?
-
One Of Every 6 People Who Die In The UK Have Been Euthanized
Sept. 3 (LPAC)--
As reported in the Daily Telegraph in an article
entitled "Sentenced to death on the NHS," 16.5 percent, or one of
every 6 people, who died in the United Kingdom from 2007-2008,
had been subjected to "involuntary euthanasia." As Lyndon
LaRouche commented today, the fact that the truth is finally
coming out about the British healthcare policy, which is the
model for Obama's Nazi legislation, is the result of the fight
that LaRouche has led in the United States. This report comes at
the point that Obama's health care policy has been thoroughly
exposed in the U.S. and Obama is desperately trying to revive it.
The Daily Telegraph published a letter to the editor by
doctors and experts denouncing the NICE program called "Liverpool
Care Pathway," which was designed by the Marie Curie hospice in
Liverpool working with a team at the Royal Liverpool and
Broadgreen University Hospitals Trust. It was originally
developed as a way to care for cancer patients towards the end of
their life, but has been adapted to apply to all patients no
matter what their illness.
The signers of the letter denounce the program as giving
premature death sentences to patients by denying them fluids,
nutrition, medicine and treatment after making a determination
that they are close to death, a determination that is often
wrong. This program was recommended as a model by the NICE in
2004. It has been adopted nationwide and more the 300 hospitals,
130 hospices and 540 care homes in England currently use the
system.
The date 2004 is significant, because it means that the
program was put into effect by NICE during the regime of Tony
Blair. Blair's healthcare advisor from 2000-2004 was Simon
Stevens, who is now with United Health Care in the U.S., which
has the exclusive franchise to provide insurance for AARP
members, and is a strong supporter of the Obama plan.
The program is denounced because patients are wrongly put on
the pathway, which creates a self-fulfilling prophecy that they
would die. In 2007-2008, 16.5 percent of the deaths in Britain
came about after continuous deep sedation, according to
researchers at the Barts and the London School of Medicine and
Dentistry, twice as many as in Belgium and the Netherlands.
Criticism of the LCP has long been simmering beneath the
surface in the UK. Back in December 1999, even before the LCP
program was formerly recommended by NICE, Dr. Adrian Treloar, now
a psycho-geriatrician and senior lecturer at the Greenwich
Hospital and the Guys, Kings, and St. Thomas's Hospitals in
London, denounced the British NHS for involuntary euthanasia. At
that time the British Medical Association (BMA) had issued
guidelines that said that doctors should be allowed to authorize
withdrawal of food and water by tube for victims of severe stroke
and dementia who can no longer express their wishes. The guidance
said: "Doctors should have the final say over whether treatment
including feeding and giving water is in the patient's best
interest. It is not always appropriate to prolong life."
More recently on April 26, 2008, Dr. Adrian Treloar, warned
in a letter to the British Medical Journal, that the Liverpool
Care Pathway is a blueprint for systematic euthanasia of disabled
patients. "Combined with withdrawal of fluids, deep sedation
leads quickly to death. Treloar wrote that the LCP threatens
patients because its eligibility criteria do not ensure that only
people who are about to die are allowed on the pathway. They
allow people who are thought to be dying, are bed-bound, and are
unable to take tablets, onto the pathway. In chronic disease such
as dementia, dying may take years, but such patients may be
eligible. GPs often put patients on to such a pathway without
palliative care advice."
Treloar expressed concern that sedation is being used as an
inexpensive alternative to assessment and specialist treatment.
The LCP recommends sedatives and opiates for all patients on an
`as required' basis, even when they are not agitated, in pain, or
distressed. An automatic pathway towards prescribing heavy
sedatives incurs risks. Moreover, the LCP recommends setting up a
syringe driver within four hours of a doctor's order. This is
laudable, if it is needed. But the pathway encourages the use of
syringe drivers even when symptoms can be managed without them.
The pathway doesn't mention the need for food and fluids.
