Another one bites the dust. Okay to speak ill of the dead?

During his life Frankhouser had been convicted of an international fraud scheme, allegedly involved in assassination plots against U.S. government leaders, acquitted of a stabbing a rival Klan leader, lost an eye in a bar fight and waged a battle to get his white supremacist show on public access cable television, according to just a few of the dozens of newspaper clippings in the Reading Eagle archive.

The longtime Klansman and former member of the American Nazi Party was convicted in February 1995, following a four-day federal trial in Boston stemming from allegations he advised a white supremacist’s mother to destroy evidence linking her son to the desecration of synagogues in Randolph and Brockton, Mass., as well as alleged assaults on black Brockton residents.[…]
On February 17, 1988, Frankhouser was sentenced to three years in federal prison and fined $50,000 for advising political extremist Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. to obstruct a federal grand jury probe into an alleged fundraising fraud scheme.
During the trial, Forrest Lee Fick of Stony Creek Mills testified that he and Frankhouser were asked by a member of LaRouche’s organization to kill former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger during a flight to Europe.

When asked to comment on the life and his association with Roy Frankhouser, Jr. Lyndon Larouche had this to say:

“This is straight Nazi stuff,” Larouche elaborated. “It’s not a quibble; it’s not an interpretation. This is a direct copy of the philosophy of the Nazis. You cannot duck that issue. This is Nazi stuff.”

While I’m on the subject of recently deceased associates of this cult leader, I bring to attention this weird bit – funny in a disturbingly sick way (as all these things are)– on 1992 vice presidential candidate James Bevel, a career fall from Martin Luther King, Jr to Larouche (at which time he had an “educational program” going on with his children and was committing incest) one of those things you shake your head at:

In 1993/1994 I remember that I sat together with some youngsters from Sweden and Poland. He spoke about sex. The basic idea with what he said to us youngsters, was to say that one had to control once sexlife and sexual instincts in order to become a good political organizer. He said that he used to have sex with cows (!) as a kid, as all other kids had (!), and that almost all young people today (!) have sex in in the same “unscientific” and hedonistic way as he used to have sex with cows (!). “And we did not care if the cow (!) was male or female, as long as there was a hole to stick it in”, I remember he said… Bevel appealed to us young people (I was 24 at the time) to make a revolt against the sexual habits of “today”. Homosexuality, and sex when dating, SEXUAL ATTRACTION, etc, was “unscientific” and a way for the oligarchy (Yes, he spoke about them too!) to control people… Off course, Bevel said that he was “scientific” when he wanted to eradicate lust from sexuality…

“When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule,” as the radical anti-abortionist Neal Horseley once said.

Or, it puts the constant references to “Bestial”. And, in what the cult hopes to consider a big historic expedition, Larouche spoke at Central Connecticut State University and asked the question Larouchies have asked me on this blog — DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAN AND ANIMAL? Luckily the LPAC site bullet-points this for me:

The Difference Between Man and Ape: Fire

As simple as that. He could have condensed the lecture to just that one thought. Also that is why he doesn’t have to dwell on his supposed task of the Middle East situation.

From the moment he was invited to deliver the lecture as part of the Middle East policy series, chaired by the distinguished Middle East scholar Prof. Norton Mezvinsky, LaRouche contemplated how best to use the limited time allotted, to deliver the most thought-provoking message.

As you will read below, LaRouche stepped outside of the rigged game of the Middle East per se, to deliver a message, intended to reverberate in the Obama Administration as it prepares for an urgent round of diplomacy, and within governing institutions around the world.
It was in this spirit that Lyndon LaRouche delivered the following lecture, before an audience of approximately 200 faculty, students, and guests of Central Connecticut State University on the afternoon of May 4, 2009.

There would appear to be some squabble with the numbers in attendance at this lecture hall. Observers at the scene and observers of the youtube clip are claiming about 20 or 30 were in attendance. But never mind, it’s on the Internet, which means that it surely will now achieve a mass audience. Youtube commenters, have it:
laroucheyouth The Larouche videos are way under-viewed. What can we do to increase it? Put a link on your facebooks, myspaces, and wherever you chat online. People need to be educated on the current state of affairs in this world!

The focus is on our website. That is the mass education and organizing center.
jmar10420 Let the sheep hand out their green leaflets. When the bottom falls out, they’ll be flocked! Lyndon LaRouche is the truth!

Hey guys. Your cult sucks. Quit that cult and join another cult, please.
Should I link to the youtube video and help alleviate their problem somewhat? Nah. Unless I did, in which case no big deal.
Incidentally, this is being blamed for part of the small attendance:
Student demonstrators gathered outside of Davidson Hall Monday afternoon to protest political activist and philosopher Lyndon LaRouche.
Mostly members of the Youth for Socialist Action protestors were armed with comic book-style fliers depicting LaRouche as “a small-time Hitler”.
LaRouche spoke as part of the CCSU Middle East lecture series. This particular event, unlike the rest of the series, was funded personally by CCSU professor Norton Mezvinsky.
“I know some sharply negative attacks are being targeted at LaRouche here on campus,” Mezvinsky said. “The material being handed out is, at best, problematic factually, and some of it just downright false.”

I think I know what the flyers were — run into them when rumbling online, though quickly checking Chip Berlet’s website it doesn’t appear to be from that site. I question if that’s a particularly worthwhile battle to wage, on the YSA’s part, and if it is if that’s the best way to demonstrate — but that’s their business and they may do what they must.

Norton Mezvinsky — I’ll have to email him and ask him what he was thinking and whether he found this a satisfactory lecture furthering free inquiry (questions rather narrowly construed to those mattes). You can email him too!
…………………………………………

Final Goldman items:Good as far as it goes, here and here — just so long as they know the man is lying quite a bit.If you read more of this little satirical piece than I did, you’ll find him referenced for the sake of putting him in the Democratic Party.

And this guy observed the whole Michael Bloomberg drumbeating. Our old leader of the Larouche Cryonics Movement, Phil Ossifur, provides an inadequate response to his Omniscent Master.

Why do they go after Nancy Pelosi (second to last comment) when Charles Schumer makes a more obvious target, placed aside Soros? (But I should really stop and not be handing them any ideas here.)

tap tap tap tap.
Get one matter out of the way pretty quickly: David Goldman lied in his “Confession” column about his time in the Larouche organization. He halved his time there. I am reminded of a problem I briefly had in reading a different succesful ex-member who, in his initial article in April of 2007 and then subsequent series of myspace pages (I’m not hiding who I’m referring to, but I have no interest in drawing him into anything or tapping him on the shoulders, which writing a name of the Internet is the equivalent of doing — I refer to NB, of course) — and it became clear to me that he had roughly compartmentalized lines of Independence for dates, though I don’t think the public record showed him as correct. I notice that one of the variations of the sock-puppet “Herschel Kurstofsky” expresed my same “issue” at the wikipedia entry on him, though I always took the “official” “line” on NB as expressed from “unofficial” comments left on the Internet — variations of what we see expressed about Goldman seen here:

I guess he was not allowed to screw the girls in the organization any more that must be why he left.

Ah, yes. Stay classy, Anonymous Larouche Organization Commenter. (In NB’s case, the innuendo was altered to his sexual orientation.) There is a pattern here, such that I begin to wonder if the real story of this organization is that it shouldn’t be understood in terms of any political matters whatsoever and that it’s actually an anti-sex cult. The Larouchies keep saying that the only reason people leave is because they weren’t allowed to have sex in the org, which strikes me as a good reason to leave.

IF I were a wise man I would not make a single comment on Goldman myself, and would throw up various of the more intelligent comments, conflicting though they are, and move along quietly, never dwelling on David Goldman again. But I’m nothing if not a fool, willing to say a bit more than I have any right to say.

