I’m reading a Birchite written biography of Robert Welch.  One thing it has done is cement for me the answer to the question “which side of an ideological divide do you slot Lyndon Larouche?”.  Yes, with all due respect to various Marxist memoirs and historical left-wing sect pamphlet propaganda I’ve looked at, it is “right”, qualified as it is with idiosyncracies aplenty and from out a Trotskyite core (enough to lead him to a pause).  But perhaps this question entangles itself with what you want to focus on: the policy apparatus behind those large public works projects aren’t getting us anywhere, the conspiratorial worldview has gotten them places.

I have long noticed the Larouchite love affair with the “they call him Marxist, Fascist, Left, Right” argument.  I’ve never been sure where this is supposed to get them anywhere, but I guess the love affair with this is as good a reason as any to bounce about the political landscape as they “flank” various issues and movements (hm).  It is a fallacious argument, made by plenty of more mainstream pols.  Bill O’Reilly uses it with regularity.  He reads a letter calling him a Right-wing fanatic.  He then reads a letter calling a Left-wing fanatic.  And he finishes with a letter affirming his “if you’re getting it from both sides, you must be doing something right”.  The lesson, of course, is that you have a good chance of getting a letter read on the air if you write calling him a left-wing fanatic.  (A few years’ ago a liberal blogger tested that thesis and hit pay-dirt.)  The generic retort to Larouche is, of course, to be content to push all that aside and settle on “Fruitcake.”  (Or, Mark Levin’s “Looney Tunes“.  Another neat bit of invective: Ladouche.)

But this “slot ideological placement” is only intermittently an interesting question — the cult mostly just slides everything into a projection of itself — ’tis what a cult does.  A different question, far more pertinent, occupies my thoughts when I consider the Larouchites (dissecting an rare species of exotic floral.)  Slowly and surely, a few comments and questions have emitted over the Internet which slot recent Republican commentary on Obama Administration health care policy with Lyndon Larouche’s months long campaign — best illustrated by sticking a mustache on Obama’s face.  Representative Virginia Foxx threw out the Eugenics equation!!  And also, did you see that elderly woman at a Townhall meeting?  Notable, though, is that even Representative Foxx isn’t saying Obama is physically/literally cribbing from Hitler’s policies.  Which is to suggest, we can go ahead and cite this is as a perversion of a criticism from Betsy McCaughey, thank you very much — with some broad “eugencs” blouters from various sources, that include the deluge of Larouche.

But the boiler room over in Leesburg may as well consider this a “hit” regardless.  An observation from the Bircher book — the Birchers took credit for more than they were due in their battles against the Illuminati and Communist infested world.  (Also Welch spoke out against the encroaching Dark Ages, a Spenglerite notion I suppose but one that naturally allows for a “design to fail” as well a version of…

“It’s either LaRouche’s solution or a Dark Age. You decide.”

An interesting thing… even bonker quasi-supporters seem able to grasp this “design to fail”.  See, from Transition #743, 1997 — an interview with Kelefa Sanneh and Killah Priest:

KS:  What about someone like Lydon Larouche?  He’s another person who claims to be exposing truths that the government is trying to hide.  Larouche has had a high profile in the African American community ever since his 1992 presidential bid, when he chose the black activist Reverend James Bevel to be his running mate.  What do you think of Larouche?

KP:  Yeah, the book is deep.  He was part of the plan and they gypped him.  I don’t know what they did.  But Cooper is like Larouche: the Armegeddan that he wants to prevent is destined to happen.  [followed by some more bonkers commentary that’d make you cringe.]

The database I plucked that out is likely available to you too.  But if pressed, I’ll finish that “Killah Priest” quote, as well go back and drdge up the question I am sure is on your mind:  What has Ward Churchill said about Lyndon Larouche?

The question with the Larouche cult’s particular brand of demougery: what measurement can we use to suggest they’ve injected something into our discourse, and to what degree have they simply reflected some bad impulses?  It is, I think, mostly the latter but there are times when the former does impugn on us, and there are a few small times when there are not clear – cut answers.  I guess I’m willing to give them all credit for “Prescott Bush financed the Nazis”, only faintly the great Leo Strauss game.

When I referenced Spengler, on the tip of my mind only due to a random comment seen somewhere, I am of course refering to Oswald Spengler, and not Goldman (wikipedia page in error, incidentally) — though I guess I may as well be referencing both.  But to go on with that element.:

The prospects for all of Eurasia now hang on the probable impact of two reactions of Europe to the present, terminal financial crisis of the virtually doomed U.S. Obama administration: the September 27 general election in Germany and the presently inevitable breakdown-crisis of the U.S.A.’s system during the interval of approximately Oct. 2-12, 2009.

Unless the present U.S. Obama administration is taken over by sane forces within the Administration and Congress prior to September, the oncoming U.S. crisis now scheduled for early October 2009 will actually explode, like a bomb set off by a proximity fuse during the period of the run-up to the Sept. 27 general election—or, in the alternative, even earlier.

By sometime no later than early through middle September, all present operating delusions about their own prospects, among leading Eurasian nations will have been exploded: if the U.S. goes down, the entire world goes down, and the debris of the explosion will be a planet-wide new dark age which no presently existing nation of the world would survive in a recognizable form.

Well, that keeps this question in the minds of the faithful, I suppose.  The faithless will move on.:

But what I did not agree with-was trying to link Obama to Hitler!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE??
I have a copy of a booklet that the LaRouche supporters were giving out entitled: “ACT NOW TO STOP OBAMA’S NAZI HEALTH PLAN!!!
The front cover of the booklet shows Obama photoshopped in with Hitler and some of his Nazi supporters.
This to me, is TOO STRONG OF A STATEMENT-ONE CAN MAKE THE POINT THAT THEY BELIEVE OBAMA MAY BE SACRIFICING THE HEALTH OF THE MENTALLY ILL AND POOR BUT LINKING HIM WITH HITLER DOESN’T FLY WITH ME!!!

And the explanation for the current questioning from these guys:

That was annoying enough on its own, but one of the guys blocked my path. “Would you like to give our President a shave?” he asked.

I really didn’t like being impeded in my quest for a sandwich. “Crazy losers” I muttered, and steered around him. His associate called after me in a jeering tone, “see you next fiscal year!”

Next fiscal year? Was he saying that when I saw next year’s deficit I’d come around to their side? I highly doubted it. But that kind of false confidence is what keeps people like that out on the streets with their placards, year after year. Anyway, thankfully I was back on path to the Brown Bag, and my quest for the almost-perfect sandwich was soon fulfilled.

While I recognize nobody reads this stuff except the terminally curious (because we can’t quite tell the difference between the sort of thing just (oh for the love of god, I had the perfect auto-generated word salad link) and this sort of thing — skip to italics), it is pretty evident that the Org has positioned itself to wander back to support of Obama.  It is in the “Unless the present U.S. Obama administration is taken over by sane forces within the Administration and Congress prior to September” equation, and the equation within:   On the basis of that defeat, a new team of economists, grounded in the reality of this existential crisis, can be brought in.

Such is the meaning of “Would you like to give our President a shave?” — only you, through the agias of supporting these supporters of a negligible fringe cult leader — can free Obama of his Hitlerian mustache!  Does that mean anything?  Not really.

“The paranoid spokeman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms — he traffics in the birth and deaths of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human value.”  — Richard Hofstadter.

“I go further than you do, for I question whether the Dark Ages in Western Europe from the fifth to thirteenth centuries were really as dark as the usual historian paints them.  It might be worthwhile to compare not paintings and arhitecture or literature of the Europe of the seventh century with the Europe of the eleventh century but to compare rather the state of civilization of the mass of the inhabitants of these far seperated ages.  […]  Another thought for you — the only “civilizations” which have really ended have been isolated islands like Yucatan and the Incas.  They, I fear perished without transmitting much of their gain to any other part of the world.” — Franklin D Roosevelt, letter to Theodore Dreiser, 10-5-39
…………………………………..

