| Revision as of 13:55, 23 September 2004 editBcorr (talk | contribs)Administrators10,092 edits claim -> state← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:22, 23 September 2004 edit undoWeed Harper (talk | contribs)440 edits untangle confusing sentence structuringNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| In ], Berlet and King met with a number of individuals to debate the activities and ideas of LaRouche. Among those they met with were ], of the ]; ], then a consultant to the ] and the ] (PFIAB); Mira Lansky Boland, head of fact-finding at the Washington, D.C. offices of the ]; at least one representative of ], a private research organization headed by PFIAB Chairman ]; ], a wealthy Pittsburgh businessman, whose tax-exempt foundation would later come under federal criminal investigation for illegally financing the arming of the ]n ] (Mellon-Scaife later became notorious for his involvement in the ] case, and other activities intended to discredit President ]); and several dozen journalists from major national media outlets, including ], '']'', '']'', '']'' and '']''. | In ], Berlet and King met with a number of individuals to debate the activities and ideas of LaRouche. Among those they met with were ], of the ]; ], then a consultant to the ] and the ] (PFIAB); Mira Lansky Boland, head of fact-finding at the Washington, D.C. offices of the ]; at least one representative of ], a private research organization headed by PFIAB Chairman ]; ], a wealthy Pittsburgh businessman, whose tax-exempt foundation would later come under federal criminal investigation for illegally financing the arming of the ]n ] (Mellon-Scaife later became notorious for his involvement in the ] case, and other activities intended to discredit President ]); and several dozen journalists from major national media outlets, including ], '']'', '']'', '']'' and '']''. | ||
| LaRouche supporters make much of this meeting (see the link to the Quinde Affidavit below), but Berlet has stated repeatedly the meeting was a debate where left-wing critics of LaRouche were asked by conservatives to present and defend their claims about LaRouche spying and fascist tendencies. LaRouche supporters note, however, that all the participants, both right and left, were outspoken opponents of LaRouche. Berlet further notes that he and King were present to protest the fact that LaRouche agents were supplying information about their political enemies on the right and left to the Reagan administration -- including the National Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency -- a relationship that some conservatives close to the Reagan administration felt was inappropriate and sought to terminate. |
LaRouche supporters make much of this meeting (see the link to the Quinde Affidavit below), but Berlet has stated repeatedly the meeting was a debate where left-wing critics of LaRouche were asked by conservatives to present and defend their claims about LaRouche spying and fascist tendencies. LaRouche supporters note, however, that all the participants, both right and left, were outspoken opponents of LaRouche. Berlet further notes that he and King were present to protest the fact that LaRouche agents were supplying information about their political enemies on the right and left to the Reagan administration -- including the National Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency -- a relationship that some conservatives close to the Reagan administration felt was inappropriate and sought to terminate. According to Berlet and King, the LaRouche supporters try to use the meeting to distract attention from the convictions of LaRouche and his associates, whereas LaRouche supporters maintain that the meeting was a planning session to produce a wave of hostile press coverage, intended to make those convictions credible. | ||
| During the ] Presidential campaign in the United States, Berlet issued a report entitled "Clouds Blur the Rainbow" about the ], which placed ] on the ballot in all 50 states as a ], Presidential candidate that year. The report documented that in ], ] (the psychotherapist who later founded the New Alliance Party) had entered into a alliance with Lyndon LaRouche, which lasted less than a year, but heavily influenced the tactics and strategies of the New Alliance Party. Critics, including Berlet and previous New Alliance Party presidential candidate ], argued that the New Alliance Party was in fact a psychotherapy ] that was more a vehicle for Fred Newman's ] movement than it was a left-wing third political party, and which continued to incorporate some of LaRouche's ideas. | During the ] Presidential campaign in the United States, Berlet issued a report entitled "Clouds Blur the Rainbow" about the ], which placed ] on the ballot in all 50 states as a ], Presidential candidate that year. The report documented that in ], ] (the psychotherapist who later founded the New Alliance Party) had entered into a alliance with Lyndon LaRouche, which lasted less than a year, but heavily influenced the tactics and strategies of the New Alliance Party. Critics, including Berlet and previous New Alliance Party presidential candidate ], argued that the New Alliance Party was in fact a psychotherapy ] that was more a vehicle for Fred Newman's ] movement than it was a left-wing third political party, and which continued to incorporate some of LaRouche's ideas. | ||
Revision as of 22:22, 23 September 2004
John Foster "Chip" Berlet is a researcher at Political Research Associates — which concentrates on researching the political right — and specializes in tracking and analyzing right-wing movements and government intelligence abuse. He has published articles in publications ranging from Radical America and High Times to the New York Times and Boston Globe. Berlet has appeared live on ABC’s Nightline, NBC’s Today Show, and CBS This Morning. He has been interviewed on scores of other national and local television and radio news programs and talk shows, including NPR’s All Things Considered, Terry Gross’s Fresh Air, David Barsamian’s Alternative Radio, and Pacifica Radio’s Democracy Now.
Berlet began his activism in the civil rights movement through the Presbyterian Church in the mid-1960s, and later became involved in the antiwar movement. In the 1970s he was an editor at College Press Service and later was a magazine editor at the National Student Association, but this was several years after it was exposed as a CIA front, not before, as wrongly claimed by Lyndon LaRouche supporters. Berlet became interested in government intelligence abuse and covert action while researching FBI spying and disruption of the Alternative Press for the Underground Press Syndicate where he served on the board of directors.