There are a few reasons it would be relevant to point out a Larouchian past. Two do not apply here. He’s not “connected” to the org (cough cough, Dreyfuss, cough cough) and he’s not pulling a similar confidence game (Tarpley). In the case of Spengler/ Goldman, it would appear, what I’ve thought of as the “David Horowitz Effect” sparked some interest.:
(GO down to Mark In Houston) When I hear David Horowitz and people like him talk about how far left they were back in the day and how that helped push them to be so far right now, my general response is “So you were a freak then and you are a freak now. Big deal.”

It’s not a perfect fit here, and subjective enough that most anyone with a mere ideological difference of opinion can justify tossing that past up.
It’s there that I think much of this analysis is a bit unfair, skip to 6th paragraph: “of the collective madness” — shades of LaRouche’s rant against the “68ers. — and, also a pretty common trope in conservative politics, and that kind of “new recruit” who decides that their own “New Left” was an adolescent “collective madness”.

A bit closer to an explanation for an affect of “this matter” is seen posted here:

But I have to admit I was dismayed to read of the Larouche connection, which makes me wonder if Goldman is still not subject in some degree to the theory-of-everything fallacy. As interesting as I have found the many essays inspired by Rosenzweig, I have sometimes thought that they explain a little too much, not unlike the experience of talking to a LaRouchian.

Up to whomever to determine, I suppose. Back to Goldman in explaining himself, and a key point: In a caricature of the reductio ad Hitlerum, everything he didn’t like pointed to the Nazis. The economist Milton Friedman, whose students had advised the Pinochet regime in Chile, must be a fascist because LaRouche didn’t like his economics, and I coauthored a book with LaRouche in 1978 with that silly allegation.

As though wanting to provide a ready-made example for the curious, LPAC released this news article as Goldman’s article bumped around a small piece of the blogosphere!

President Obama Is Being Brainwashed by Nazi Doctors
President Barack Obama’s recent interview in the New York Times magazine of May 3, demonstrates without a doubt that he is being brainwashed by his crew of behavioral economists, led by Larry Summers, who are peddling Nazi economics against the old and the sick. […] This is nothing but Nazi economics. EIR will continue to look for any different between these Orszag-Obama policies and those of Adolf Hitler, but so far, there is no difference.

Anyway, The references to the Larouche as a “gnostic cult” (oooo… the gnostics… oooo), while easily made next to referring to it as “Maoist” in nature, seems to be framed right for this sort of traditionalist religious — the phrase “Up From Secularism” suggestive of, for the sake of Larouche, the old line about open-mindedness allowing for shoving any old crap into your head. That case made further here.

Well, not exactly. I know no Straussians — I really don’t, and this blogger does know that “Straussians” (such as they are) as well the Larouche organization believes Larouche was responsible for planting the common view of Strauss in our political discourse, doesn’t he?
But tweak the phrases a little and you’d get to the religious. Jesus Christ, and for that I suggest skip to “III” at this entry.

It is to laugh. But it is around this theme that I have my biggest problem with this essay, and suggest how weirdly manipulative it is. The line that most floored me, and I don’t know if David Goldman is sincerely pulling stuff out of his arsh for his own sake, or cynically pulling stuff out his arsh to wave at his audience to move past this issue… A comment at beliefnet post expresses this here:

Pentimento May 7, 2009 4:12 PM
Goldman’s explanation of the proportionally high numbers of Jews in classical music is just as bizarre as any LaRouche formulation IMO. He suggests that the reason for these high numbers is that secular Jews are afraid to engage with God, and so play music in order to evoke feelings of the divine. Hmm, all right. Then where does that leave devout Jewish musicians, like the opera singers Jan Peerce and Richard Tucker? What about Jewish composers? What about Jewish converts to Christianity, of whom there historically have been many in both performance and composition? What about non-Jewish classical musicians? Do they, too, turn to music because they fear the encounter with God? I dunno. It seems to me that someone ought to be editing the editor.

I would think the reason there’s a “proportionally high numbers of Jews in classical music” is the same reason there’s a proportionally high number of Jews in any intelletual or artistic endevor. By which I refer to the initial seed money propagated by the Rothschilds which built the arena of Foundations that perpetuate Jewish World Domination.

By the way, I will give Goldman one thing. He solves a wikipedia problem, if it’s of enough concern to rise to the level of “problem” and if anyone were interested in “solving” it.  In the comments section for Larouche’s Views, “Will Beback” states the obvious manichean nature, and Leatherstocking (or a different name for a sock-puppet of the organization — I’d have to look it up) calls for a citation for such a claim.  I was going to get around to posting this item, and end by asking “Would the next person making a brief reference to Larouche please help us out by placing “Manichean” next to the usual assortment of adjectives (fringe and so forth… also, quite increasingly and incorrectly “dead”)?  Well, here we go:

In LaRouche’s Manichean view of the world, a conspiracy had suppressed the truth in the service of evil oligarchs. Starting with Aristotle, it continued through to the nominalists, the British empiricists, and that supposed pinnacle of modern evil, Bertrand Russell. The Venetian Inquisition, the British Empire, the Hapsburg family, the Rockefellers, and the Trilateral Commission all figured variously in this grand conspiracy against LaRouche’s supposed intellectual antecedents. Jewish banking families kept popping up in LaRouche’s accounts of the evil forces.

Overall, to post a different part of a comment I already posted, it’s about like this:

I’m not seeing how this is a courageous piece, however. It seems to me that it was a necessary piece, in that Goldman had been outed as a former LaRouchie and needed to explain that portion of his life for credibility reasons, and the piece otherwise reads like many Boomer ex-radical biography pieces.

With convenient omissions.

One more item linking to “Spengler” on how one can stretch this article to make any policy point they desire, go here. And a very brief celebratory dance of sorts from an “outer”.
………………………………………

Hey, Revenire! HBPA is Sweeping the nation!

AND… a basic rule … whenever a poster at Wonkette posts regarding Ron Paul, someone will see fit to throw in a reference to Lyndon Larouche.

Two wikipedia articles I don’t think are quite fair, or proper.  The American Mercury and HL Mencken.  The date at which you can posit the American Mercury as firmly, and respectably “conservative” in terms of political character would have to date back into the 1930s, and there is no date at which it tripped over the deep end — into a sort of John Birch Society Cold War hysteria  with attendant conspiratorial traps  (example, from a 1956 issue:  “Discussion Groups:  A Leftist Trap” — Adult education programs, promoted by the UN and sponsored by tax-exempt foundations, are being used to further the Communist ends.”), and then even further into the heart of Willa Carto’s Liberty Lobby.  Perhaps you can stick a fork at it, as a matter of symbolism, when a young William Buckley bailed on the magazine and founded the National Review, the better to have a leading conservative magazine not featuring the articles of one G Lincoln Rockwell.  I have to wonder what this writer for the American Conservative magazine wants when re-capturing “the Old Right”, and citing an American Mercury article attacking the Nuremberg Trials, placed next to an uber-patriotic piece by Rockwell.  (Perhaps a few articles over to opposition in the creation of Israel?)

The section on the (elitist, curmudgeonly, invective-spewing contrarian) Mencken’s anti-semitism is an odd focus.  But it is, in exaggerating this trait, the basis for The final phase of the American Mercury’s tie to the legacy of Mencken’s founding — never mind the truth of the “POV” statement found here.