“Internal document usually means something which Chip Berlet or Dennis King claim that they have obtained through clandestine means and which cannot be verified.” — Leatherstocking, on this wikipedia page.

Leatherstocking knows better than that, of course.  After all, “Revenire” stated so naw justin, i don’t mind if you read/scan LPAC/”the” briefing/etc… you’re a nice enough person and just doing your thing so keep at it. (2/25/09)
Then there’s:
As far as I’m concerned, “conflict of elites” and “psychosexual political organizing” are esoterica and won’t be missed. The “economics” section is different;
Har de freaking har.
Really, I think this wikipedia entry should be shortened to the two sentence “Larouche views himself as a world historical person, and has proceeded on the basis of ensuring that someone somewhere believe it along with him.  He has a long line of opposition to this claim, mostly expressed with the question “Who?”.”  (An observation made right here   If I must, the wikipedia article may be expanded beyond that — but the central problem is always, as expressed by these conflicting Will Beback statements:

“Confidence in the dialog”? How do you expect me to have any confidence in the dialog when at least 15 sock puppet accounts of a single user have made 432 edits to this talk page? After that much deception it’s hard to have confidence in a dialog. This page is a monument to mendacity.  AND:
“in the interest of compromise“.

Which ensures that the larouche pages are the poster children for the limitations of wikipedia, as voiced recently by a “Cas70″ with:
I’ve always told my students not to trust everything they read on Wikipedia, and it seems I’ll have a cautionary tale from this experience to reinforce that warning. […]   To call LaRouche an econimist would be tantamount to calling a little child playing with a stethoscope a doctor just because he imagines he is one.

Though how can he describe this all as “Jabble-Wockey” when confronted with this opinion:
I was just totally mesmerized by it. I had never met anyone who spoke so eloquently as Mr. LaRouche.
……………………………….

The big question for Ryan James here:

Now usually any citation of Mr. LaRouche instantly puts me off the subject matter, as I am sure it does with you, for the reason that Mr. LaRouche and his followers have a worldview that tends to go down well with a certain amount of Kool-Aid. However, I bring this information to light so that readers can decide for themselves.

So why bother?   The given answer to that question  is:

While the report does not name any sources, other than party officials, it would still be in the interest of Gov. Beebe and Sen. Lincoln to disavow this report and deny that the White House is pressuring the Governor’s Office to “crackdown” on Mrs. Lincoln, even in the face of the White House and Democratic National Committee’s decision to run television advertisements against the senator in order to pressure her to vote for Obamacare.

There’s, I suppose, a formula being worked here for LPAC.  Obama is engaging in nothing more than standard politicking –truth be told, nowhere near as strong-arming as your Lyndon Johnson engaged in — if he weren’t putting pressure on Senator Lincoln, he’d be guilty of a sort of Political Malpractice.  That is about the sum total of the “nugget of truth” in this article — perverted beyond reasonable recognition by the Cult.  So from this we jump to:

But LaRouche, a student of both history and psychology, understood that someone suffering from an acute Narcissistic Disorder, has to be confronted—repeatedly, and with ever-growing candor—if he is to ever break free of the syndrome and return to the world of reality.
The man knows from Narcissstic Disorders, don’t he?

Slightly more than 100 days have passed, since LaRouche delivered his clinical diagnosis, that President Barack Obama suffers from acute malignant self-love. In the intervening period, the evidence of the President’s disorder has become so transparent that one prominent Washington, D.C. Democrat confided that the joke circulating around Capitol Hill and at Democratic National Committee headquarters is: President Obama awoke one morning, looked in the mirror and saw that his nose was bleeding. Furious at what he saw, he ordered aides to immediately bring him a new mirror!

Attention LYM members and assorted Baby Boomers: Who and where are these people that reach back to this reference to illuminate, casually at that, contemporary events?

Senior Democrats, speaking on condition of anonymity, have told EIR that they are astounded at the behavior of the President and his Oval Office aides. “They see the world as a zero-sum game,” one official commented.
Again. It is highly unlikely that anyone speaks in that particular idiom on capital hill.  Try again next time.  Or don’t — it serves its internal purpose, as well its middling external “now, Larouche is a nut, but –” purpose.  The other game is the defense of Ethics-challenged House members. (Conyers is a new figure to pop into such a list, but googling “Conyers” and “ethics”, I see a conservative group has filed a complaint.  Hm.  To be an elected official is to have that done.)

Some of the people on Emanuel’s Congressional hit list, among them Representatives with the greatest seniority, and the strongest “FDR Democrat” credentials, have surfaced as recent targets of relentless FBI investigation and a barrage of media leaks. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee; Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, perhaps the most powerful body in the House, responsible for all tax legislation; and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who has championed a single-payer universal health insurance plan, that was instantly deep-sixed by the President […].

Well, here Larouche fineses his way to a “left-plank” position*.  The standard liberal position being “Single payer is preferable, but at the very least a public option,” and the former is cut off the table from the outset due to the power of the Insurance industry.  The Larouche position apparently is, as suggested here (but probably if spelled out elsewhere not so much), “Single Payer, yes, and Obama’s public option is the Nazi program of genocide.”  The double-speak is that Larouche is dropping health insurance for his organization.

This morning Morrison & Foerster, a California law firm whose employees contributed heavily to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, is seeking to stop organizers associated with LaRouche Political Action Committee from campaigning against the President’s health care policy at Los Angeles area shopping centers. In legal papers filed in the Superior Court in Los Angeles, the firm specifically complains about posters and literature that document that Obama’s health care policies are identical to those personally adopted by Adoph Hitler in 1939.
A spokesman for LaRouche PAC stated. “This is exactly the way the Nazi’s behaved against those who resisted Hitler’s policy of eliminating lives deemed ‘not worthy to be lived. ‘ This is the United States of America 2009, not Nazi Germany 1939. Obama’s loyalists won’t stop LaRouche from exposing their Hitler-like plans.”

Exactly like the Nazis, this… this… attempt to stop the org from setting up card tables in front of various businesses.

I await to see how this q and a session is written up in LPAC, to see the fun-house mirrors in action:
Then we got another question from the LaRouche crew, tying the Holocaust to with government-run health care. The panelists were abruptly dismissive of the question, and good for them. (The weird thing, is the LaRouche person felt like she was helping them – like they were all on the same side.)

Well, I suppose this is a more mainstream cause than the continued grasps at the 9/11 Truth movement.  The comments suggest some general problematics:

Again, a Mossad backed mis-information campaign to move the attention away from the Israel-Mossad-9/11 link. Half-truths implicating the wrong people to steer the general public away from the real perpetrators. 
AND
I could only view two of the YouTube links before I got bored.
These people are seemingly more interested in How Larouche Got It Right than in formulating any coherent approach to the subject matter.  […]
The whole thing (or the two links that I saw before giving up) was pretty weird, and oddly amateurish. Mind you, who listens to Larouche folks anyway? …………………………………..
Howie G confuses me while stepping into the old “Fema camps” junkyard, and then returning to — I guess this?
Howie G:  Is this a typo:  that went on after the election of Jimmy Carter, in the December 1975 time period — or is the phrase “time period” supposed to be a weasel word?  (Suggested to a group tending to be hung up over a misplaced “Tri-lateral Commission“.)
………………………….

Mesmerizing power of Jeffrey Steinberg!!!
(Now, it’s true that from the libertarian perspective, Obama is fairly similar to Bush. It’s likewise true that, from the perspective of a die-hard Lyndon LaRouche supporter, Obama and Bush are also peas-in-a-pod, both ignoring LaRouche’s prophecies about the gold standard and the British monarchy and the like.) Jonathan Chait

Ah… but Obama can be fixed.  If he just realizes his Narcisstic Problem.  And then realizes the inherent “Institution of the Presidency”.  Which means following the road of the FDR — Clinton — Larouche Democrats!
That out is laid at the end of that “Narcisstic article”.  Clever game, they continue playing.

