Hitler begs Hjalmar Schact for a $7 billion loan

[Terry Mauro]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

Edited October 5, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Terry Mauro]

Continued from the Sarah Palin thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...5&start=165

No Larouche has a 2nd rate mind, is a paranoid megalomaniac and probably suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He expressed racist views in the past against Blacks, Latinos, Jews and Native Americans, though he no longer expresses them publicly he has never AFAIK renounced or apologized for them.

Classic. "He has expressed racist views in the past against Blacks, Latinos, Jews and Native Americans, though he no longer expresses them publicly......

That's like saying "GG Allins audience was over the age of 21, "for the most part".

Quite true both were correct statements. Most GG shows I was involved in were 21 plus because bar/club owners make more money at shows they can sell booze at. As anyone involved in the club/bar music scene can tell you most if not all “the door” goes to the bands, the venue owner gets his profit from the bar.

You bring me one racist quote made by LaRouche and I'll purchase $1,000.00 worth of native Brazilian Art. 3rd party gossip does not qualify.

Do you really have $1,000.00 plus in disposable cash? Not long ago you were whining about being broke. If you certify that you do I’ll make you a deal.

1) I will post racist comments made by LaRouche (often under his pseudonym Lyn Marcus/L. Marcus) in pamphlets, articles, internal documents etc put out by the NCLC, EIR and/or other LaRouche groups. These will be backed by scans (in jpg, pdf and perhaps other formats) of the aforementioned documents.

2) With in 2 weeks of my doing so you will “purchase $1,000.00 worth of native Brazilian Art” from me and pay for shipping.

3) If you are unable or unwilling to fulfill your end of the bargain you will quit or accept expulsion from the forum if John or Andy are willing to enforce our “deal”.

4) If I am unable to produce any such comments I will quit or accept expulsion from the forum if John or Andy are willing to enforce our “deal”.

5) If you don’t acknowledge that the comments by LaRouche that I post were racist we will accept arbitration by any moderators, administrators or members of this forum (mutually agreed upon) willing to accept such a role.

i. If they agree that at least one of the statements was racist 2) and 3) above comes into effect.

ii. If they indicate that none of them were racist 4) will come into effect.

Essentially your argument is the legal drinking age at clubs was 21 years old. Now that's a great argument. Any club that would feature GG Allin is not likely to worry about legal drinking age.

PS- hurry back with your racist comments. You should have a bunch of them seeing how you're an expert on LaRouche. The ADL also has also exhibited this same expertise.

[Terry Mauro]

Colby, you're a hack. Nowhere did I ever state that I was promoting the credentials of Abba Lerner.

I described him and LaRouche as “obscure men” you seemed to be citing his Wikipedia entry to refute that; I have seen no evidence he was/is known outside economic circles. If you are vauge you can’t blame people for not figuring what points you are trying to make.

What was of interest, was that here you had a well known Keynsian economist of the time blurting out that Hitler was just a "hitman" for the austerity policy of Brooklyn born banker Hjalmar Schact and his Wall Street and London banker friends.

AFAIK not even LaRouche claims he said that, you’re making things up now. There are no reliable accounts of what was said during the debate, the only versions we have come from LaRouche himself several years after the fact.

And $7 billion represents 5% of the California state budget. Good lap dog, but what's the point? The issue is that California is bankrupt and in need of bail out money. In fact the entire US economy is bankrupt.

Did you actually read the article you linked beyond the 1st paragraph? Here’s the 2nd:

“They [schwarzenegger and California's top finance officials] have been worried that the credit market will hurt the state's ability to get short-term loans to cover basic operating expenses, a step California takes each fall until the bulk of its tax revenue arrives in the spring.”

From later in the article “California seeks short-term loans every year”

To make a long story short getting short term loans from the private sector (normally in the form of bonds) every year is SOP in California but due to credit crunch Arnie is appealing to Paulson. Apparently an aggravating factor is that “state lawmakers delayed passing a budget for nearly three months.”

As Mike and David pointing out calling him a Hitler or a Nazi because he cut the budget is plain stupid. Davis wanted to cut the budget as well, is he a Nazi too?

Arnold Schwarzenegger is a nazi. Don't give me your BS about agreeing with this policy or not agreeing with that policy. He is a straight up nazi, placed in office by people like George Schultz.

Rubbish

And he is there for the very same reason exposed by economist Abba Lerner back in 1971.

Not even your guru claims he said that.