There is a long conspiratorial series by a Paul Stevens (I don’t expect anyone to know anything about him) in the American Mercury which grabs my attention, in pieces.  “Money Made Mysterious”.  It was written off the heels, and in the same vein, as an article for the July 1956 issue entitled “Bankers’ Blueprint for Ruin”, in part:

But the most spectacular instance of a nation which was prepared for Communism from within by disloyal businessmen and bankers was Tsarist Russia.  The story of the role of the European money powers and the business sharpers in the delivery of Russia to the Bolsheviks has never been adequately told.  It stands as a nightmarish example to the unwary.”
The softening up of Tsarist Russia was preceded by an underhanded struggle of Western European bankers to fasten their talons upon the Russian economy.  Whatever the faults of the Tsarist regime, it must be said to its credit that it firmly repulsed the Amsterdam — Frankfort — Paris — London — Vienna ring of international bankers and family dynasts.  It was the check which monarchist Russia administered to the Rothschilds and their yes-men which swung the whole camarilla, with its immediate control over Western European opinion, into open sympathy with the Russian revolutionaries.

Always with the Rothschilds.  The article goes on to lay out the International Bankers’ Conspiracy, and I don’t have the patience to craft a flow chart.

Paul Stevens had a “Money Made Mysterious” piece which was composed entirely of excerpts from speeches by “Jacob Thorkelson”.  The wikipedia article doesn’t do him justice, but I guess it would be up to researchers to flesh out this wiki stub.  Thorkelson was the Silver Shirter’s favorite Congressman.  Ironically and incidentally, he was replaced in office by Jeanette Rankin, the first woman in Congress when she was initially elected for a term in 1916 — elected out of office with her “no” vote to a declaration of War–, and in this second go around the only “no” vote for a declaration of War after Pearl Harbor… a more tolerable pacifist, I’d say, as opposed to the condensed Thorkelson speeches:

The Internationalist alone is responsible for the chaotic state in which we find the world, for wherever he is you will find dissension, hatreds, unemployment, poverty, and despair. […]
The Internationalist is, as I have already said, an insiduous destroyer, who, like a parasite which undermines the health of man, saps the vitality of nations in which he is allowed the freedom to operate.  He uses the public wealth to entrench himself at the expense of industrious and patriotic citizens.
[…]  The Internationalists, however, have finally come to the conclusion that they cannot create the world government except by destroying every sovereign government in the world, and it is with that purpose in mind that unseen forces are now at work in the United States to destroy our government.  In 1913, they were successful in destroying the Soverign government of the state when representation was abolished in the Senate of the United States.  They no doubt hope to destroy the sovereign government of the United States by suspension of the Congress, either by war or because of some critical upheaval.

Just to clarify Torkelson’s position about who is the “Internationalist”, As a point of consideration, a May 3, 1939 article in The New York Times, relating to the “Brown Scare” which wrapped itself into a “Red Scare” before the Dies Committee (House UnAmericans Activities Committee):
“Moseley Proposes Use of the Army to Drive Out Reds
Tells Dies Committee Menace Could Be Handled in Five Minutes from White House”

Major General George Von Horn Moseley, retired, spent five turbulent hours before the Dies Committee today, alternately insisting that a Jewish – led Communist revolution was about to overwhelm the country and protesting that he harbored no anti-Semitic prejudices.  With an oratorical flourish he asserted that “the Jew is an Internationalist first” and “a patriot at home second.”

The General’s entry into the Committee room was impressive.  He stepped through the door, with a military stride, acoompanied by a retinue of attorneys, augmented by one member of the House, Representative Thorkelson of Montana, whom the current issue of Liberation, organ of William Dudley Pelley’s Silver Shirts, calls a “new statesman reaching high above this miasma of skullduggery.”

And, for curiosity’s sake, a June 2 article “Moseley Depicts a World of Jewry“:

General Moseley, who apparently lives under constant dread of assassination, started to drink from a glass of water which had been put at his place, as is the custom, when he jokingly asked if the water was all right.  An aide, taking him seriously, whisked the water away and brought a fresh supply in a new paper cup from the cooler in the corner of the caucus room.

What’s my point?  On a more or less weekly basis I throw up what amounts to the debris left over on the web regarding Lyndon Larouche, and there’s enough fairly interesting material that I might have done so.  I could have done that, but I thought I’d step back and put something in context, mainly with regards to a comment from factnet that’s always bugged me:  a demand for King to quit lying and speak the truth that Larouche’s “anti-semitism” heralds from “[King’s] Leftwing Stalinist Obediance” and not this nazi-friendly “Fascism.”
Actually I’m also somewhat annoyed by cries that Larouche created some “unique” line of (nonetheless bad) thought here.  Yes and No, with a slant toward the “no”.

Say, isn’t the two week Uber-Fundraising about over?  How’s it working?  (Second box here would, I guess, suggest an answer.  See also final link where accolytes to noted late night radio talk show guest Ed Dames compete stubbornly with accolytes of Lyndon Larouche to argue that their guy was right regarding the Swine Flu Pandemic and its attendent destruction of humanity… is that fund-raisable?)

I’m having some trouble with this one, the Daily Briefing for March 16.  My question is: What is “the LPAC Way”?

Because: If we continue with the present policy of practice this organization will go out of existence in two weeks. Therefore, there will be no deviation as a matter of policy or practice from what I’m about to say. And the $120,000-$125,000 is key. Don’t say you have to achieve something else first. That’s what you have to achieve {first}. Otherwise, you’re not going to solve the problem. Anybody who thinks you can solve the problem in another way is an idiot and needs some kind of care.

Look: Our influence is not based on people doing heel and toe in the street. Our exposure in the street in some cases, is relevant. But that’s not the way we raise money. We raise money with the LPAC way. Now, what’s the LPAC way: If you want to raise money, you don’t talk to a member of the Senate or a member of the House of Representatives. That’s a stupid move. We have people who talk to these people, and we call them trained toads—that is , the people who talk to these guys, who call these Senators and Members of Congress toads. Because they can’t swim any more, since they crawled out of the swamp. They can only run around rhhuhh! rhhuhh!

It’s a strange admission.  Apparently observed as much on the streets as in the conference table at Leesburg.  Observe:

Item #1:  Far be it from me to advocate pouring a lot of money into it, I’m just suggesting they use a permenant marker and get somebody with good handwriting to letter it.
Item #2, and I’ll link to a Tea-Party friendly forum that linked to this Seattle Times article, to take note of the follow-up plug to “Obama Deception” — notable because, of course, Tarpley, and there’s a certain irony in a pooh-pooh of Larouche next to an embrace of Tarpley: 
Liz Monta, 69, of Ballard, a retired bartender who said she was upset with bank bailouts, “nationalizing health care and Obama’s socialist agenda,” did take one of the 3-by-3-foot signs the LaRouche supporters were handing out.
But she folded the bottom part that had LaRouche’s name, so she was only waving a sign that said, “End the bailout. Dump Pelosi.”
Finally, something the Larouche Organization is good for.  Eventually your political enemy will align with their political enemy, see here.  They’ll produce a bunch of pictures of unflattering photographs of that individual for your own use.  If only the Larouche Organization could figure out a way to monetize that, they might have something going here, and have a different way of “making money the LPAC Way”.

Just as well the deployments at the “Tea-parties” are down-played.  Observe:

The April 15th Tea Party anti-tax actions were not a “mass movement”—they were an orchestrated operation of George Soros and his Twitter operations backed up by Sir Rupert Murdoch’s Fox media empire. Forget the so-called organizers like Newt Gingrich, Fox News fascist Sean Hannity, and Congressional has-been, Dick Armey. They are just frontmen—the real organizers were the cyber-zombies of Twitter, Facebook and the like. […]
This whole thing is being orchestrated—that’s what’s important. What you have is the control of so-called popular opinion, which is a bunch of zombies! They’re like a bunch of zombies, like 14th century zombies, marching en masse. Don’t treat it as credible: this is not mass protest. This is not spontaneous protest. You’ve got zombies out there, who will move at the hint from that fascist drug pusher, George Soros.”
“And a lot of this stuff which is called mass protest, is Soros’s zombies—which come in many varieties, because he’s paying for them. Many of them are drugged. They’re out there doing mass protests, not because they know what they’re talking about, but because they are just being told to go out and shake up the Establishment.”
“They have to be compared to the lunatics known in the 14th century New Dark Age, known as the Flagellants. Call these guys the New Flagellants.”