Okay. 
It’s been a while since I’ve heard anything about Lyndon LaRouche. Maybe since the eighties? I’m not sure.
If I remember correctly he’s a darling of the lunatic right-wing fringe. I’m dying to hear more about the “Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy.” I wonder if it’s anything like the International Jewish Conspiracy to take over the world.
Oh, not particularly the “darling” of anyone  — “right – wing fringe” or otherwise.  I think this sort of popular-conception is where some former members get annoyed by the “experts”.
Michael R. Zaeske has been active in the LaRouche movement for the past 13 years. He and his wife live in Oshtemo Township with their three dogs.
I’m tempted to post a rather mean-spirited allustion to cult policy, but I can let it go.  Cryptically, I’ll just say that I trust they’ve walked their dogs today.

A few months ago, the Lyndon Larouche organization — in the daily briefing of February 4— rebuffed Webster Tarpley and told of the duty “that no one might confuse us with them.”  Interesting to note that the Tarpley is now fingered in something publically published (by them, I mean), in an effort to — um — consolidate 9/11 Truth Hegenomy?  See here.
The newly released documents, when cross-gridded with other evidence already in the public domain, confirm the Anglo-Saudi hand behind 9/11, and debunk nearly eight years of conspiracy rubbish, that portrayed the attacks as a scheme by cave-dwellers and “under the floorboard” mysterious forces. The writings of a former LaRouche associate, Webster Tarpley, more or less typify the kind of off-course conspiracy mongering that is now thoroughly discredited by the new material and the larger picture assembled by EIR researchers.

For comparison’s sake, here’s “Oregon Patriot” explaining what it is the Larouchies believe:

It’s not the people of Britain.  It’s the Venetian style slime mold that is represented by the imperial international monetary system centered in London and New York that is destroying nation states.

And here’s an explanation or other about Tarpley.

 Webster Tarpley is a gifted historian who generally eschews mention of Jewish bankers in favor of euphemisms like “Venetians.”  Therefore it is unusual for him to state bluntly that King Edward VII was in the pay of the Rothschilds and was responsible for World War One.  “

For more on the Venetian conspiracy — well, there’s a 9/11 Truth premier I leafed through once, with an interview with Tarpley — or there’s his wikipedia entry.  Essentially, Webster Tarpley claims ownership lock, stock, and barrell of the Venetians.

“Oregon Patriot” objected to the explanation (with a You’ve watched too many sci-fi movies.  What a bunch of crap.  Learn something for a change at LPAC — ) from a Cyrylek.

Like any self-respecting cult leader, LaRouche presents himself as a philosopher-king (in waiting), his messianic message being deeply rooted in history and global in application, of course. The Great Good that LaRouche happens to personify is not just about the strong opposition to the free trade (and most anything free) or the resolute preference for the “nation-statehood” over the “empires” (Funny though how he cheers for Putin at the same time, and his efforts to crazy-glue the last great colonial empire falling apart). No, from what I remember, this guy views the world we live in as a sum result of an ancient struggle between the empiricists (starting with Aristotle whom he hates passionately) and the Platonic idelalists, with their fascistic utopian ideas  (which LaRouche embraces and developes enthiaistically, in his own schizophrenic manner – once a Trotskyite is always a Trotskyite, to quote another great Platonist,  Comrade Stalin ). Hume, Locke, Adam Smith and other Brits who embody, for LaRouche, the evil Aristotelian spirit, also have the rare distinction of actually having influenced the government policies in their country, to what appears as the greatest success story of all times to rotten cosmopolitain market-liberals like myself – and as the greatest and most vicious conspiracy of all times to a “Platonist” like LaRouche. Jews, Jesuits, Masons et al (are the reptile space aliens in yet?) are always welcome to join the list of evildoers, but only as a side show, to the extent they seem to be conducive to the propagation of the appalling anti-utopian world order that requires no philospher-kings with their idiotic blueprints of societal perfection.

But if “Oregon Patriot” is going to charge that as being sci-fi, it means he hasn’t read this here.  That retort is kind of interesting in light of — posted here (and from lpac) — “We are a government in the wings”.
Also noteworthy in that light:  Larouche botched Greek history.  Understandable mistakes, in the right context — I imagine a college professor (or his/her assistant more probably) grading an essay from a Freshman, and shaking his/her head.  But the LYMers will get what they are intended to get from Books six and seven from Plato’s Republic… see here, (an old story, if you go back through their history).
“We do have a situation of opportunity, and we won’t be able to capture the thing unless we have a better understanding of how the mind works, and what the role of music and art is, how it has to be approached,” LaRouche said; Thus, the central strategic importance of LaRouche’s current writings, and the related scientific work underway by the LaRouche Youth Movement’s Basement Team.

I’m a little bit more plussed by the claim of “Obama administration’s unprecedented” interference of party politics.

For example, the White House is interfering in Democratic Party state electoral processes in New York, Pennsylvania, and other states, trying to dictate who will be party candidates for the House and Senate—an unprecedented action in an area that has never been the White House’s prerogative.

Ahistorical, considering they supposedly worship Franklin Roosevelt.  But this is an intellectual cargo cult, which doesn’t really attempt to understand any of these concepts — just manuever about these concepts.

And now for your weekly allowance of oddity.  (As well).  AND:

That I found at a right-wing website — one that had prominent images of Joe the Plumber as an Every-hero and on the front page strikes against Obama’s Health Care policies.  I don’t know where the image is attached, though — could be general malaise or an increase in the Americorp program, perhaps?

In theory, the Obama — Nazi image should attract something on the order of skip down to Glenn Arlt and the response from Scipio.  But note this response:

I remember LaRouche. I could not get much into the webcast due to time. LaRouche’s hold on reality has long been tenuous, but what he says about Obama is a breath of sanity. No one will listen of course. A pity LaRouche says it when Republican leaders should be saying it.

A demagougic’s appeal, tainted beyond repair.  For instance, a basic problem with this story comes from the first sentence:  Protestors opposed to President Obama’s health care reform effort demonstrated last week on sidewalks across the North Fork, telling anyone who would listen that the proposed measure is a mirror-image of the Nazis’ T4 health care plan.  They’re not “opposed to President’s health care reform effort”; they’re just wound up and buzzing about.

I think I just might be responsible for leading a Larouchite to call the Mark Levin show — seen (heard?) here, posted by this conservative radio fan.  To wit, I mentioned Mark Levin in relation to Larouche on this post, saying simply that the current line for Larouche in “Obama’s Nazi Health Care Plan” aligned under Mark Levin’s current rhetoric about “knowing the history”.

It is interesting that the cult-caller, John from Lansing, Machigan, chose the “Larouche is a Federalist” line, apparently thinking it matched better the right wing host’s political predilictions better than what the Larouchies might say to a Democrat — which would be something along the lines of “Rooseveltarian”.  (Though, I take it from his current take on the situation in Hondurus — aligned with the coup , never mind the tangeantal lump in of  health care politics– that he’s sort of charging to and fro in right-wing paranoia during the Obama Administration as opposed to the left-wing paranoia during the Bush Administration — the “recruiting for the LYM” would necessarily be off now.)

A note to John from Lansing, Michigan… if this weird course of deployment surfaced from out of this blog.  HA HA!!  No, really:  HA HA!!!

Maybe they can try for some synergy on the fringes of the “tea-party”, which in its sort of “down to the core” state has hit its “Obama Hitler Mustache” sweet-spot — slightly better than handing out to (go to item #2) pictures of Nancy Pelosi which protesters can then slice the “l-pac” line at the bottom for use with the bigger earlier crowd.