In the letter, Treloar cites a Dutch study of the LCP:
"Reitjens et al. show that withholding artificial nutrition and
hydration is the norm. The LCPs omission of prompts to reconsider
nutrition and hydration may allow serious errors in the care of
dying patients. It is not acceptable, as Murray et al. suggest,
that assessing nutrition and hydration are not part of the
pathway. Sedation is right in some situations. But as Murray et
al. point out, the anticipated outcome of continuous deep
sedation is death. We must learn from Reitjens et al.'s
observation that continuous deep sedation may replace
euthanasia."
On Aug. 13, 2009, Adam Brimelow, BBC news health
correspondent, warned that there is evidence that some clinicians
may already be using continuous deep sedation (CDS), as a form of
slow euthanasia. Professor Clive Seale, at Barts and the London
School of Medicine and Dentistry, reports that in the UK the
prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death is very high
indeed, 16.5% of all UK deaths. (wfw)
Letter to the Editor of the Daily Telegraph Exposes NICE Murder
Policy
Sept. 3 (LPAC)--The following letter to the editor of the Daily
Telegraph is merely the latest, most explosive exposure of the
Nazi health policy implemented in Britain under Tony Blair and
his health adviser, Simon Stevens, who is now working with United
Health in collaboration with AARP. The report by the Patients'
Association referred to in the letter, exposed that one million
NHS patients received cruel or neglectful care. Another recent
report, by the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA), estimates
that the number of NHS patients who have been given the wrong
medicine has doubled in the last two years. A further report
indicates that a third of patients are being treated by nurses
rather than doctors at General Practioner surgeries.
This is the policy which Obama is desperately attempting to
impose on the population of the United States of America on
behalf of his British controllers.
The LaRouche PAC has been denounced and violently attacked
for denouncing Obama's policy as Nazi. Instead, opponents of this
Nazi policy at town meetings across the nation have been
denounced by the likes of Nancy Pelosi, among other allies of
Obama, as Nazis.
Here is the evidence of what is in store for Americans if
Obama were to succeed. You decide who is the Nazi.
"SIR The Patients Association has done well to expose the poor
treatment of elderly patients in some parts of the NHS (report,
August 27). We would like to draw attention to the new gold
standard treatment of those categorised as dying. Forecasting
death is an inexact science.
"Just as, in the financial world, so-called algorithmic
banking has caused problems by blindly following a computer
model, so a similar tick-box approach to the management of death
is causing a national crisis in care.
"The Government is rolling out a new treatment pattern of
palliative care into hospitals, nursing and residential homes. It
is based on experience in a Liverpool hospice. If you tick all
the right boxes in the Liverpool Care Pathway, the inevitable
outcome of the consequent treatment is death.
"As a result, a nationwide wave of discontent is building
up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food
to patients. Syringe drivers are being used to give continuous
terminal sedation, without regard to the fact that the diagnosis
could be wrong.
"It is disturbing that in the year 2007-2008, 16.5 per cent
of deaths came about after terminal sedation. Experienced doctors
know that sometimes, when all but essential drugs are stopped,
dying patients get better."
P. H. Millard
Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics University of London
Dr Anthony Cole
Chairman, Medical Ethics Alliance
Dr Peter Hargreaves
Consultant in Palliative Medicine
Dr David Hill
Fellow of the Faculty of Anaesthetists of the Royal College of
Surgeons
Dr Elizabeth Negus
Lecturer, Barking University
Dowager Lady Salisbury
Chairman, Choose Life
-
I think he knew Jackie after the White House. He may have written about the RFK assassination. He had an interesting, up-and-down Hollywood life, with the great low point of his daughter's sad murder. RIP, DD.
I remember him as an arrogant know-nothing jerk commenting with "great authority" on OJ Simpson's guilt.
Jack
This may explain his attitude towards OJ's guilt. He certainly wasn't the most fair minded reporter and this was likely due to the rage he harbored as the result of his daughters murder.
This quote is from 1990. Five years before the OJ Simpson circus.