The “Tea-Baggers” were … 14th Century Zombies.  Yes, taking rim shots at the words of Lyndon Larouche is easy sport, though noted is that “Howie G” didn’t get the memo.  I suppose if I say that I nod in agreement with Gary Trudeau’s thoughts It’ll be like an imaginary conversation taking place between him and James Galbraith.  Beyond this, I will echo the thoughts of one Tony Papert, from that briefing:
TONY: Don’t discuss what? I didn’t understand what you were just saying a second ago.
Though, in Tony’s case, the answer can be found with a few simple words spoken:
What we’ve been doing, it STINKS!

Looking through this, does this mean we have a two week bunker-session manning the phones followed by a season where the Larouchies will be taken off of “cardtable Service”, providing a tad less amusement to the public, and put to work sticking videos on their website?  And how is the website going to be “monetized”, anyway?

But the key thing is: Think about what the mission is. Think about what this business is, on method of operation: We’re doing mass organizing in the way I’ve described. Not massive, saying we need 50,000 people; you don’t need 50,000 people. You wouldn’t get anything done with 50,000 people that you couldn’t get done with 500 people. Really get done, in net effect. With 50,000, they’d trip over each other’s feet.
What you do, is you use the vehicle we have: We have an effective website operation in terms of the way it’s designed. It merely has to come up a little bit more in terms of performance, and it {has to be supported!} so it can do the job. We have to have more people on it, doing the work. And we have to produce more product, which means, some of this product is going t be one month, three weeks, two weeks, and so forth, to produce as it comes along. Some stuff is ready to go. So but you have to have a net effect of more than three a day. […]
But we have to produce the stories, and we have to do it in the audio/video form. The audio/video form is the type that gets across. And the other thing will work: because if they accept you on the audio/video lead, then they’ll accept your written report. Because it’s information, especially short.
So that’s what we do—and we go like hell with that. And we get the impact immediately, because we need, in the next two weeks, we need to get the cash up! And this is the only way we’re going to do it. And we’re going to go full tilt! No apologies, no guessing games, no college tries. Burn down the universities, we don’t want any more college tries. We want results, not college tries. A college try is a guy struggling with a condom. [explosive laughter]

The “Obama Deception” was the number one video on yahoo, beating out “1932” by a country mile, I’m thinking.  Supposedly the next two week’s of phone harranging is going to produce more web material ala “1932”.  (New up-take of new material apparently coming up quickly.  The money is being raised for more of this quality, I guess.  I see they’ve found the great “Hydrogen Monoxide Kid“, but after cribbing that gag it’s all downhill.  I guess this means this is one of the kicks they’re on , and it along with “Goldman Sucks” don’t fall into the category of bad issues… which, strictly speaking I don’t see what’s wrong — have to throw a wide net in order to get money out of, say this guy‘s Hamiltonian Crusade.)

Actually, the real story of “Raising Money the LPAC Way” is shown in the scrippings for savings.  This “to all points” memo shows health care for the central org being dropped.    Which apparently is leading to a Run on final Health Care Check-ups.  The tradition of “raising money through scrippings” is long running, as seen in this memorial to the John Morris.

I don’t know what he and Gary were driving such a long distance at that hour for. I don’t know whether they were coming from a long deployment (standing at a small table selling subscriptions and literature, collecting names and phone numbers to call later), or driving back from an event. But I do know why they ran out of gas. They ran out because there wasn’t enough in the tank, and there wasn’t enough in the tank because there was never much gas in the tanks of LaRouche cars when I was in the group, when the stuff was well under $2 a gallon. I can only imagine that the problem was only more pronounced last summer when gas was $4 a gallon in many parts of the country. Gas tanks were never filled because cash from deployments was a precious commodity. It was always better to bring cash back to the office than spend it all to fill up a tank. Usually, there was only enough gas in our cars to last a day. At the end of a long day of selling literature on the streets, we’d put a few gallons in, at most. Enough for tomorrow.
The cars were never in very good condition. Though these cars were used every day for driving over long distances (sometimes for 50 miles or more each way) they were rarely maintained. I remember a car or two in Los Angeles that didn’t even have a working gas gauge. We always had a can of gas in the trunk of the car. If the driver of the car ran out of gas, he’d have to pull over and re-fill out of the can. I’ve heard that it was a common problem elsewhere in the country as well. Given that John and Gary were trying to refill their tank on the side of a highway, I think there’s they may have had a car in this condition.

 I gather that comments like the one found here are wrong, and can be checked against experiences such as that one:
As to what is motives are, or his credibility, I can be sure that you can never really know, any more than you know what goes on by those in power every day. what you can be sure of, is that a significant portion of those in power, in the U.S., in outher nations, and throughout history, have done, and continue to do, really, really bad things to keep things in their favor.

  For instance, something that’s popped up in my mind regarding “Howie G”‘s sex obsession at  “European”‘s blog.  The line about leaving the cult because it doesn’t provide sex seemed to derive from European’s comments on the proposed Canadian Constitution and its homosexuality ban.  Which is about what harm the org did in their two California Initiatives, as seen by this commenter.
I remember what the LaRouchies were doing 20 years ago. May your leadership be reincarnated as garden slugs for adding to my friends’ stress levels during the darkest years of the HIV pandemic.

Well… anyways…

April 10, 2009 (LPAC)–U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder began a series of personnel moves yesterday in sensitive areas of the Justice Department, in order to restore confidence in the Justice Department in the wake of the prosecutorial misconduct shown in the prosecution of former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and other political figures.
The Justice Department, is facing “fresh calls to reopen the cases of other prominent political figures” since Holder ordered in the wake of all charges withdrawn against Sen. Stevens.
The most outrageous case of prosecutorial misconduct, according to former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, is the case of American Statesman Chuck Norris.
Words fail me.  But next line:

Eric Holder’s tough and non-Mollycoddling approach to prosecutorial misconduct is encouraging, and should be extended to the Norris case.

The prosecutional excesses in the Ted Stevens case is “Mollycoddling”.  Who the hell do the folks in the Boiler Room in Leesburg think is reading and paying attention to these things, and is this something of an admission of sorts that it’s just about nobody but “larouche watchers” (of one stripe or other)?

Damned it, I broke protocol.  I meant to type “Chuck Norris Watchers”.
……………………………………

If you have a Bloomberg fascist government in the United States and a Lisbon dictatorship in Europe, I have the distinct fear that we are on a road to World War III. — Hegla Zepp.

What is a Bloomberg fascist government, and how does the Mayor of New York hold such a diabolical reign?  Also, wasn’t the Bloomberg fascist government supposed to be marked by the imminent Bloomberg fascist presidency?
…………

The ‘Citizens Electoral Council’ is the most demented group to make it onto the ballot in Australia. LaRouche and the dimwitted retards that sing in his dicky choirs and spout his half baked ideological bullshit. He claims Bertrand Russell is one of the most evil people ever to have lived. Bertrand Russell was one of the most amazing minds of the twentieth century. Larouche is one of the most amazingly ed minds of any century.
……………………………………………

And that’s when my interlocutor lost the argument I didn’t know I was having. In a classic case of Godwin’s law, he called me a Nazi, thus, according to one popular formulation of the law, forfeiting any claim to a reasonable position by virtue of rhetorical name-calling. And all because I disagreed with his, and Lyndon LaRouche’s, ardent demand for a new New Deal, which apparently anyone who’s not a Nazi knows is exactly what our country needs right now. Had he accused me of KKK membership, I would have been no less astounded.
I trust Jim knows that the two were talking past each other.  He can feel the satisfaction in having called you a Nazi, you can feel the satisfaction in knowing his irrelevance, and plot to write this experience up on your blog.
Perhaps he was just a coherent lunatic whom I made the mistake of listening to. Or perhaps there is a running tide of political polarization sweeping this country, one that teaches people to reflexively hate any opponent without regard for rational thought, and this was merely the first wave lapping at my feet.
The possibility of the latter, though I don’t think this signifies that — this seems to go beyond any political trend — does not negate the possibility of the former.
……………………………..