But John from Lansing, Michigan must have missed my point.  The guru views these political movements (left or right) — in this case, against “socialized health care” [for the sake of Alexandar Hamilton’s Federalism, I guess?]– as entities to trail, for some implantating of anti-British and “international” conspiracy to public discourse (or to ride the wave of the already existent ‘paranoid style’?) and for implanting “Historic World Importance” in the membership, and off the margins for recruitment and donations.

Such is the case for demonstrations as:

Also Thursday, a group of activists gathered in Sioux Falls to protest what they consider to be a Democrat-led drive for “socialized medicine.” Some of that unrest spilled over to Mitchell when, at the end of the hearing, a man stood up in the audience to loudly proclaim that Herseth Sandlin and Johnson should have “listened to Lyndon LaRouche,” a perennial presidential candidate whose brochures were distributed Thursday by supporters. One brochure depicted President Barack Obama alongside Adolf Hitler with an admonition to “Act now to stop Obama’s Nazi Health Plan!”
When the LaRouche supporter was talked down by moderator Duffett and some audience members, another man stood up in a different part of the audience and shouted “They work for us! They need to listen to us!” The hearing wrapped up quickly thereafter, and the second man carried on a private conversation with Herseth Sandlin for several minutes.
Johnson and Herseth Sandlin told the panelists and the audience members — who were given the opportunity to fill out comment cards — that they were playing a vital role in an important process of reform.

So I await the Larouche response to Al Gore’s comment.  I suspect Winston Churchill will get a work-out moreso than an analogy about a weak will in fighting the nazis.  But that’s just a guess.
……………………………………

Question:  who took this interview off of youtube?  The “We Are Change Virginia” 9/11 Truthers, or LPAC?  (One or the other needed it removed to avoid embarrassment, I gather.)  Not that it’d be worth 40 minutes of one’s life to find out what’d embarrass whom.

Hey!  Here’s a twitter feed to subscribe to!

http://twitter.com/StormfrontWPWW … It seems to be clip each new thread posted to the neo-nazi website “Storm-front” for twitter feed purposes.  In the mix of that  came:

StormfrontWPWW: Breaking News: LaRouche calls Obama insane..: Here’s the webcast..

And to think, Larouche went on a jeremiad against twitter not that long ago.
Some more fandom seen in the comments here.  I’m puzzling over this one:

 :  TheInternetGanger says:
Your smile captivates me.

 Huh.

And, this is as good a conspiracy as any.  I am a bit surprised they haven’t shown up to leave comments to “keep hoping a large truck swerves and at least clips the f*cktards” comparing themselves to the accosted civil rights struggle , as seen here (commented on by me in this post.)

I wonder too if something waving the Guardian into the neo-conservative universe is in the offing, since they just saw print new developments in the Jeremiah Duggan struggle.  Actually, seeing the new administration in America, they may be might have the politics aligned in a semi-more-sensical way.
…………………

Apparently stung by the net effect of sparodic blogs reporting, in combination of mock and irritation, meetings with Larouche card-table deployments, LPAC has stuck this report — a distillation of some scattered comments into something of a rallying call.  It is… funny, in that moribud way all of these things tend to be funny.

Generation that Fought the Nazis: LaRouche Is Right on Obama!
July 1, 2009 (LPAC)—Lyndon LaRouche’s webcast call to arms on fighting Barack Obama’s Nazi policy on medical treatment, profoundly touched the souls of his generation—those who fought in World War II, or lived through it. But many boomers and younger people were protective of Obamamania, and fearful of what their “friends” and peers will think about calling Obama’s plan “Nazi.”
Among the older people, whether it was those who attended the Washington-area meeting where LaRouche spoke, the regional meetings, or watched it on the web, or learned about it in the field, there was a powerful response. At a literature table in the New Jersey region, an older woman was at our literature table, getting briefed on the LPAC fight, and looking at our signs on Obama and Hitler. She looked over the LPAC literature, and exclaimed, “You’re right, his policy is Nazi.” Then she pulled up her shirtsleeve to reveal the numbers tattooed on her arm, put there when she was a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp in Poland at the age of 9.
At the Washington, DC-area event, an Italian-American man from Philadelphia, said, “Lyn has to win. I know, I lived under Mussolini. Lyn is right.” Two men in their 80s had the same response. One, at a field site in Los Angeles said, referring to Obama and the Administration, “I’m 80 years old. They’re out to kill me!” Another World War II veteran, attending the New Jersey office showing of the webcast, said, “I’m in trouble … I’m over 80 … they want to be rid of people like me.” In Chicago, a 79-year-old man, who had retreated into religion from politics, listened by phone to Lyn’s webcast, and later said, “That speech should be on the front page of every newspaper in the country! What he said about the British is absolutely true! In fact, everything he said is true! He’s the smartest man in the world!!”

Hm.  Frankly, they could play the “Current events remind person alive during WW2 of Nazi Germany” game since at least Nixon, probably before.  A note to the family of the elderly persons referenced in this item:  it may be time to take over some of their financial decisions.

Granted, if one cares one probably has read these things, but I draw your attention to the factnet posts of  Hylozoic Hedgehog  under the “Old Mole Files” and the “New Mole Files”.  I gather part of the purpose here is carrying on an argument against  Dennis King (“quit lying” about “Larouche’s ideological orientation”), such as I’m left with the belief that it promised more than it delivered on that score.

I assume this was the purpose of putting in bold type and adding a paranthetical “emphasis added” to the phrase in Larouche’s stated purpose of finding “Leninist Boomers”.  Of course, a secondary purpose is to put the context of the org as being a forty year history of yanking a small cadre of “Leninist Boomers” around in various fashions, which I guess would argue for the cult orientation over any ideological consideration.

To review how the “left” and “right” strait-jacket is reconciled, here are two quotations from Tim Wohlforth in his memoir The Prophet’s Children:

“In fact it is quite remarkable how the ‘new’ Larouche organizes his followers in a Leninist cadre fashion, drives them with a vision of the historic tasks and the necessity of their actions and successfully reaches layers of society with “transitionl” slogans that appeal to economic needs or old prejudices.”

“The Larouchites began mouthing anti-Semitic phraseology, promoting the nuclear program and arms industry, advocating a Star Wars defense, and baiting gay people.  The old Trotskyite, a member of my own small organization, had emerged as a Fascist!”

I hesitate to say Wohlforth over-stepped his bounds in referring to various mainstream causes of the 1980s into the realm of “fascist”, though the “gay baiting” in particular may have the “matters of degree” on a one dimensional “left / right” spectrum.  The “anti-semitic phraseology” is what remains constant.  Also I wonder what “layers of society” he refers to here — surely the elderly people in the LPAC release and the similar credit fraud victims of the 1980s, and the college aged recruits, and a larger number I guess anyone who’s quoted a single line from Leon Strauss in the past eight years and talked and blamed Hitler on Prescott Bush over the past two decades.

As for the Nazis?  Well, we can move further afield from King, who  — cavalier about posting a photograph of the man’s arms out-stretched though he may be (ironically transforming Larouche into an ordinary politician).  I have no opinion on Plato and his “Golden Souls”, except that Plato’s Republic has served as the rationalization for a number of despots.  I have no opinion on Nazi Space swirls, except to point to nazi courtship.  And I’m hard pressed to figure out what else the org’s effect, outside its orbit of spending membership’s lives [Jeremiah Duggan the extreme example], has been besides stirring these conspiratorial items into public discourse.
Across the spectrum of what it means for Larouche to be defined as a nazi:  On the far edge you have European’s “researchers” and “reporters” who insist to him that they know they all read Mein Kampf and sit before portraits of Hitler.  An edge inward and you have this admitted tin-foil hat wearer’s conspiracy theory that the org was financed by fleeing Nazis’ Gold and there we have Dave Emory’s program which sticks him in as part of that “Underground Reich” (though, Emory would also hold forth about Prescott Bush on that score.)  At the opposite end, “European” had denied any existence of anti-semitism until recently.