Tragedy struck his life in 1982 when his actress daughter, Dominique, was slain — and that experience informed his fiction and his journalistic efforts from then on.
"If you go through what I went through, losing my daughter, you have strong, strong feelings of revenge," Dunne said in 1990 in discussing his novel "People Like Us," in which the protagonist shoots the man convicted of killing his daughter.
"As a novelist, I could create a situation in which I could do in the book what I couldn't do in real life. I intended for Gus (the character in the book) to kill the guy. But when I got to that part I couldn't write it. He wounds him and goes to prison himself for a couple of years."
-
Another interesting connection to Michael Jackson and Resorts International and their private security firm Intertel, is via Pepsi Cola.
Wallace Groves took over Pepsi from Loft Candies(???) during the 1930's. Of course Jackson was signed by Pepsi to a multi million dollar contract during the mid 1980's.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...,762567,00.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/02/01/obituari...in-bahamas.html
PS- Intertel which boasted the NFL and Time Magazine as clients was staffed by former Kennedy Justice Department operatives. Robert Peloquin, Walter Sheridan along with a few other's from RFK's "Get Hoffa" task force.
-
John, I couldn't have put it better myself. The wild accusations being flung about by American conservatives during the "debate" regarding health care reform would be laughable were it not for the fact that some of the more gullible members of the American public appear to have been taken in by them. Obama's popularity is, apparently, shrinking, and he seems to be backtracking on some aspects of his promised health care program
This video explains in detail the sudden "backtracking" with regards to Obama's healthcare reforms.
-
Video expose on the British NHS.
Terry, thank you for posting this. I now know that I will never take seriously anything that comes from the LaRouche organization. To give just one example of the logic of this video: Adolf Hitler was in favour of a National Health Service type system so therefore you can use terms such as Nazi-NHS and Nazi-Obama. Even Sarah Palin is not as daft as this. It is clearly the political movement for the political illiterates. I am sending the video around to friends so we can have a good laugh at LaRouche organization.
John,
I do not agree with your "simplistic" review of the video. What I took away from the video was Obama's healthcare proposal contained the same call for "medical rationing" by an independent commission that Hitler used. That this commission would decide who gets healthcare and what kind of healthcare. This is identical to Hitler's T-4 boards.
This is also identical to the British system. Further that Simon Stevens (Health Policy Director to Tiny Blair) was the "KEY ADVISOR" to Obama prior to his June 1st, 2009 Healthcare reform initiative. Stevens said that NICE could be applied to Medicaid. There is your "foreign influence" of American policy, for example.
Here's a recent article defending the British NICE
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/200...-american-lies/
The Wall Street Journal editorial page described NICE as a “rationing board” and wrote: “Americans should understand how NICE works because under ObamaCare it will eventually be coming to a hospital near you.”
Dr. Rawlins noted that defending the N.H.S. had become a political badge of honor in the United Kingdom. “These attacks from the U.S. have been good for the British,” he said. In speeches, Dr. Rawlins routinely tweaks the United States for its profligate health care spending and poor results.
Now from December 2008 here is an article on NICE "cost/benefit" analysis
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/healthlaw...-costbenef.html
When Bruce Hardy’s kidney cancer spread to his lung, his doctor recommended an expensive new pill from Pfizer. But Mr. Hardy is British, and the British health authorities refused to buy the medicine. His wife has been distraught. . . .
If the Hardys lived in the United States or just about any European country other than Britain, Mr. Hardy would most likely get the drug, although he might have to pay part of the cost. A clinical trial showed that the pill, called Sutent, delays cancer progression for six months at an estimated treatment cost of $54,000. But at that price, Mr. Hardy’s life is not worth prolonging, according to a British government agency, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The institute, known as NICE, has decided that Britain, except in rare cases, can afford only £15,000, or about $22,750, to save six months of a citizen’s life. British authorities, after a storm of protest, are reconsidering their decision on the cancer drug and others.