From wikipedia.
I placed the tag because of the comments in the previous section by an IP identifying itself as Paul Krassner. However, whatever edits he made may not be enough to justify the tag. There has been a pattern of Yippie activists editing Wikipedia for the purposes of self-promotion. —Leatherstocking (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

By this he means Dennis King.  He put up a COI tag on Paul Krassner’s wikipedia page to assert the COI tag on Laroache related pages.  Coincidentally enough, this came at about the time I posted a link to The Realist archives on my sidebar.

I did not realize until just now that the name Leatherstocking is a reference to James Fenimore Cooper’s work, a writer with few sympathizers in academia, but who Larouche has sidled into having up held us against the Dark Ages.  This tends to undermine his claim here, not that his claim needs more undermining.  More on how the great James Fenimore Cooper in the org here.  And Mark Twain’s essay is available here.

Mark Twain, of course, is a perpetuator of Dark Ages and Confederate America and all that.  Or something.  As seen from the real world, those distinctions come across like so:

In the decades following the American Revolution and the adoption of the Constitution, the quality of mind and intellect, which allowed for those events to succeed, was gradually undermined. Whereas Cooper took up his pen to save the republic that his father’s generation had created by waging war on stupidity, ignorance, treachery, and cowardice. He did so, not only with his pen, but also as one of the key leaders of the American secret intelligence service during the second quarter of the 19th Century. As a result, Cooper, like Larouche, was seen by the enemies of the United States as a clear danger to their plans to destroy our republic.

Hm.  For a more sane celebration of the works of James Fenimore Cooper, go find this Weekly Standard article.  Or you can just go ahead and read through what Norton’s excerpted, which I gather is used widely by English Professors to have a point of reference to the Twain essay.
………………………………

Howie G has posted a few more crude sexual references to European’s blog.  It is his thing, I guess.
…………………

The existence of this posting, the highlight in terms of games of connecto of which is this,:

My belief is that [Milton] Cooper was murdered by the Illuminati because of his work to expose the Beast to the public. This series of talks on B’nai Brith and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) was part of his work to enlighten the public on who’s who behind the veil. Right at the beginning of this series he makes a comment about just such a scenario arising for many who did what he did. God willing he’ll be the last one to die for such efforts. Bless his soul.

gives me a good reason to post to my posting of the first article here.

Tomorrow, a Webcast will be viewed by… um… nobody, roughly.  It will feature supposed questions from supposed Important People — anonymously, I guess scribbled out by folks in the Boiler Room in Leesburg or something?  It will be available in and near trash-can in various major cities and colleges in a couple weeks, at the end 3-day Deployments behind card-tables stacked high with the past handful of “webcast transcript” dominated packages.

The April 11 webcast comes at the two year anniversary of Kenneth Kronberg’s suicide.  Keeping in mind the scheduling antics for the leaf-let job Newton residents in 1993, and considering the focus of the org as it rolls into this “Historonic Webcast” settles into making a reference to “Molly-coddling” relating to attaching a supposed exoneration of his crimes with the Prosecutorial Misconduct in the Ted Stevens case…

Will he use the word “Molly-coddler”?

Okay.  Can somebody explain to me what the hell “Howie G” is talking about here, because I’m not entirely sure.

Seriously.  Which is it:  Does Howie G
(a) believe that “European” is a fictional entity — anti-Larouche agents set up this blog and factnet poster , or
(b)is this his way of saying that his personality was “created” by the anti-Larouche agents?

This is not a rhetorical question.  ‘Tis one or the other.  The former would be a literal reading of his words, the latter a figurative reading.  The latter would make some sense of some kind, the former is completely nuts.  I simply do not know which side of the coin I fall on, but get the feeling that to solve this problem is to have the key to a few locks.

Next question.  What is this?, from October 2008 — and from someone who evidentally heralds from Montana:

It’s common knowledge in the conservative community that William Ayers recruited Barack Hussien when he was 8 years old. In addition to being used to deliver bombs to the homes of American Patriots in The Heartland, the young boy was also converted to a life-long homosexulist by the all-pedophile Liberal class and he spread this deviancy throughout the many madrasses he attended during his religious indoctrination. As a member of a ring of Muslin call-boys, Barack Hussien was able to infiltrate the Defense Department, where he entrapped, blackmailed and eventually assassinated Texas Senator John Tower, all on Ayers orders. This was only one of a long string of murders Ayers directed the boy to commit, all in an attempt to bring down our Democracy in order to replace it with a Stalinist-Muslamo hybrid state of repressive religious influence and strange food.

Ayers continues to control him. In the early 1970’s, the radical bomber put together a devious plan to take out Lyndon LaRouche’s printer, Ken Kronberg. The genius of the plan was the length of time it would take to execute, which would in turn, leave Ayers off of the list of suspects. He finally concluded his devious machinations on Aprill 11, 2007 by having Barack Hussien run Kronberg over with his own Toyota Corolla, making it appear to be a suicide. Curiously, all records of this event have been lost and the FBI has refused to make any statement on it.

Barack Hussien is the ultimate ….ummm…….what was the name of that Frank Sinatra movie where the guy gets brainwashed and then he gets elected? The Stepford Wives? Well, he’s the ultimate Stepford Wife, ready to go insane as soon as the layer cake is frosted, speaking metaphorically. You LIE-brals need to get your heads out of the sand and recognize that John McPalin is the only thing standing between us and a life of eating chick peas and pita bread for the rest of our lives, wearing a turban the whole time under the threat of the Muslin clothing police.

Okay.  I recognize this as a partisan Democrat mocking a Republican tying candidate Barack Obama to Bill Ayers more tightly than real — but in this rambling of conspiratorial tropes, WHERE DID KEN KRONBERG COME INTO THAT PICTURE?  Maybe I was wrong after all in saying that I don’t think Kronberg should have a wikipedia entry, except that the whole Larouche villa of wikipedia entries is screwy.  Apparently he’s lodged into the popular psyche somewhere.

Such matters tend to be pretty strange.  But everything is strange hereabouts.  Case in point:  In December, I ran into this list of British Jews.  Um… “a list of most of the Jews that occupy top positions in our country, some are very influential in many areas of our society while others in the list are not, at this stage of the investigation it is impossible to determine which Jews are guilty and which Jews are innocent.”  Interesting starting supposition.  Jeremiah Duggan made the list, which struck me as just a little bit weird.  Well, here’s another list of Jews that Duggan made, a tad more positive a purview.

And there’s this comment — which brings me back to the Howie G question — “Prove to me you’re real and not composite.”:

The Geithner/Paulson/GoldmanSachs plan is so bad even Lydon LaRouche makes sense ranting against it!

Couple that one with this guy, who last week I spotted at his blog wading into the tide of Larouche in having done a tad of research to convince him that there is “FAD” about him swarming about — but anways:

I am bracing myself for those dismissive comments that often arrive immediately after I point to a thought provoking video, article or speech that happens to reside on a site supported by Lyndon LaRouche or his various organizations. However, I have learned to base part of my judgement about thinkers and leaders by the people that they have influenced. If LaRouche can convince people like Portia that he is no “nutter”, then it seems to me that he has passed a very important test of legitimacy.