Addendum, 6-27:
I need to note that after a long absense of releasing rather lukewarm appraisals of the situation in Iran, due seemingly to Larouche being out of it and focused on “major speeches” in Europe — a bad sign for the post death of the leader — they’ve finally come out full bore against the British intransigence (the whole-hearted belief of “The Daily Elitist”.
Though, it’s a bit hard to imagine the “Support khamenei” line — or “The British must admit they killed Neda” –becoming a peition-gathering project, ala the current “Nancy Pelosi Sucks Eggs”, I gather the stance is enough to get the org some rumpus into Iranian State television (or round about there), for a full projection back to the cult about being a “American Statesman” figure — the better for a wikipedia edit.
…………………………………

Hand count.  How many people out there have been waiting to see when and where someone in the blogosphere or the web-o-sphere would take a Robert Dreyfuss article on the current events in Iran, and snip it next to parts of Robert Dreyfuss’s writings on Iran, perhaps from his book, from the 1979 to 1980 period?  (Today’s piece would appear in, for instance, The Nation — 1980’s Hostage to Khoemeni was published by the Lyndon Larouche Organization, as Robert Dreyfuss would have been the Secretary of State had Lyndon Larouche ever become president… no, don’t laugh.  Actually, yes — do laugh.)

(Crickets chirping.)
Okay.  Yes.  I am the only one.

Well, satisfactorily, here is my answer.  Right here.  This is the conspiratorial nattering which slides away inconvenient information, focuses on convenient threads, and seems to hold the American Clandestine government as the only actor that acts out there.  The Nation magazine is posited as a “gate-keeper”, a device to keep the Left in line, evidenced because Katrina vanden Heuvel’s father was International Rescue Committee which was a CIA plot.  Nonetheless, the author of this item apparently found The Nation valuable enough to continue a subscription until 2006, when it published a piece that followed the CIA line on the JFK assassination.

Actually, the Dreyfuss clippings here are from his 2006 book against his 1980 book.  And here’s the purpose of the Larouche organization.:

Surprisingly, though, the story of the CIA and British intelligence’s overthrow of the Shah is also told by Robert Dreyfuss in Hostage to Khomeini, 1980.   Dreyfuss rewrote the history of the Shah’s overthrow in The Devil’s Game, 2005.  In Hostage to Khomeini, Dreyfuss details how and why the CIA and the US military installed the Ayatollah and how Carter was manipulated into setting up the taking of the U.S. embassy — Dreyfuss even quotes the NYT to show how Carter knew that giving sanctuary to the Shah would lead to seizure of the embassy.  But now, as a Nation contributing editor, this time around Dreyfuss wrote, “Never did a revolution catch the United States more by surprise than did the one that swamped Iran in 1978-1979.” p. 214.
 
Why the change?  The obvious and most reasonable conclusion is that Dreyfuss is an intelligence agent or asset.  Dreyfuss’s earlier book was published by New Benjamin Franklin House, a Lyndon LaRouche affiliate.  One of the functions LaRouche served for the USG intelligence community was to advertise obscurely a covert operation that they dearly wished to keep secret, but to wrap it with the noxious LaRouchian ideology and nimbus so that anyone else respectable who revealed it could be smeared and dismissed as touting a crazy LaRouchian idea.

The one good thing that can be said with this to lend it some credence there  is that it is written in the past tense.  A second “say… what did Dreyfuss say round about 1979?” item is here.  (What did he say?  That the polot to bing down the Shah was orchestrated by, in particular British.  This is Larouche, after all.  Which I suppose makes some sort of conspiratorial sense in the way of Khamenei’s recent “British evilest of all” statement — the 1953 coup was encouraged by Churchill, had been rebuked by Truman.)

The topic of Larouche remains a bothersome one.  To have something of such irrelevance and then to peek into the natterings of the involved and their rather skewed perspective, trying at once to see where they are coming from … is a little disorienting.  I refer to the comments, and we can thread this roughly from  jimdeblasi to (as of this moment, and as of the 20th) MR76 at this Seattle PI story.  And it is a rather unremarkable story.  But comment by comment:

The La Rouche organization is an anti gay hate group.  With all due respect to the contours of the California Initiatives of 1986 and 1988, and the uses of the word “faggotry”, that’s a rather narrow classification for the org.
I already mocked Will I Am Tell’s comment in my last post.  He continues with a new comment under a different “question” moniker with such as:
Let me tell you first that I’m not a full out Larouche “supporter”.
Steve?  Is that you?
when I read the comments on this blog, it reminds me of something. I picture an article posted here, lets say it was posted in 1950 in alabama. (I know, no internet then, bear with me!) and it was about a black man who was hit in the streets, causing the white sherrif to arrest the white perpetrater for violating his civil rights. The comments on the blog that follow are “stupid n–ger shouldn’t be walking down that street in broad daylight.” and “damn n–ger was out there to rape a white woman!” and, “Why they chargin him with hate crimes, we all know n–gers ain’t human!”
In other words, those posting on this blog ought to be ashamed of tthemselves and their bahavior. Your attitudes are worse than racism, and you reveal what existential wretches you really are.

We are getting a rather unique perversion of the word “hate crime”.  Or maybe it’s not so unique, and every Cult of Personality deem themselves a necessarily protected class due to perceived historical persecution.

Silverchild, a name I recognize from my years of scanning these things, chimes in with:  Look at the BILE coming out of the minds and mouths of most of the folks commenting above- against LaRouche. It’s all media brainwashing. […]  As for the jerk who threatened the young LaRouche supporters, he has no right to threaten people or to rip down their signs-if he disagrees, he should create a movement and set up his own table.
Maybe it’s media brainwashing to go back to the article these comments are directed toward and pointing the rather minor nature of the reported threat?
But the Grand Dragon of Delusion comes with the final comment:

I’ve heard that back in the 1970s that Communist Party assaulted LaRouche organizers and that LaRouche responded with a self defense campaign called “Operation Mop Op.” They fought street battles with the Communists until the assaults ended. When LaRouche was arrested, the government sent 300 special ops police. You’d have to be an idiot to pick a fight with these people. No wonder the man threatened from his car and drove off!

So that’s the Larouche sequence of events on that one.  Bizarre for that item, is that it’s popped up in the wikipedia editing attempts.  Coincidentally, I assume.  But, if I may offer an explanation with Oscam’s Razor in hand, the man threatened from his car and drove off because it was an item of flippancy and a gut-level emotional response to the Obama Hitler Mustache and not, in the scheme of his life, a matter of much importance.  See, for instance, this reaction — just important enough to rip off one quick blog post.

Frequent blog poster “whitemale” shares his conversion story:

When Lyndon Larouche gave historical webcast in the month of July 2007, he pronounced at the time the stock market was at 14,000 that: “The Anglo-Dutch Financial Monetary system will die…”,
I nearly became overwhelmed with fright and fear because I never ever heard any forecaster speak with such utter certaincy and conclusiveness and surity. […]  I thought immediately to myself, “Lyndon Larouche must be a prophet or a majician with majical powers”, but there was more.
I note that he’s not there yet, as evidenced by allowing a few other experts into his purview:
You can call me a ‘tin-foiled’ hat wearer all you want for listening to peoples like Lyndon Larouche, Alex Jones and others but so far, most of everything that they have been warning about for years and years has come true.
As previous posts from other commenters told, people like Jones, Beck, and Paul are mere populists with no ideas.  This man needs to attend one these meetings discussed by this Berlin traveller to get his mind straight on that matter.

AND finally, in genocidal, Malthusian, energy plan news.  Also, in that vein.