In the early 1980s Berlet wrote reports and articles on LaRouche for High Times and other magazines and newspapers which claimed LaRouche had a right-wing and agenda and was an antisemite and fascist. LaRouche sued Berlet for defamation for these charges -- and LaRouche lost in court.
Berlet, along with Dennis King and Russ Bellant combined their research efforts to show that LaRouche and his associates were engaged in illegal fundraising and tax dodging activities amounting to millions of dollars per year. LaRouche and several associates were convicted and jailed for their crimes; and the photo of Berlet and King on this page was taken in Alexandria, Virginia where the two authors were celebrating LaRouche being led off to jail from the courthouse. Both Berlet and King have stated they are delighted they played a role in seeing LaRouche brought to justice.
In 1983, Berlet and King met with a number of individuals to debate the activities and ideas of LaRouche. Among those they met with were John Rees, of the John Birch Society; Roy Godson, then a consultant to the National Security Council and the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB); Mira Lansky Boland, head of fact-finding at the Washington, D.C. offices of the Anti- Defamation League of B'nai B'rith; at least one representative of Freedom House, a private research organization headed by PFIAB Chairman Leo Cherne; Richard Mellon-Scaife, a wealthy Pittsburgh businessman, whose tax-exempt foundation would later come under federal criminal investigation for illegally financing the arming of the Nicaraguan Contras (Mellon-Scaife later became notorious for his involvement in the Paula Jones case, and other activities intended to discredit President Bill Clinton); and several dozen journalists from major national media outlets, including NBC-TV, Readers Digest, Business Week, The New Republic and The Wall Street Journal.
LaRouche supporters make much of this meeting (see the link to the Quinde Affidavit below), but Berlet has stated repeatedly the meeting was a debate where left-wing critics of LaRouche were asked by conservatives to present and defend their claims about LaRouche spying and fascist tendencies. LaRouche supporters note, however, that all the participants, both right and left, were outspoken opponents of LaRouche. Berlet further notes that he and King were present to protest the fact that LaRouche agents were supplying information about their political enemies on the right and left to the Reagan administration -- including the National Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency -- a relationship that some conservatives close to the Reagan administration felt was inappropriate and sought to terminate. According to Berlet and King, the LaRouche supporters try to use the meeting to distract attention from the convictions of LaRouche and his associates, whereas LaRouche supporters maintain that the meeting was a planning session to produce a wave of hostile press coverage, intended to make those convictions credible.
During the 1988 Presidential campaign in the United States, Berlet issued a report entitled "Clouds Blur the Rainbow" about the New Alliance Party, which placed Lenora Fulani on the ballot in all 50 states as a third party, Presidential candidate that year. The report documented that in 1974, Fred Newman (the psychotherapist who later founded the New Alliance Party) had entered into a alliance with Lyndon LaRouche, which lasted less than a year, but heavily influenced the tactics and strategies of the New Alliance Party. Critics, including Berlet and previous New Alliance Party presidential candidate Dennis Serrette, argued that the New Alliance Party was in fact a psychotherapy cult that was more a vehicle for Fred Newman's Social Therapy movement than it was a left-wing third political party, and which continued to incorporate some of LaRouche's ideas.
Berlet gained a reputation during the 1980s as a researcher into government abuses of civil liberties, and as a critic of intelligence agencies and the FBI. Articles of his appeared in publications such as Covert Action Quarterly, and he issued lists of recommended books on government abuses. He was a founder of a national newsletter devoted to training attorneys to litigate against police misconduct and spying abuse, and he worked as a paralegal investigator on several lawsuits aginst the FBI, CIA, Military Intelligence, and local city and state "Red Squads." In the 1980s, Berlet worked with and later edited the Public Eye magazine, now published by Political Research Associates.
During the 1991 Gulf War Berlet worked to expose other left-wing critics of intelligence agencies as wittingly or unwittingly being channels for conspiracy theories of the extreme right. In articles which appeared in magazines including The Progressive and In These Times, Berlet criticized the Christic Institute, Craig Hulet, Victor Marchetti, L. Fletcher Prouty, Mark Lane, the Oliver Stone film JFK, and the October Surprise theory. He published a report entitled "Right Woos Left" in 1992 about many of the above theories and how he saw their origins within a populism of the extreme right wing, and not being genuinely progressive or leftist. In 1995 Berlet edited a collection of articles which appeared as the book Eyes Right! Challenging the Right Wing Backlash, from South End Press. It won a Gustavas Myers Human Rights Award.
Berlet has been critical at times of Ralph Nader, Alexander Cockburn, and Ramsey Clark, who are willing to work with populists of the right on common issues of concern, such as anti-globalization and peace activism. In 2000, these themes were examined in a book by Berlet and Matthew N. Lyons, Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort, publishd by Guilford Press. It also won a Gustavas Myers Human Rights Award.
Starting in the late 1990s, Berlet began writing a number of scholarly articles and book chapters on racist, antisemitic, and fascist social movements; focusing on the dynamics of conspiracism, demonization, and apocalypticism. He served on the advisory board of the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University. Berlet continues to write about government intelligence abuse, including an article he co-wrote on domestic political repression in Amnesty Now for Amnesty International, USA. He is on the advisory board of the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation.
External links
- The Public Eye, the website of Political Research Associates (PRA)
- More background on LaRouche by critics (from the PRA website)
- More background on Berlet (from the PRA website)
- NameBase.org citation on the Quinde Affidavit
- The John Train Salon (LaRouche's criticism of Berlet's work)
- Ramparts article on the National Student Association