With a statement like that, it demands what he is requesting, hence comment #1:

The Introduction which stated “it is time to listen to the wise words of Lyndcn LaRouche,” got to me. A definate turn off. LaRouche once said:
“America must be cleansed for its righteous war by the immediate elimination of the Nazi Jewish Lobby and other British agents from the councils of government, industry, and labor.”

At least LaRouche has an original explanation for his anti-Semitism, the Jews are the agents of the Queen of England, who is the real ruler of the United Kingdom. The Jews are not the only tools of the British monarch, “Adolf Hitler was put into power in Germany on orders from London.”

I could not watch anymore.

Is this Ron Rod Adams a real person, or just a composite?

At least he didn’t cite Ramsey Clark:

… but Ramsey Clark is now working to free the remains of Geronomo from the Skull and Bones secret society, so that makes up for all that, right?

In truth, the “so bad even Larouche makes sense” entity linked to something where Larouche’s thoughts are corraled well enough that it makes sense of a sort — it could have been worse for him.  Might have linked to this all:

“This is fascism combined with insanity. It is a case of the criminal mind going insane.” […]

Perhaps no recent event better proves the point that the United States, and the Obama Presidency in particular, is under a vicious assault from an apparatus that, a half century ago, would have been openly called what it is—a bunch of lying Fascists—than the forced resignation of Ambassador Chas Freeman from his designated post as head of the National Intelligence Council (NIC).

Not that I’m going to call anyone who disagrees with the dumping of Chas Freeman as anti-semitic, but for the love of Gawd, really?  Half a century the “Israel Lobby” would have been called “fascist”?

And here’s your Webster Tarpley accolade fix!

Webster does an outstanding job articulating our collective reality and the way back from the brink of a new dark age. I suggest we listen and learn………..

Indeed.  He crafted that Venetian Conspiracy that Larouche is still using, didn’t he?   See also this list of evil-doers.

Scott McLemee, noted art and culture critic, shall now face an existential question offered up from “Leaterstocking”, noted Larouchian wikipedia Sock Puppet.  If there is no wikipedia article devoted to you, do you exist?  On March 26, 2009, as seen in a not easily link-specified place here:

The fact that there is no article about McLemee suggests that he may not be notable enough to be mentioned as a critic. Perhaps you ought to author an article about him if you disagree. But regardless, how does being an “award winning book critic” qualify him to offer criticism of political groups?

The perfunctory search engine search suggests that devotees to Carrol Quigley (good overlap there), Thomas Pynchon, Christopher Phelps, and the Spartacist League do not have this same problem with the matter of Scott McLemee’s existence.  But trimming Scott McLemee from the entry is key to Leatherstocking’s sense of balance:

I removed the neutrality tag, because I was satisfied that the article had been returned to a balanced state, but I see that Will Beback has tilted it once more toward his team’s POV.

“Neutrality tag” removed with the “clean editing job” (in the eyes of this Larouchian sock puppet) during the time that “Will Beback” was on vacation.  I bet Scott McLemee didn’t even realize he was on a team.  The LYM as a wikipedia entry poses the probelm that nobody much is paying attention much — there is another struggle to get a couple of dead-link college newspaper articles off, key in that the college environ is the primary place the LYM has a presence enough for anyone to care to demand an article.  Remove such and we are left with the only focal point that takes the LYM seriously at face value:

Remember that in Reliable Sources it says that fringey sources should be used only as sources about themselves and in articles about themselves or their activities. Thus, LaRouche sources may be used in this article, just as your writings would be appropriate in the article Dennis King. If the material is clearly attributed, the reader can judge its credibility.

But noted cultural and art citics have been removed from the discussion.  (Incidentally, Scott McLemee ceased a “Fringe Watch” on his blog, apparently answering the age old question “What is the role of a critic in a society?” with “Not to spend an undue amount of time commenting on perhaps fascinating, but largely irrelevant political sects.”)

I do not think the LYM warrants a wikipedia page.  In a better world, one where wikipedia editors don’t feel the need to bargain with participants of an elaborate playground mimicry of Mission Impossible shows, this LYM article would be surmised by the sentiments expressed with the Avi Klein citation, perhaps with some citation to some Larouche pronouncments, and perhaps with the items concerning Jason Ross (and there might be two too many “perhaps”es there)– and then tucked firmly into the wikipedia article on the “Larouche Movement”.  As is, the first thing we learn about the LYM on the wikipedia article is that their “war-room” is located in Leesburg — a fact that in its proper context is filed under “LYM planned as instrument to outlast Larouche”.
……………………………….

I have two problems with this British “Channel 4” news report on the “Justice for Jeremiah” Wiesbedan trek:

#1:  skip to the 2:42 mark and wait for the phrase “with views seen by many as anti-Semitic and anti-British“.  I suppose we haggle a tad with “anti-Semitic” and its role, and just what it is to reference a Locust here or there, but I’m wondering who views his call for War Against Great Britain as not being “anti-British”.  (Well, theoretically those who schlep that completely over to the “anti-semitic code language”, I guess — notably some posters at the neo-nazi “Storm Front” board.)
#2, and a wee bit more important, and this is something I harp on a bit:  Skip to 3:42,  “On their website, however, they expressed”.  For the love of god, if you’re going to report on what they expressed on their website, please expand your purview from that narrow line and mention the broader conspiracy it finds that the Duggans have been a part of Tony Blair and Dick Cheney’s goal to destroy Larouche.  (At the very minimum.)
……………………………….

And now it’s time for The “Howie G” Show.  First a few of the loopier comments he posted to former member “European”‘s blog:

Seems to be a couple of lines of inquiry.  Notice the brand new Larouche sock puppet at wi:kipedia (brand new, that is, unless it’s the nineteenth or thereabouts iteration of the figure who originally went by the Simpsons reference “Herschel Kurstofsky”) at Dennis King:

Not much biographical information in this article. He published a book in 1995 — anything since then? What does he do for a living? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coleacanth

Colecanth, eh?  I don’t much know the answer.  Doesn’t Larouche have a line on that?  Something about Drug Money or something?
Which brings us to the next Howie G blog entry… for the life of me, I don’t see what from the LPAC link to a London Times piece I’m supposed to view as troubling regarding George Soros.  But if finding some sense of adventure from fleeing the Nazis excites “Howie G” , so be it..  There is a tinge of “huh” with this statement:
continues his anti-human tradition, by literally pushing drugs.

I suppose I advocate legalizing two things I’m not going to take advantage of: gay marriage and marijuana.  The latter is so anti-human that this. (Then again, that would have had to have been during an Aristotlean Dark Ages Epoch.)

Ironic, as I posted the list of evil conspirators gleaned from the essay “A Defense of Poetry” to a message board I frequent I had the response:
Uhh…errr…I can only assume the author was on a major drug trip whem he wrote that little jem. Or how does that old saying go?…
‘psychotics build imaginary houses and neurotics live in them.’
Unfortunately…
…………………………………………………

Some fascinating discourse on a Larouche speech found in the comments section here.  I guess this is what a Platonic dialouge in Leesburg would sound like?

IFUCKUBITCh says:  yea if we can all work together, we can destroy UK. If we fall into UK’s trap and keep fighting each other, UK is going to gain even more influence.
The gameplan:  nope UK & US will start the war, US will lose ground and then betray UK, US & Russia with send all their nuke to UK at the same time and end the war.

Load1Bongs1Not1Guns chimes in to put this man in his proper credentials:  That man is a former presidental canidate, and you are watching celebrities.