Note: "But at that price, Mr. Hardy's LIFE is not worth prolonging, according to a British government agency, NICE.
There in a nusthell is why LaRouche identifies the British idea of rationing healthcare with Adolf Hitler. And this is what the British wish to "export" to the United States?
Further in the article we find this:
To arrest this trend, the United States needs to adopt at least some of NICE’s methods, said Dr. Mark McClellan and Dr. Sean Tunis, who served earlier in the Bush administration as, respectively, administrator and chief medical officer of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Dr. Tunis said he spent a lot of time in government “learning about NICE and trying to adopt the processes and mechanisms they used, and we just couldn’t.” That’s because the idea of using price to determine which drugs or devices Medicare or Medicaid provides has provoked fierce protests. But Dr. McClellan said the American government would soon have no choice.
How valuable to his masters will President Obama become if he fails in pushing through this Nazi medical policy of "useless eaters" and "lives unworthy to be lived" ?
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2008.../26-35_3548.pdf
-
Video expose on the British NHS.
-
Jack,
OJ Simpson pleaded "not guilty" and then spent every pennie he had defending himself. Had he wanted to protect his son he would have had to have turn himself in and claimed responsibility for the two murders. He did not do this. OJ Simpsonhas maintained his innocence from the very begining.
Gaining an acquital would do nothing to protect his son. The whole premise just doesnt make any sense.
The case is "still open".
Did you watch the documentary? It makes sense.
Jack
Jack, I watched the whole thing and found it very persuasive.
Bill Dear is quite a character. And he uses Dr. Lee and Henry Wade's son as consultants.
He should now tackle the Tippit murder, doing the same thing, with the same approach.
And Terry, the LAPD position on the case is that OJ is the guilty party and the case is closed.
John Geraghty could get a few ideas from watching it too.
BK
OJ Simpson was acquitted of murder, so therefore another party could be charged with the crime. That doesnt mean the LAPD is actively working the case, only that another party could be charged with the murder.
Therefore what OJ Simpson did, in no way prevents his son Jason from being charged with the murders. Therefore the entire premise "OJ Simpson was protecting his son" makes no sense at all.
Had OJ Simpson wanted to protect his son Jason, then he would have confessed to the murders and worked out some plea arrangement. He would not have spent every last dime defending himself! There in lies the flaw with this theory.
And the LAPD and DA charged OJ Simpson with murder, he did not charge himself with murder. So how in the world could he have been protecting his son Jason? And from the very begining OJ Simpson professed his innocence.
Terry, please watch the documentary. You clearly have not.
Jack
Jack,
I don't doubt the innocence of OJ Simpson. I simply don't believe he was trying to take the rap to protect his son. OJ Simpson did not make the murder charge against himself and furthermore he maintained his innocence from the very start (prior to being charged). To me that is no way to act if your motive is to cover up for the real killer.
Furthermore in my view there had to have been more than a single killer to commit the crime at Bundy. There is no way a single person could have committed those murders.
Hollywood has a long history of these types of satanic killings. The Manson case in 1969, the Cotton Club Murders in 1983 and on and on.
The TV trial was just one big brainwashing exercise in my opinion. Watch the public reaction to the verdict and you'll see what I mean. Millions of people developed a personal attachment to the outcome. This attachment came as a result of the daily bombardment of media attention.
The entire courtroom drama was a farce.
-
Lyndon LaRouche was working with the Reagan Administration on the issue of "beam weapons" that would eliminate the Bertrand Russell policy of Mutually Assured Destruction. This technology would have made nuclear weapons obsolete.
They called it the SDI or "Strategic Defense Initiative". President Reagan adopted LaRouche's policy during a nationally televised speech to the American people on March 23, 1983. This sent shock waves though out leading Soviet, US and British circles.
Daniel Graham was a leading political "opponent" of the SDI.
http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2007/3407_sdi_revisited.html
This dovetails with John Train and why he was trying to rail road Lyndon LaRouche into prison. LaRouche had shown a certain capability during this SDI period that the enemy feared.