And that was the point of my posting about Abba Lerner. I never had any intent of puffing up Lerner or any such thing of that sort.

Of course you do by puffing Lerner you by extension puff Larouche.

You're such a rabid LaRouche hater, to the point of being irrational that you attack at the very sight of his name.

I actually agree with some of what he says (his opposition to Bush, the invasion of Iraq, and deregulation of the financial sector) but most of it is rubbish. You are such a LaRouche cultist you blindly accept his every pronouncement as ‘gospel’.

Other than our “wager” I’m done with this topic unless you produce evidence from sources not affiliated with Larouche.

You're always "done" with my topics. Never mind the threats because you'll be done when you cant deliver the goods. I await the racist comments by LaRouche. This should be great fun.

Len Colby the great LaRouche expert.

For the last time, I called Arnold Schwarzenegger a nazi because that's precisely what he is. You dont need to create a fraudulent premise, attribute it to me, and commence to argue based on your false premise. Arnold Schwarzenegger is a nazi. Is that clear enough for you?

Edited October 6, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Mike Tribe]

Terry Mauro is a banana. If I said this often enough, would that make it true? It's about as intellectually valid as your repetition that Arnold is a nazi...

[Terry Mauro]

Terry Mauro is a banana. If I said this often enough, would that make it true? It's about as intellectually valid as your repetition that Arnold is a nazi...

Do your own homework Tribe; you're supposed to be an educator. You might start with his father, then you might look at the pedigree of the people who placed him into office. You might also try and understand what he is being used for. Then you might want to review his idea of leadership, and the role of government. You might also want to review his actions as Governor of California. You may also want to review the history of his in-laws the Kennedy's when it comes to facist proclivities. The recall of California Governor Davis would not have been possible without the help of the Kennedy political machine. And after all the family patriarch Joe Kennedy Sr. had a long history of being chummy with members of the Nazi party. You might say Arnold was the fascist son Joe Kennedy never had.

I must say I dont think much of your talents and skill as an academic. The only thing I've seen you do here is whine.

Edited October 6, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Mike Tribe]

So, because I don't agree with you, I have deficient skills as an academic and an educator and am a "whiner"...

You, on the other hand, are of the opinion that someone supported by the Kennedy family must be a Nazi... Brilliant... Sen Obama is supported by Edward Kennedy, so he's a Nazi...

I don't pretend to keep up with all the details of Californian politics, but I'm sure I would have noticed if political parties had been banned, labor unions closed down, books burned, Jews obliged to wear yellow stars, political dissidents rounded up and put in concentration camps, etc, etc...

Every one of your posts reveals your amazing lack of historical knowledge. For example, you claim that the American colonies rebelled against Britain because of "free trade"... Britain didn't even begin to adopt free trade policies until the 1820s. At the time of the American Revolution, the economic policy was firmly mercantilist...

You are a banana.

[Terry Mauro]

So, because I don't agree with you, I have deficient skills as an academic and an educator and am a "whiner"...

You, on the other hand, are of the opinion that someone supported by the Kennedy family must be a Nazi... Brilliant... Sen Obama is supported by Edward Kennedy, so he's a Nazi...

I don't pretend to keep up with all the details of Californian politics, but I'm sure I would have noticed if political parties had been banned, labor unions closed down, books burned, Jews obliged to wear yellow stars, political dissidents rounded up and put in concentration camps, etc, etc...

Every one of your posts reveals your amazing lack of historical knowledge. For example, you claim that the American colonies rebelled against Britain because of "free trade"... Britain didn't even begin to adopt free trade policies until the 1820s. At the time of the American Revolution, the economic policy was firmly mercantilist...

You are a banana.

You mean like their British East India Company? Good call Mike. You're the one lacking in knowlege about history. Slavery was based on the concept of free trade, and the British were behind the slave trade. Adam Smith an economist with the British East India Company penned his piece of garbage "Wealth of Nations" as a propoganda piece for the British Empire and their policy of free trade. I believe he wrote his thesis in 1776 (?) at the very time the American republic came into existence.

Then later there is always the British Opium Wars against China.

If we left history to guys like you we would believe that history changing developments like the American Revolution was based on some tea party or some other such nonsense, instead of the willful intent of the founding father to form a republic and break the grip of the "Empire" on the rest of the world.

"firmly mercantilist" oh my, now thats impressive.

Maybe what you might tell us is how the fascist movement in Spain came to be. And further if that tendency still plays a role in that country's politics today.