Calebsaccount defends the British:  your a ing hole dude, britians one of the best countries and arnt evil they are trying constantly to help the usa end what will soon be world war 3

Habs1009 lays out his view: world war 3 will start with a coalilation led by russia ft islam nations, ethiopia, turkey vs israel. it will be thwarted by jesus christ. another war will happen7 years later. all the nations led by the antichrist except for russia, china, india, japan, and north korea. the antichrists forces will beat russia the march on israel, after that the asians 200 plus million man army. they will all die

To put a spin on an old saying, “‘psychotics build imaginary houses and psychotics live in them.” Sometimes.
………………………………………………..

Like posting to an article from Adolf Hitler about vegetarianism.

A good friend sent me the link to this well produced video that makes some excellent points. I am fully aware that the source of this video may call into question its veracity, but I have been doing a lot of research for the past year or so and have come to the conclusion that FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) has been spread about LaRouche as well as about nuclear power.

Hm.  Note to the Org: Here’s a good contact for funding!
Meanwhile, another good source for the Larouche organization might to roll down is the list of commenters at this Alex Jones article.  They’ve tapped the same conspiratorial veins.  (But I guess they’d have to remove Obama from the equation in contact… for the moment?)

Though we’ll run into this from the “Science Movement” quadrant:

I also learned that British royalty is an elaborate front for the opium trade, and many other things my education and common sense had led me to embrace falsehoods.

Lindon, bless your heart, your village called, seems they want thier idiot back.

……………………………..

When Joshua Micah Marshall expanded his blog to this community type thing, I don’t think he had in mind providing a forum for Larouchies to peddle their propanda.  And so the question:

Admin question.  How does this diary with no recs make the rec list?
An interesting answer is proferred.  LaRouche is all powerful.
I actually accidentally provided one of these diary entries with a “recommendation”, making one recommendation two, thinking I would be able to deign who the heck recommended it by clicking.  Alas — I’m part of the problem.

This comment is the Comment on the Century!:

The Oligarchs and their low life lackeys are feeling the heat, eh, and you L.M. do not like that because laRouche is so very effective in rallying real patriots from around the globe against them? Tell the truth who do you work for? Bring forward your notable champion of vice and debate laRouche concerning the last 50 yrs. of current history as to what really happened to our nation and the world! Who has the balls to come forward? Your half-truths are bullshit, good to cover your own ass, but a slippery slope to hell for anyone who falls for it! For daring to speak truth to the unspeakable powers, thus unmasking these evil untouchables and their world class criminal tools, traitors, and fools, the fearless folk hero and true American patriot, Lyndon LaRouche was railroaded. Many of those same enemies of LaRouche and of our nation today, still remain protected by the opinion makers of the opinion makers above the law. He was in fact an American political prisoner of George H. W. Bush.! Unlike you and your fiends, LaRouche is the only living economist on the planet, who was always right! LaRouche’s ideas concretized as policy of the United States would save this republic, and the enemies of this nation do not want the nation state to survive under Globalization(Empire). What is needed now is an all-out mobilization to ensure LaRouche’s plan goes into effect—and that those who seek to block it are removed from power. If we would have listened to LaRouche the world would not now have come to endless bailouts and the brink of a new dark age.

Huh.Are you sure you’re not Webster Tarpley?

Anyway — attention Joshua Micha Marshall: dailykos can immediately delete these things when they eke into his “diary” community, why can’t you?

tap tap tap… You know… I haves post about more mainstream political stuff.  Arlen Specter.  Obama’s emerging gaffe chart.  Portland’s boondoggle MLS deal.  But, no… I have to go back to this thing:

The latest missive from L-PAC (and what kind of “political action committee is this?) reiterates two points:  #1: The degree to which the org cares not at all about the Duggans, and #2: a degree to which, and I don’t know quite what degree it is, Revenire does not believe his crap.

But let’s start with a demonstration of how ridiculous the Internet art of “fisking” looks like on a Larouchian article.  (And Jerry Pyenson: please to be posting to a 9/11 Truth board, as I’m disinclined to link directly to L-PAC.  Oh, never mind — I’ll go ahead and post it in the comments.)

March 25, 2009 (LPAC)–A well known group of miscreants,
well known group of miscraents?
steered by circles associated with the British Fabian Society
British Fabian Society?
and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair
and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair?
, are, once again, planning a hate rally against Lyndon and Helga LaRouche in Germany.
hate rally?

Actually that’s enough of that.  But let’s skip the next paragraph (important though it may be with key phrases) and here’s the key paragraphs for show in the two points I made at the top:

The matter first erupted into the public in 2003, several months after Mr. Duggan’s suicide, when Lyndon LaRouche was prominently featured in the British press as a leading American opponent to the war in Iraq instigated under then P.M. Tony Blair’s lying pretext. At that time, British intelligence circles, most notably British scientist David Kelly, were exposing Blair and his aides of “sexing up” the evidence that Blair and U.S. President George Bush had proclaimed as the justification for the war. After a public uproar, Kelly was found dead, supposedly by suicide. Subsequent events have amply proved that LaRouche and Kelly were right and that Blair, Bush and U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney were liars.

Wishing to cover up their public falsehoods, the Blair-Bush-Cheney circle began a war time false propaganda campaign against LaRouche by manipulating the grieving Duggan family into claiming, without any foundation whatsoever, that the suicide of Jeremiah was not properly investigated and encouraging them to promote numerous false and nefarious allegations against LaRouche fed to them by LaRouche’s enemies.

To ask Erica Duggan to accept this is to demand she join the cult in believing Larouche a “World Historic Person”, which clearly she’s disinclined to do even if he’s an important figure in her life after the death of her son.  As a cult focused on Larouche’s Eminence, they are incapable of getting away from this internally, even as externally it’s a necessity.  As for revenire and his mindset:  notice that in his frequent feignings of “sympathy” toward the Duggans’ grief as “hi-jacked” for political purposes (and it apparently it took him until just this last week to discover an amount of animosity and/or distrust by some of the ex-Larouchies at factnet toward King and Berlet) by those long time Larouche haters, he never stated it in the context of Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, and et al. and broader political battles — and that sheer joke of being referred to here as “leading American opponent to the war in Iraq”. 

This LPAC item trips over itself round about here:
After a public uproar, Kelly was found dead, supposedly by suicide.
You don’t say.  Wait!  Is this some sort of double reverse?!  By implying this Suicide as actually a cover-up for a nefarious death, implying the Larouche critics as equally conspiratorial to the Larouchies!  Pretty clever!  It’s actually one step more clever than revenire’s “Bush – Palme conspiracy” contraption, because that one is implied as rejected by the Larouchies while this one is accepted! 

But revenire gets a little bit complicated in allowing me to brush him aside as not entirely believing his crap.  It appears that for the sake of argument and public consumption (figure LPAC articles as in a gray area between public and private consumption), he can’t go into this broader political context because he recognizes its absurdity to the outside world with the always raving matter of “what to do with” the Jeremiah Duggan “problem”.  BUT, in his parting shot, he rattled into the Larouche storyline regarding his place in uncovering Iran Contra — where in reality the Org is a mildly interesting footnote, in the Larouche sphere, he hovers over.  It took me a while to understand what he was stating, elliptically that he did so — a big chit in the reason for Larouche’s Imprisonment, supposedly, as opposed to the actual Credit Fraud as presented in the mindset shown in the recent “Windy City Dialouge” with:

If we don’t get enough money in, I’m going to kill somebody. [laughs]

But here revenire MUST and CAN go into this because this is a bit more in the realm of “Inside Baseball”, and we’ve got this game to play.

Though, nobody believes that one either.

Though, they’re always tripping for a narrative, witness (and I guess this is another board they’ve found useful), Obama’s collapsing ratings.  (Not yet.  It’ll happen eventually, as it does all presidents.)  I also note, a blogger at the libertarian Reason Magazine has discovered the 2 year old insertion into the conspiratorial purview, and European was accused by “Howie Copywriter” of quitting because he wasn’t getting any money or sex.