Regarding LaRouche's characterization of Fritz Mondale as a Soviet KGB agent of influence.
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2004/3110sdi_timeline.html
May 24-28, 1983. A high-powered KGB delegation of 25, including some Russian Orthodox Church prelates since acknowledged to be KGB agents, came to Minneapolis, Minnesota to hold a "peace conference" with leading Democratic associates of Walter Mondale. The purpose of this "U.S.-U.S.S.R. Bilateral Exchange Conference" was to declare war on the SDI. The Soviet delegation was sponsored by Georgi Arbatov, head of the U.S.A. and Canada Institute of the U.S.S.R. (this was the official who had refused to meet with LaRouche as Shershnev proposed); it was headed by KGB publisher and journalist Fyodor Burlatsky, a confidant of future President Mikhail Gorbachov.
Furthermore your credible "non LaRouche" source is also mentioned.
Jan. 13-15, 1985: The Washington Post published a three-day, 10,000-word "exposé" of all the contacts between LaRouche and his associates, and anyone connected with the Reagan Administration, name by name, in order to try to force those contacts to be broken
-
Jack,
OJ Simpson pleaded "not guilty" and then spent every pennie he had defending himself. Had he wanted to protect his son he would have had to have turn himself in and claimed responsibility for the two murders. He did not do this. OJ Simpsonhas maintained his innocence from the very begining.
Gaining an acquital would do nothing to protect his son. The whole premise just doesnt make any sense.
The case is "still open".
Did you watch the documentary? It makes sense.
Jack
Jack, I watched the whole thing and found it very persuasive.
Bill Dear is quite a character. And he uses Dr. Lee and Henry Wade's son as consultants.
He should now tackle the Tippit murder, doing the same thing, with the same approach.
And Terry, the LAPD position on the case is that OJ is the guilty party and the case is closed.
John Geraghty could get a few ideas from watching it too.
BK
OJ Simpson was acquitted of murder, so therefore another party could be charged with the crime. That doesnt mean the LAPD is actively working the case, only that another party could be charged with the murder.
Therefore what OJ Simpson did, in no way prevents his son Jason from being charged with the murders. Therefore the entire premise "OJ Simpson was protecting his son" makes no sense at all.
Had OJ Simpson wanted to protect his son Jason, then he would have confessed to the murders and worked out some plea arrangement. He would not have spent every last dime defending himself! There in lies the flaw with this theory.
And the LAPD and DA charged OJ Simpson with murder, he did not charge himself with murder. So how in the world could he have been protecting his son Jason? And from the very begining OJ Simpson professed his innocence.
-
Jack,
OJ Simpson pleaded "not guilty" and then spent every pennie he had defending himself. Had he wanted to protect his son he would have had to have turn himself in and claimed responsibility for the two murders. He did not do this. OJ Simpsonhas maintained his innocence from the very begining.
Gaining an acquital would do nothing to protect his son. The whole premise just doesnt make any sense.
The case is "still open".
-
-
Tom,
You're funny. Usually when someone "omits" Lyndon LaRouche it's because they are afraid of what their friends and neighbors might think. I am glad to see this is not the case with you.
George Plimton was born in 1927 and damn if he doesnt claim Aga Kahn as his Harvard roomate! That leaves Train a whole year younger than George Plimton. That shoots down your speculation based on birth dates. Unless of course this Prince is a differrent Aga Kahn than the person you reference.
Quote:
George always knew that of all the choices in his life, the "most sensible one," he once told me, "would be to drop The Paris Review ." But he didn't, and from the moment he tapped Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan, his Harvard roommate, to be the Paris Review 's first publisher while they were running the bulls in Pamplona, to the somewhat less glamorous but no less loyal publishers of the 1970s (Ron Dante, the music producer and creator of the Archies; Bernard F. Connors, the Canadian soft-drink king), to the creation in the 1990s of a sensibly endowed Paris Review Foundation, fundraising was foremost on his mind.