Edited October 6, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Adam Smith an economist with the British East India Company penned his piece of garbage "Wealth of Nations" as a propoganda piece for the British Empire and their policy of free trade. I believe he wrote his thesis in 1776 (?)

Himself, and David Ricardo, are still qouted today by the freemarket capitalist vipers who have delivered us to this sorry state. if they really wish to understand how markets work, they should give ol Karl a perusal.

[Terry Mauro]

Adam Smith an economist with the British East India Company penned his piece of garbage "Wealth of Nations" as a propoganda piece for the British Empire and their policy of free trade. I believe he wrote his thesis in 1776 (?)

Himself, and David Ricardo, are still qouted today by the freemarket capitalist vipers who have delivered us to this sorry state. if they really wish to understand how markets work, they should give ol Karl a perusal.

That's right, "The Invisible Hand" or "The little green men under the floor board who magically control the economy". It's insane, but people believe it.

I just read a headline posted at MSN and it stated that 50% of the US population earns less than $32K per year. I guess the "Little Green Men" of Adam Smith decided not to be kind to the lower 50% income brackets in the United States. With Free Trade you are not allowed to intervene into economic policy to lift the living standards of the population.

You also wonder under Free Trade and "magic markets" just how a bridge or rail system gets built. I thought these infrastructure projects were the work of governments committed to the general welfare.

With the free trade system collapsing we may see governments taking a closer look at the axioms behind this stupid idea of "magic markets". Let's put Adam Smith in moth balls for an eternity.

Edited October 6, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Len Colby]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

So you propose to be the “judge and jury” as to whether the remarks he made were racist? Sorry I don’t think so, obviously you’ll just say the comments weren’t bigoted otherwise you’ll have to admit you were wrong, admit your messiah was wrong and fork over $ 1000+. We’ll need a mutually agreed upon 3rd party.

Mike Tribe wrote

You are a banana.

Mike

Banana no, parrot. She simply repeats what ever LaRouche says. Facts and common sense don’t come into play what ever he proclaims is uncritically accepted. LaRouchites make me think of the Communists in France and Norway (and perhaps elsewhere) who undermined their own countries’ resistance to the Nazis 1939 – 41 because of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Note that she rarely if ever documents her claims, in her mind it is not needed, what her guru says is considered gospel, you might as well discuss evolution with a fundamentalist.

She even spouts on about terms she doesn’t seem to understand (mercantilist v. free trade) and is seeming so ignorant of history that she is unaware the Opium Wars occurred well after 1820 or that Adam Smith didn’t work for the British East Company and that it was decades before his book was put into practice.

[Terry Mauro]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

So you propose to be the “judge and jury” as to whether the remarks he made were racist? Sorry I don’t think so, obviously you’ll just say the comments weren’t bigoted otherwise you’ll have to admit you were wrong, admit your messiah was wrong and fork over $ 1000+. We’ll need a mutually agreed upon 3rd party.

Mike Tribe wrote

You are a banana.

Mike

Banana no, parrot. She simply repeats what ever LaRouche says. Facts and common sense don’t come into play what ever he proclaims is uncritically accepted. LaRouchites make me think of the Communists in France and Norway (and perhaps elsewhere) who undermined their own countries’ resistance to the Nazis 1939 – 41 because of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Note that she rarely if ever documents her claims, in her mind it is not needed, what her guru says is considered gospel, you might as well discuss evolution with a fundamentalist.

She even spouts on about terms she doesn’t seem to understand (mercantilist v. free trade) and is seeming so ignorant of history that she is unaware the Opium Wars occurred well after 1820 or that Adam Smith didn’t work for the British East Company and that it was decades before his book was put into practice.

Look how long you've been gone! How many hours since you made the charge that Lyndon LaRouche is a racist. I'd think that if you had the knowlege to make such a charge, that you'd also be able to produce proof in relative short order. Yet here you are again going back over the same old BS. What has it been 24 hrs, 36 hrs and running?

What's the problem, couldnt you find anything worth while at FactNet, Dennis King, and the Chip Berlet "slander factory"? Likely you are not certain whether you want to risk opening that can of worms. You know you'll have to pack up and leave.

I never made any issue regarding "mercantilist vs free trade". That was Mike Tribes meaningless drivel. Leave it to you to grab ahold of something so meaningless. And I know exactly the period of Britain's opium war against China. You should read my post instead of running at the mouth like GG Allin's rear end on stage.