And in a completely different vein.  Quite funny.  I guess The Abominable won.

 

 

 As you see, Stephen Colbert and the members of the Lyndon Larouche Organization have come to the same comedic routine.  It’s worth comtrasting how the two handled the joke.  The Colbert bit took less than ten seconds, and what you see in this image is the conceit of the mock – O’Reilly asking “Did you put up the Hitler Mustache image?” — meaning even in this parody he recognizes it as an absurd parody.  It’s taken off, and he moves on the Obama Fly-Swatting story.  The LYMers, on the other hand, are taking the joke on the road, and standing on street-corners for hours on end (as oppsoed to a few seconds) with the “Hitler Mustache” placard. 

There is at least one outraged reaction against Colbert’s image — a bit different than the Seattle reaction.  As for the Larouchies, when I saw them standing in front of a Portland mall, they didn’t have the overhanging Larouche image that you see in the image shown at the top of this post.  I suggest that this might clarify a problem for them.  For some not entirely apt reason, there are people running into the Mustached Obama image who will assume this is a neo-nazi organization.  The giant image of Larouche will clarify iit, “Oh.  Okay.  It’s even lamer.  It’s the Larouchies.”

A bit of sympathy, of sorts.  Unlike the Obama Monkey “double standard” conundrum, which is a violation due to the historical nature  of considering blacks as sub-human — though in the famed April of 2008 speech Larouche more than violated the “same insult leveled at Bush” line by explicitly running to the racialist problems of miscegenation — the “same as Hitler” line is just too second nature as mindless invective.  If Carter, Bush I, Gore, and Cheney Can be imposed with a Hitler Mustache or compared to Hitler, why can’t Obama?

I suppose there’s the problem of Hitler’s Master Race conflicting with the message.  The need to arrive at a higher ground in the way of piddling political invective is shown with how this rather innocuous youtube video of Obama’s fly-swat brings out “n”-word practioners in the comments section (which I saw flooding the page 1 yesterday — today, it’s buried a bit deeper) .

Yes, I wonder what former Civil Rights activist Amelia Boynton Robinson , now in her elderly years, bizarre Larouche validator, has to say about such an image.

The good news for the Larouchies, I suppose, is that the Obama’s Care plan’s path through the Senate has hit some set-backs this week.  This has nothing to do with the whole campaign of wandering to street corners and putting Obama Mustached pictures up, but the delusion that it does can safely fill their mind.  Likewise, I can almost imagine Larouche (a big fan of Stephen Colbert, I hear) might just assume that Colbert’s handful of seconds of showing an image of Obama with a mustache is evidence of some influence or other.
Comments from these postings, and a couple “talk radio pundits”, showing wherefor the Larouchies are aligned right now:

whitemale08 (???)  People who are smart and can connect-the-dots, can see on the horizon, a British Empire of Worthless Derivatives and Credit-Default Swaps Neo-Fuedalism and Serfdom posed as Malthusian Parasites and Ticks

Ah.  Finally I run into the new(ish) blog from the leader of the Larouchian Cryonics Movement…  Check it out and let us see what animates him, and his self-professed “movement of one member”.

Pearl harbour was staged?
Hippocratic Oath given Nazi interpretation by Obama’s man.

Hm.  Actually none of this is terribly interesting.  The one I’m wondering about is “Comedy That Actually Works“.  Having my fill of some rather low-brow comedy regarding David Carradine’s death, I’m wanting to set my mind on a higher, more Platonic plane.  Unfortunately, the leader of the Larouchian Cryonics Movement is setting aside his material behind passwords, so I’m stuck with his request to go to the EIR site.  Which, I will admit, is a bastion of comedy.

Though not quite as comedic as the commenters that float into the blogosphere:

wow, pretty accurate description of Larouche’s work! If I were’nt already associated with the movement, I’d ask, “where do I sign up to get involved with these people?” Thank you for spreading the word accurately. My only question is, did you investigate anything that you wrote above? is it all really that absurd to you that it doesn’t merit an investigation? Are you that immersed in popular opinion that you just simply cannot think, or are you afraid that Larouche may be right?

The canard of the “Popular Opinion” — a clever device, I’d say, on how the followers can explain away how nobody much thinks about their master, and those that do and pay him slight enough mind to do the cursory glance (and for the most part a cursory glance is what he deserves) come up with “the standard”.

… Very RoughlyDefined as what ends up dumped onto wikipedia.  And now it’s time to look at the concerted Boiler-room Effort at Wikipedia.  Firstly, the round-up for the keeping of an article for Stanislov Menshikov:

Keep. As long as we continue to pretend this is an encyclopedia, I support greater lenience in applying notability standards for articles about legitimate scholars/thinkers than those conerncing pop culture flashes-in-pans. I find the discussion as to whether the article was crated by a (gasp) banned user to be petty and somewhat surreal.–The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I imagine that wikipedia features articles for peoples that are arguably less notable than this Menshikov, and doesn’t have articles for peoples that are arguably more notable than Menshikov, and to a great extent I don’t much care — in the end I barely care about the odd dents that the Larouchians have affected in the Larouche articles, though am fascinated enough to observe and note this process.  But whatever it’s worth, the only reason that article was created was because the Larouche organization wants to use him to push forward the idea that Larouche is a somebody.  It is a curious skewing of wikipedia focuses — kind of similar to how the sweep of articles devoted to topics of concern to Larouche is equivalent to, say, Albert Einstein — in and of itself not too much of a problem, I’d say, except it gives a pretty bad impression.  (See the article devoted to Hegla Zepp… and I’ll get to that one in a second.)

Remind me to go to sign up to wikipedia, and get to the task of putting up the Floyd Paxton article.  Who’s he?  He invented the bread-clip and ran the “Qwik Lox Fastener” company.  That’s as notable as an old Soviet functionary, and has more of an impact on our day to day lives, right?

Is there any doubt that Helga Zepp has roughly zero affect on anything outside the cloistered confines of Das Cult?  Well, never mind, she gets a wikipedia article.  A point for her in the Helga Zepp — Jeffrey Steinberg Splinters of Sucession.  Some new arguments have ensued over her article — the travails of EIR as a source (and EIR will hype up any niggling mention of das Cult  — apparently she addressed the Duma, and apparently that is worth something grand).

Incidentally, the state of EIR looks to be rather poor these days:

The EIR is not shipped to the European organization any more. Apparently no (!) copies reach Europe any more. So the LC in Europe cant mail the EIR to the last subscribers here that still does not use the EIW. Apparently the European LC is making photocopies in black-and-white and are mailing it out instead!

Hm.  Nobody’s missing anything.  EIR is now just a compilation of images of Obama photo-shopped with Hitler’s mustache, anyways.
… Say, doesn’t that fall under the Larouche concern last December that Soros (or somebody like that, and also the British) was orchestrating, some heated rhetoric would be the cover for which this might be done, for the Assassination of Obama — which, I’d think the “Obama’s Nazi Health Care Plan” trope would suffice for this purpose, over in that alter-world.  (See my commentings of nazi  related rhetoric here, or look to this item regarding Nancy Pelosi:

“What is she doing about genocide? Doesn’t she know the Obama administration, her own party, is pushing genocide? She doesn’t have time to deal with that? What is wrong with the bitch? She is not paying attention. She wants to change the subject. She is not talking about reality. She wants to talk about schedules.”

Regretably I don’t have enough patience to pin down comments of how an Obama Assassination would come down — and the strange double-track that would preclude his current talk, but I can take us back to when the gang in the Boiler-room was rhapsodizing about Obama’s assassinating, and speculating that (from the “Get Larouche Conspiracy”) “Molly might do it” and “pin it down on us”.