The Last Gentlemen New York Observer
http://www.observer.com/node/48129
You must also try and keep in mind that LaRouche and his organization probably have a better understanding of John Train and what he represents than the typical researcher trying to connect the dots. They were in a full blown political battle for their very life against John Train.
http://berletwatch.freehostia.com/qa.htm
Richard Cumming
http://www.literaryrevolution.com/mr-cummings-52305.html
QUOTE:
But founding a magazine was not
within Matthiessen’s ken, so he befriended expatriate Harold Humes, who had
attended MIT and who was starting a new literary publication that would feature
interviews with writers, fiction and reviews of restaurants and clubs. Matthiessen
provided funding from Sadruddin Aga Khan, the son of the Aga Khan, who had been
John Train’s roommate at Harvard, and who agreed to serve as the magazine’s
publisher. Train became managing editor. Then Matthiessen got rid of Humes and
brought in his old friend from New York, George Plimpton, who had been studying
English literature at King’s College, Cambridge, to replace him. Plimpton, who had
gone to Groton and Harvard, was the son of Francis Plimpton, founder of the white
shoe law firm of Debevoise, Plimpton (His partner was Eli Whitney Debevoise) who
also served as counsel to the Democratic Party.
Sorry Tom but I'll take the intelligence briefs of the LaRouche organization any day over any other private source. But don't despair I have seen your complaint before, many time before in fact.
-
"The less care they give them the more money they make".
Ehrlichman/ Nixon 1971 transcript. The birth of the HMO's and the end of Hill Burton.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Transcript_o...MO_act_of_1973:
-
David,
You have your own fan base out in cyberspace. They seem to think you're the one needing a straight jacket.
If these are indeed your quotes, then you should be concerned. You remind me of the wild Jim Hackett II from the wild Black Op Radio days.
http://rossleysignorance.wetpaint.com/page...ID+GORDON+HEALY
-
Wallace Groves took over Pepsi Cola in the 1930's from Loft candies. Wallace Groves collaborated with Meyer Lansky on his gambling empire in the Bahamas.
Groves is generally credited with creating Freeport in the Bahamas.
The Far-Right Conspiracy against the NHS
in Political Conspiracies
Posted
Correct you if you're wrong? Okay, you're wrong. But I have read these idiotic slanders many times myself. It takes little brains to repeat this worn out gossip.
The last time I read this kind of tripe it came from the poison pen of Ambrose Evans- Pritchard who was in the employ of John Simkins former employer Lord Conrad Black and his "Hollinger Corporation".
QUOTE:
In the June 4 , 1998 edition of the Hollinger Corp.'s Daily Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the infamous "Clinton-basher," penned a shameless slander against EIR and Lyndon LaRouche, absurdly blaming us for the "conspiracy industry" that has built up since the Aug. 31, 1997 death of Princess Diana, her companion Dodi Fayed, and driver Henri Paul. In typical Evans-Pritchard style, the British poison pen, who admits to close collaboration with Britain's MI6 intelligence service in all of his overseas assignments, lied that EIR is "accusing the Queen of ordering the assassination of Diana, Princess of Wales." He continued, "The group is led by Lyndon H. LaRouche, 76, a cranky economist, convicted felon and publisher of a book that accuses the Queen of being the world's foremost drug dealer." The latter bit of black propaganda is a reference to the book Dope, Inc., first published in 1979, which laid bare the role of the London-centered offshore financial institutions and allied intelligence services, in running the global drug trade, from the time of Britain's nineteenth-century Opium Wars against China.
http://larouchepub.com/other/1998/2525_diana_wars.html
If you want to know LaRouche's view on the international drug trade then you should wipe the tears from your eyes and read his book Dope Inc. A thorough reading should clear up any misconceptions you might have. Be warned, it will take longer than the "few minutes" it took you to find and repeat these worn out LaRouche slanders.
http://www.conspiracyresearch.org/forums/i...post&id=266