In short you havent delivered the goods. Where are the racist remarks made by Lyndon LaRouche? C'mon Mr. Sophist, let's see your argument/proof. Will I have to wait another 2-3 days before you produce your proof?

How difficult is it to produce a quote from a known racist? I've subscribed to his EIR magazine for 15 years. That's 750 weekly issues and I've yet to detect any direct or even implied racism by LaRouche. I also own 20 books published by LaRouche and his organization, and again nothing I can find suggests that he is a racist. I've also watched and listened to his public speeches (including his tribute to MLK in front of an all black audience), which are available in part on youtube. You'd think this would be a great way to prove your charge of racism.

But Len how difficult a project is this for you? You should have been able to respond the moment I challenged your lies.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Terry Mauro]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

So you propose to be the “judge and jury” as to whether the remarks he made were racist? Sorry I don’t think so, obviously you’ll just say the comments weren’t bigoted otherwise you’ll have to admit you were wrong, admit your messiah was wrong and fork over $ 1000+. We’ll need a mutually agreed upon 3rd party.

Mike Tribe wrote

You are a banana.

Mike

Banana no, parrot. She simply repeats what ever LaRouche says. Facts and common sense don’t come into play what ever he proclaims is uncritically accepted. LaRouchites make me think of the Communists in France and Norway (and perhaps elsewhere) who undermined their own countries’ resistance to the Nazis 1939 – 41 because of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Note that she rarely if ever documents her claims, in her mind it is not needed, what her guru says is considered gospel, you might as well discuss evolution with a fundamentalist.

She even spouts on about terms she doesn’t seem to understand (mercantilist v. free trade) and is seeming so ignorant of history that she is unaware the Opium Wars occurred well after 1820 or that Adam Smith didn’t work for the British East Company and that it was decades before his book was put into practice.

You're copping out. Let's see these racist comments by LaRouche. You know he rarely makes these remarks in public anymore! What a clown.

[Terry Mauro]

Len, here is a racist rant by LaRouche. I thought I'd help you get the ball rolling. Shall we vote later? Maybe educator Mike Tribe will cast a vote?

http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2004/3104mlk_talladega.html

Edited October 7, 2008 by Terry Mauro

[Len Colby]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

So you propose to be the “judge and jury” as to whether the remarks he made were racist? Sorry I don’t think so, obviously you’ll just say the comments weren’t bigoted otherwise you’ll have to admit you were wrong, admit your messiah was wrong and fork over $ 1000+. We’ll need a mutually agreed upon 3rd party.

Mike Tribe wrote

You are a banana.

Mike

Banana no, parrot. She simply repeats what ever LaRouche says. Facts and common sense don’t come into play what ever he proclaims is uncritically accepted. LaRouchites make me think of the Communists in France and Norway (and perhaps elsewhere) who undermined their own countries’ resistance to the Nazis 1939 – 41 because of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Note that she rarely if ever documents her claims, in her mind it is not needed, what her guru says is considered gospel, you might as well discuss evolution with a fundamentalist.

She even spouts on about terms she doesn’t seem to understand (mercantilist v. free trade) and is seeming so ignorant of history that she is unaware the Opium Wars occurred well after 1820 or that Adam Smith didn’t work for the British East Company and that it was decades before his book was put into practice.

Look how long you've been gone! How many hours since you made the charge that Lyndon LaRouche is a racist. I'd think that if you had the knowlege to make such a charge, that you'd also be able to produce proof in relative short order. Yet here you are again going back over the same old BS. What has it been 24 hrs, 36 hrs and running?

What's the problem, couldnt you find anything worth while at FactNet, Dennis King, and the Chip Berlet "slander factory"? Likely you are not certain whether you want to risk opening that can of worms. You know you'll have to pack up and leave.

We have to establish the ground rules namely

1) Who will be the arbiter if you dispute that the comments were racist

2) What happens if the arbiter agrees the statements were racist but you refuse to carry out your promise (i.e. buy $ 1000 of product from me)?

Don’t worry I have the quotes already. I’m just waiting for you to accept my terms. If you are so confident he never made any racists comments you should just at the opportunity to get me to quit the forum one is contingent on the other. I’m waiting for you.

I never made any issue regarding "mercantilist vs free trade". That was Mike Tribes meaningless drivel. Leave it to you to grab ahold of something so meaningless. And I know exactly the period of Britain's opium war against China. You should read my post instead of running at the mouth like GG Allin's rear end on stage.