Heh heh heh.  Right?
Oh, that one answers this question — echoing some thoughts expressed by Revenire – that Erik asks here:

One can wonder why so much time is spend on the morning briefing. While EIR cotains some useful articles, the briefing is a piece of paper that is not memorised, stored, re-read or quoted to the outside world.

I collect from all over, and arrange the pieces of the puzzle as best I can.  One item to be noted here — regarding an article on the overuse of the word “extreme” in political campaigns in the state of Virginia:

In 1996, Mark Warner — then challenging Republican Sen. John Warner — tried to paint the old lion as a wingnut, too. “Mark Warner is testing the risky strategy of trying to portray the senator as an extremist,” a news article reported. During a debate, Mark Warner admitted to having voted for John only because he was the lesser of two evils: “Between you and the LaRouche party, you were the clear choice . . . . [But] I don’t think the senator that I voted for in 1990 would have marched in lockstep with Newt Gingrich over the past year.”

Note that in denigrating his opponent as “extreme” he didn’t even bother with a labeling of the 1990 “greater of two evils” Nancy Spannaus candidacy as “extreme” or “loopy” or what have you.

The current line of Obama following the “Nazi Health Care” plot — I’m having a bit of trouble locating on an ideological line in terms of what passions the campaign is aimed to flow out from.  But maybe I’ll contemplate that one later.  I’m having some trouble locating the existence of the org itself at the moment — maybe they can flutter past and leave some debris to remind me that they do exist in the physical economy somewhere.

Unless the so-called health-care reforms presently proposed by President Obama are prevented, all talk of civil rights were an ugly farce in the tradition of Adolf Hitler’s Tiergarten-4.

Obama = Hitler.  Why, we even have the image of Obama with the mustache to work with!  A pretty awesome turn, albeit one to a spot he was in beforehand.  But who cares what Lyndon Larouche has to say, really?  I’m more interested in reading old Communist Party, USA pamphlets showing what Earl Browder had to say about things!

First of all, the question of literature to the masses.  In the first principle of Party defense that I spoke of — going to the masses — the most important role is played by mass literature.  We have made certain definite improvements in this respect in the last six months.  During this period, we have distributed more pamphlets than in any previous year in our Party’s history.
That is an improvement.  But can we say that this measures up to the possibilities of the situation, especially in the circulation of one-cent and two-cent pamphlets?  I think that in an historical moment in which the enemy is making Coummunism and the Communist Party the central issue in the life of the Country we must admit that with better organization of our work, we can multiply the present distribution of pamphlets, especially cheap pamphlets; for these mass popular pamphlets are precisely the sharpest weapons we have for influencing the masses and through the masses, the actual course of events in the history of our country and of the world.
This emphasis upon literature should not be taken to mean neglect of mass meetings.  Mass meetings become more important than ever, although through mass meetings we can never reach as broad a

But now I’m already a little bored of Earl Browder.  I’m having trouble with this one — was this hawked on street corners in the days of 1940?  Who would be interested in reading Earl Browder’s discussion of internal Communist Party, USA matters?  As opposed to, I suppose, his realignment on that thing which caused many a splinter in the Communist Party — The Finnish Question — which as Orwellian as this be, at least figures into actual world policy matters:

Well, we don’t need to go today into all the details of the gigantic conspiracy, this grandiose effort of the world bourgeoisie to turn its forces to the crushing of the Soviet Union.  Suffice it to say that all of these enormous efforts and these grandiose diabolical schemes come to wreck.  They come to wreck on the Bolshevik vigilance of the Soviet Worker, of their Party, and above all, of their great leader, our Lenin of today, Comrade Stalin.

As Comrade Foster mentioned in opening this meeting, the military news from Finland this morning indicates that the process of the liberation of the Finnish people from their forcibly imposed role of puppets for World Imperialism is well under way.  We can expect that it will not be long now when a free Finland will work out her own destiny in close friendship and collaboration with the Soviet Union.

Memoirs of assorted Communist members of the time tell of their befuddled confusion in accepting this tripe, a gasp of air that was not released until the line switched back to the struggle against Adolf Hitler and Fascism — where FDR was once again a hero.  But that’s neither here nor there.  Let’s ponder what’s now being pumped out of LPAC:

At this moment, the President and a selected cabal of his associates are conducting a series of meetings with such as select members of the U.S. Congress, in the attempt to ram such Hitler-like policies through as U.S. Federal statutes, before the generality of the population could be alerted to the intentional crimes against humanity being presently promoted from relevant circles inside the Obama administration.
Stop that horror while you can! Do not wait, as the German population did.

And to think, once upon a time they were using Obama campaign organizing websites for their own organizational tool.  I suppose those days are over.  AND… Can somebody do me a favor and look through the 200-some comments here and see if a “Laroucheistruth” or a (smirk) “Alexandar Hamilton” pops in for a spell?

Anyway….  It is a bit interesting that the Larouchies, as shown in their continued wikipedia edit attempts, are hanging their hat on supposed reverence found in Russia, attempting to keep in the lede a “Validator” of Stanislav Menshikov.   I suppose you’d want to know that the wikipedia editing confuberation over Stanislav_Menshikov continues apace.  Judging by the voting, it appears that this Stanislav Menshikov article will be kept, meaning not a whole awful lot for me, and only this for the Larouchian editors at wikipedia:

Here’s my two cents: The Heritage Foundation comment seems fairly representative of commentary about LaRouche in the US, while the Menshikov comment seems representative of (especially recent) commentary about LaRouche elsewhere, especially in Russia where his fans seem to have more access to media organs. —Leatherstocking (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

“Huge in Russia”, which for the LYM and Boomer faitful is what they’re going to hang their hat on to make up for not being Huge in the USA — or, I guess, for being hidden by the Dutch — Anglo Elites.  Remind me to go back to the news database, look up the “BBC Monitoring Service” for media of former Soviet countries (including Russia), and check to see if there is any mention of Larouche was not then dutifully re-reported by the LPAC clattering keyboardists.  IE:  That’s about the extent of “influence” in Russia — Menshikov, references in regards to Georgia — and most surreally, that recent LPAC release reporting on Russian Blog Coverage.
At least with Earl Browder, his movement was indeed Huge in Russia — and was indeed politically squashed in the USA. 

Incidentally, as the LYMers adjust to their new line, I need to point out how off this item is:

Avoid Lyndon LaRouche the same way you would avoid a cliche, or the plague. While the rumors that he’s a ‘fascist’ may be false, the rumors that quoting LaRouche will help you score with chicks are definitely not true.

We’ve already established that the Larouchies are an Anti-Sex Cult, so these rumors are null and void, and indeed that blog post will now be used as a Recruitment Tool.

(In other news:  I once upon a time linked to this blog, which was a new blog set up by the leader of the “Larouche Cryonics Movement.”  It appears he’s made it a Private Party.   Go figure.  I don’t know how he’s going to increase the size of his movement that way, but to each their own.)

And from Dennis King’s website:
And this first edition of Dope, Inc. in which the infamous Protocols forgery is described as the authentic minutes of a Paris “Order of Zion” meeting, is today being promoted on the website of the LaRouche Youth Movement, a cadre formation founded circa 2001 that is recruiting aggressively on college campuses throughout the United States with little opposition from Hillel or anyone else.
Hillel I never heard of until I googled just now — okay, it’s a Campus Jewish Group.  But, for what it’s worth, a Socialist Group picketed and pamphletered the recent Connecticut collge professor Norton Mezvinsky sponsored speaking engagement.  I can’t say I’m terribly impressed, but I’m not sure what to be impressed by.

Slightly disappointed to learn, though I don’t quite know why, that the 9/11 Truth wackadoodle film Zeitgeist movie makes use of Lyndon Larouche hisownself.  I don’t even know why that is — maybe I was pegging a hope that the man found himself further on the fringe of the Fringe than this, or that if it were to make use of his org it’d pull in, say, a Jeffrey Steinberg.  But nonetheless, this review tells us he makes an appearance.

