Re: [A-List] William Engdahl?

["viveka" <kaliyuga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

MW wrote:

 

> Hello Comrades,
>
> Does anyone have any background on William Engdahl? Although much of
> his recent output has been of great interest, and can usually be backed
> up with other sources, it seems this guy has had (or has?) some rather
> dubious associates (Iâm thinking of the Fascist Larouches here).

 

In response, please note the follwoing from the Managing Editor at Pluto Press and from Engdahl himself, both of whom have asked that I forward these replies:

 

Endgahl certainly had associations with LaRouche in the past.
But he says to me that he has broken all that.

You can always destroy a person by their associations.  The key thing is
whether the book stands up to interrogation, and in my view it does.  But
then I would say that.

Endgahl can always be accused of accepting conspiracy theories, but those he
does with are well researched.  I often joke, that any one who does not
accept some form of conspiracy in Government is a fool, otherwise why do all
governments spend such a vast amount of money on secret establishment?  What
do all these people do, if not make policy for governments to follow.

My view is that Endgahl's work should not be dismissed for his past
associations, his work and this book should be criticised on its merits.
And that is the danger of the piece enclosed, it tries to destroy the man,
and ignore his arguments..


Roger van Zwanenberg
Chair & Commissioning  Editor

 

 

On my origins and my work

By F William Engdahl

As I have written widely on subjects of importance in todayâs troubled world, I have drawn occasional attack from mostly anonymous accusers, who prefer to hide behind the convenient anonymity of the Internet. For this reason, it is appropriate for me to try the difficult task of stating who I am.

First I am not in any way associated today and have not been for years, with Mr. LaRouche. I am not a fascist, an anti-semite, a neo-nazi, nor a right-wing conspiracy nut as some of the charges flying in cyberspace have imputed. Above all I reject any attempts at guilt-by-association. For anyone who has read my book, "A Century of War" from Pluto Press through, or has read my other public articles and writings, this would be clear.

The tenor of what passes for political debate in the United States, particularly following September 2001, has become alarmingly like that of the McCarthy era of the 1950âs. This is more than regrettable. It is alarming, as the basic tenets of academic freedom and debate are under attack as never before. To paint someone in a negative light by alleged association or sly innuendo without openly asking for clarification in a civil honest and open manner, is to accuse and convict without granting the right of fair defense. There is a tragic history of such totalitarian practice to silence dissenting voices. I only ask to be judged for what I say not for whom I may have associated with years back. On that, I gladly invite open and honest criticism as it enriches a most crucial discussion in the public domain which is urgently lacking. What is at stake in the United States and more broadly today is far more urgent to clarify than issues of a personâs prior associations or ideas.

F William Engdahl