You cited the slave trade to disputed his classification of the British Empire as being mercantilist rather than free trade, one has nothing to do with the other the British got slaves from their colonies in Africa. Europe’s involvement in the African slave trade dates back to the early 1500’s, a couple of centuries before the inception of the notion of free trade.

You cited the Opium Wars (1840’s) as evidence the UK was free trade in 1776

PS – I started a thread concerning you nonsense JFK assassination theory, even John wants to see your “evidence”

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...&pid=155723

I've subscribed to his EIR magazine for 15 years.

I said he made them in the 70's 15 years ago would be back to 1993,

[Terry Mauro]

Why must I repeat myself? Knock yourself out.

PS- we will note vote by popular opinion. We will stick to the truth.

Bye, bye.

Are you accepting or declining?

Do you really have $ 1000+ to blow?

Why would I decline? I wont owe you $1,000.00 because it isnt true.

As I stated prior, this will not be a vote. You bring the so called racist comments and we'll just have a look see.

Bye, bye.

So you propose to be the “judge and jury” as to whether the remarks he made were racist? Sorry I don’t think so, obviously you’ll just say the comments weren’t bigoted otherwise you’ll have to admit you were wrong, admit your messiah was wrong and fork over $ 1000+. We’ll need a mutually agreed upon 3rd party.

Mike Tribe wrote

You are a banana.

Mike

Banana no, parrot. She simply repeats what ever LaRouche says. Facts and common sense don’t come into play what ever he proclaims is uncritically accepted. LaRouchites make me think of the Communists in France and Norway (and perhaps elsewhere) who undermined their own countries’ resistance to the Nazis 1939 – 41 because of the Hitler-Stalin pact. Note that she rarely if ever documents her claims, in her mind it is not needed, what her guru says is considered gospel, you might as well discuss evolution with a fundamentalist.

She even spouts on about terms she doesn’t seem to understand (mercantilist v. free trade) and is seeming so ignorant of history that she is unaware the Opium Wars occurred well after 1820 or that Adam Smith didn’t work for the British East Company and that it was decades before his book was put into practice.

Look how long you've been gone! How many hours since you made the charge that Lyndon LaRouche is a racist. I'd think that if you had the knowlege to make such a charge, that you'd also be able to produce proof in relative short order. Yet here you are again going back over the same old BS. What has it been 24 hrs, 36 hrs and running?

What's the problem, couldnt you find anything worth while at FactNet, Dennis King, and the Chip Berlet "slander factory"? Likely you are not certain whether you want to risk opening that can of worms. You know you'll have to pack up and leave.

We have to establish the ground rules namely

1) Who will be the arbiter if you dispute that the comments were racist

2) What happens if the arbiter agrees the statements were racist but you refuse to carry out your promise (i.e. buy $ 1000 of product from me)?

Don’t worry I have the quotes already. I’m just waiting for you to accept my terms. If you are so confident he never made any racists comments you should just at the opportunity to get me to quit the forum one is contingent on the other. I’m waiting for you.

I never made any issue regarding "mercantilist vs free trade". That was Mike Tribes meaningless drivel. Leave it to you to grab ahold of something so meaningless. And I know exactly the period of Britain's opium war against China. You should read my post instead of running at the mouth like GG Allin's rear end on stage.

You cited the slave trade to disputed his classification of the British Empire as being mercantilist rather than free trade, one has nothing to do with the other the British got slaves from their colonies in Africa. Europe’s involvement in the African slave trade dates back to the early 1500’s, a couple of centuries before the inception of the notion of free trade.

You cited the Opium Wars (1840’s) as evidence the UK was free trade in 1776

PS – I started a thread concerning you nonsense JFK assassination theory, even John wants to see your “evidence”

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...&pid=155723

I've subscribed to his EIR magazine for 15 years.

I said he made them in the 70's 15 years ago would be back to 1993,

You're backing out on your wager. Just how tough is this? Did LaRouche refer to black and latino people as "n" or "spic"? How tough is this that you need to select an arbiter? I have a feeling that these slanders may require an explanation (provided by you) and it's this explanation that might require an "arbiter". These slanders will require someone of great intelligence to guide the reader through their "hidden meanings". Isnt that right Colby?

And I have read his Campaigner magazine going back to the 1970's. Do you want me to poiint out the website where these publications are available?

But this should be a pretty easy task for you. All you have to do is produce these racist comments from 1970's or the 1980's or the 1990's right up to the present. You've got four decades to chose from. This should be like a turkey shoot for you.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Terry Mauro