What is grating about it is the fact that the movie uses LaRouche as a reliable witness. Google him up, and it’s like turning a rock over: suddenly, cockroaches start squirming all over the place. This individual is anti-semite, covert fascist and, no surprise here, conspiracy theorist. He claims to be the real originator of the SDI (the Strategic Defense Initiative, the anti-missile project under Ronald Reagan dubbed “Star Wars”) – no mention of the real drivers of the project, Lt. Gen. Daniel Graham and the renowned scientist, and father of the hydrogen bomb, Dr. Edward Teller. LaRouche did some years in jail for tax evasion, and then him and his attorney started a campaign saying that his imprisonment was a “conspiracy” by government officials to discredit and destroy LaRouche and “brainwash” the population.

It’s all very surreal, until you learn that he was bullied and isolated in school – well, that explains it, he looks then very much like the mad scientist from Batman, except without superpowers or death rays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_Larouche

That’s someone who the movie presents, keeping a straight face, as a reliable source of information. Sigh.

But for my purposes, what is interesting here is the simple linking to the wikipedia page as a source of information. Despite the best efforts of the concerted Larouche tag team of wiki-editors. The latest wikipedia editing attempt is a push-back from an attempt to take out from the lede the name “Stanislav Menshikov”. A few key lines here:

It might be appropriate to mention that Menshikov has spoken at one or more LaRouche movement events, so is not an impartial commentator. Will Beback talk 20:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
At this point, I think that the most helpful thing that you could do would be to write a new BLP of Stanislav Menshikov, to replace the one that you just (Ctrl-click)”>deleted as part of your never-ending feud with the LaRouchies. –Leatherstocking (talk) 01:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
If he’s genuinely notable then someone unassociated with the LaRouche movment will write one. I have no feud with “the LaRouchies”, and I’d remind you to assume good faith and avoid baseless charges. Will Beback talk 01:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I have no opinion on whether Menshikov warrents a wikipedia page, and I have only a marginal and detached belief he shouldn’t be mentioned in a lede. (Wait a few months and we’ll have a different ‘Big Name of the Month’ serving for Larouche’s back-up to suggest either “Big in Russia” or “Respected by Professors in Connecticut“!) But it is notable the reason for the deletion of the Menshikov post.

20:50, 22 May 2009 Will Beback (talk | contribs) deleted “Stanislav Menshikov” ‎ (G5: Creation by a banned user in violation of ban)

Ah, yes. Herschel Kurstofsky. And so the wikipedia game continues. As I discovered previously, a Larouchie theory at work is that to have a wikipedia page is to exist for purposes of a wikipedia reference, to not is to not. Also, (go down to the 6th section), be sure to buttress your points at tangeantal unrelated wikipedia entries they probably could give two whits about, ala Paul Krassner.

In other strange Internet sightings, follow this flow-chart regarding a posting about an Alex Jones video**:

flyinghotwing Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am  i have listened to …
i have listened to larouch and have gone to a meeting at his headquarters in LA and he does sound good…i also like ron paul because he stands for honesty and tells it like it is from within the house, i also like jesse ventura..larouche is a smart economics man……..what do you think about the creature from jekyll island?

LaRoucheisright Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am Yes of course he is … Yes of course he is
The only way to defeat this evil cabal is to join LaRouche ! You got to have a movement with a leader who knows how to win, and what to do.  Go look at LaRouchePACdotcom
listen to some of the youth members videos.
The movement we need produces youngsters like the LaRouche movement. This explanation of who predicted it is totally sophistic. Too complcated an idea to do in five hundred symbols. Listen to LaRouche if you want to understand the difference.

flyinghotwing Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am  is larouche better …
is larouche better than ron paul? why>

flyinghotwing Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am  who created the Fed …
who created the Fed? Jewish and anglo american banking interests…….same people behind the depression(s), the world wars for profit, the empires abroad for natural resources….its black nobility folks from Europe, and the U.S. and some Japanese ( trilateral connections) as well…………..

flyinghotwing Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am  the american …
the american corporation known as the united states (colonies) is part of the anglo american empire, british ruled from London via Rothschild. These Jewish European bankers are indeed in control, but they work with the Vatican asins as well…….so its really not just jews, its a conglomerate of evil conspirators…but give me proof of what you mean by the jewish american establishment…i mean i realize they are prominent with the creation of Israel, as well as banking and media interests

LaRoucheisright Says:
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am  Alex jones never …
Alex jones never talks about the solution. We must have a movement behind Lyndon LaRouche.
Alex Jones, Beck, and all the other populists are lying. This is all lies except the problem. Listen to LaRouche if you want to get out of this. Promote LaRouche, if you want to get out of this crisis with your life.

 … Okay, “Laroucheisright”, but… do you have any comment on that posting about the Jews?
A bit less important, Ron Paul supporters can sometimes pull to the same wave-length, So why no answer to the specific question “Is Larouche better than Ron Paul?”

It appears that he’s a busy blog commenter.  He has comments to make about Putin speaking about Georgia on Japanese television.  See here**.  I think he’s contradicts himself with these two comments:

Yes it is true Soros is as evil little creature as the Oligarchy has working for them. There is maybe no other that does more for the Empire than George Soros. AND

Maybe it is George W. Bush having a little fun.
Divide and conquer ya, the age old method of the British empire to destroy Nation States. Everyone knows Jr. is a cousin of the queen ya? And that his Grandfather Prescott bankrolled Adolph Hitler until he was forced to stop in 1942. If you want to stop fascism join Lyndon LaRouche.

I don’t know. Implicit is the suggestion that maybe the Bushes are as evil as Soros, and thus Soros can’t be “as evil as the Oligarchy has working for them.” Okay, never mind. That’s a stretch. “Laroucheisright” wins this round. But he loses this next round here **:

The only way to defeat this evil cabal is to join LaRouche ! You got to have a movement with a leader who knows how to win, and what to do.
Depends on one’s definition of “winning”, I suppose.

Incidentally, I need to pull back that “Beck” reference that I just pushed past. In order to shrug and nod to this factnet post. Basically, Glen Beck is swerving into the same conspiratorial and paranoid sources that Larouche is pulling back — Beck’s “Obama is unleasing Fascism with a Friendly Face” comes from dusting off what I guess is his new discovery of some the ugly parts of the Progressive Era. It’s not too hard to drive about the veins of partisan and philosophical discontent — whoop de doo — the Larouche org is swerving to the conservative side as opposed to the liberal side. Not quite completely, I guess, as he’ll still stand up against any reforms of Social Security, but good enough to — say, take on Medical Marijuana, and good enough to bring back the “Club for Life” and come out strong against Abortion and Obama’s Notre Dame speech. (And while I’m referencing factnet posts, I see a bit of symetry with this line:

Personally, I think it’s Lyn’s ham-handed response to the series of posts on Dennis King’s website on Abortion in the LaRouche Organization, including the two pieces by “Evil Witch” Kronberg.

AND THIS

What’s the point of calling out Tennenbaum in this way? What hoax or scheme is he talking about? Is this nothing more than rhetoric against those that have left the cult? And a warning to those still in it?

The Tennenbaum item is particularly interesting in light of “Revenire”‘s “friendly reminisces” of Tennenbaum (posted photograph), proving something or other to “earnest one”, aka Peter Tennenbaum (he of “New Revelations in Terror” fame). Factnet elicits elliptical responses from the org.

I may or may not post scattered stuff in the coming days in the comments section, but I’ll leave anyone bored enough to chew over this .

(* It should be noted that I do have some degree of respect for Congressman Ron Paul — your mileage may vary and I’ll say that it’s not exactly total–, and am leery of making that point the focus of the title of this blog post.)

** I think these originate from youtube and are computer-copied to these links.