Into Wiesbedan. *

Obviously I wish good luck with that — it gets its smattering of press news such as this, and .  and this, and the customary posting in the updates at the Dennis King website. 

It’s interesting to see a comment from the “Mikey Powell Campaign” on this site.  Must stick together, I guess you can say.
Go to factnet and you will see some former members expressing their frustration with, say for instance, the sponsorship of two people (rhymes with “Dertlet” and “Ring”) — long time “enemies” of the Larouche franchise who you might argue bring their own biases to the front, I suppose.  I suggest my incredulity in the comments section for the previous post — proofread it not at all. * — But to put some things into perspective, we have the inestimable “Howie G”:

European, why don’t you face it, you’re over your head. You are caught in the middle of disputes that will determine the future course of civilization.

Good god almighty.  Note to revenire:  The reason your supposed “jokes” ala “I’ve saved the world numerous times” are taken with a straight faced is because they bear no difference, and are actually rather tamer, than the straight-forward prose of the Larouche organization in describing their mission.  I suppose it would make for an Andy Kaufman routine, if it were not part and parcel of, for instance:

If we don’t get enough money in, I’m going to kill somebody. [laughs]

Ha ha ha!  It’s funny because… it has a ring of truth about… his sociopathology.  Ha ha ha!

Well, in all honesty this “Windy Hills Dialouge” is par for the course, and there is nothing new here.  I note that “Dialouge” is re-defined as “Monolouge with smattering of an ‘Amen’ Choir.”  But I see that “Howie G” has read that “Windy Hills Monolouge” and fully digested said.

I’m in the center of this. That’s my responsibility. Either we succeed, and I know that I’m crucial in this, or we go down. But you have these points. Essentially, you have Helga in Germany, as a key point of reference. It’s a reference for Russia and other places as well. Jacques in France, is in a fairly strong, relative position. The Four, the United States, Russia, China, and India, are coming into existence, and there are some meetings coming up now, which are these four! Hillary Clinton is playing a very significant role in respect to these four, as Secretary of State. Her meeting with Lavrov was highly successful, for its purpose.
So, we have inside the United States, our circle inside the United States, which is now focused around the Obama Presidency; Russia around an inside group in Russia, which is actually the leadership group in Russia; some influence in China, but that could be consolidated with the aid of Russia; and India. That is essentially what we have here, there. That is now the pattern. And what I’m doing, in terms of the question of economy is crucial, because if this were not done, if what I’m pushing were not to happen, there’s no change of avoiding a dark age. And what I’m trying to push through with Obama and Company, against all the enemies and fools and whatnot, is crucial.
That means, in the United States, that the LPAC operation is strategically significant, and will determine the future of civilization. So we are going to have a full-blast approach, politically and in fundraising, centered on LPAC. We have to get the $120,000 a week. {We have to.}
Nothing else is going to work, unless that works. Don’t talk about alternatives, or adjustments — forget it! It’s a fool’s errand.

The Four Powres Alliance, supposedly what the organization is working with, and it takes $120K a week from pestering your grandma on the phone to get it, and theoretically nickeling and diming from donations on street corner card table shrines with the latest ill-produced pamphlet thingamajing.  Well, anyway, the “4 Powers Alliance” is the pretend International Biggie they’re pushing.  The REAL International project can be found off of Parade’s Annual List of the “Top 10 Worst Dictators“.

Mugabe of Zimbabwe.  Al Bashir of Sudan. Khamenei of Iran*.  Abdullah (more to the clerics you can say) in Saudi Arabia.  And Muammar al-Qaddafi of Libya.
For Kim Jong Il, he takes credit for a rail-line (or hearlds one?), but really the Larouche — Jong Il “Economic Development” connection is more along the lines of this.

 The “International Economic Program” leads its way to this Canadian Constituion.  I post to the comments to point to something I’ve lost and will post here if I ever find.  In the meantime, translate this Hegla Zepp boilerplate anti-video game connected to violent crime item to English and read down the list of articles at the bottom — Most Illuminating to see the mileu we’re travelling through!
……………………………………….

** To tie up a loose end in that assortment of comments, while it’s true that he’s “more idiosyncratic” and probably better asserted as coming out of a “Stalinist Left”) here’s where I find “Hitler” specifically in the wide world of Larouche (beyond the various alliances at various times with neo-nazis and attendent items, beyond anti-semitism which I don’t know what to put down as)  — a quote from factnet:
First off, he certainly lacks any of the demagogic skills to attract any type of mass base, second, the West is not in the total debilitated state that Weimar Germany was in after the war (although that could certainly change given current economic condiations).

 It is, in Larouche’s world, the world situation is always in the state that Weimar Germany was in, and the paranthetical is what Larouche is going after in, well, theoretically the public imagination but in practice never really beyond the cadres — and I have never been able to read that (and before I em-meshed myself as fully in paying  the attention I have — independent curiosity-seeking) as anything than a mimicry of Hitler.  Surely the Communist Left have that ideology of worsening conditions for the proleteriat being preferable to “crumbs” thrown by the bourgeoise in order to “wake them up”, which always resulted in a same sort of Alarmist tracts of “15 minutes toward Armegeddon”, but the frames of reference throw this particular instance of Larouche over to Hitler.
But, yes, Hitler himself disappears and can’t be shoe-horned all over the place.

…………………………………..
And now for a run into the “leatherstocking challenge”, as per a wikipedia claim to just “look at how Larouche has been referred to” in news accounts in the past fifteen years, and use that.  He sort of played it through google news, a bad gambit because of the inclusiveness with which google news operates which farms in those “Executive Intelligence Review” items and gives it an undue weight as against , say, the Financial Times of London.  I refer to that because I’ll reference a story published there, January 31, 2009 — can’t find it with immediacy on the Internet: The profit of doom: George Soros may have predicted the global economic crisis, but how is the pioneering financier protecting his fortune and his legacy? Chrystia Freeland reports. 
where we see the reference made as “extremist pamphleteer”.  Would that work for wikipedia?

A ground report in the Ongoing War Against Newton:

Speaking of physics-related skeptical topics, have any of you seen the LaRouchians (aka the LaRouchebags) on campus? They’re a very politically oriented personality cult surrounding Lyndon LaRouche, and I think they prey on college dropouts. Among other things, they believe Newton, who may or may not have even existed, stole all his ideas from Kepler. Newton’s laws are plagiarized from Kepler’s laws. Joe tried showing them a physics problem involving friction, and asked them to solve it using only Kepler’s laws (which only deal with orbital motion). Their reaction was to question his credentials, and then promptly ignore him. They literally turned their back towards him, even while trying to talk to someone next to him.

They better send out reinforcements writing out more placards with the slogan “Newton Was A Fraud and We Can Prove It”.  There is even more evidence that this war is being lost.
……………………………………

A blog post called “La Rouche and God” (Strange title, even for this) runs into what itches the cult seems to provide scratches toward. This is an interesting summation of perception:
Their theory is to go back in time and review the great discoveries, then we could use that now to improve the lives of people on this planet. I agree that it needs improvement. We all hope for a better world.
For the life of me I cannot figure out whether that makes a sense “in theory” as one tool amongst many in Historic Inquiry, but as practiced by the LYM and its predecessor, the NCLC, it devolves into placing great discoveries into one or the other pile of fighters of the Dark Age or perpetrators of the Dark Age — seen in the long list here, and in skipping down to Part III of this blog entry, also in putting Larouche and his disciples as doing the work of Jesus and his Disciples.  xlcer, skimming these things, pops in with his rote response — a suggestion to xlcer: feel free sprinkle in a bit of targetted material such as that historical gem in that standard template — it might prove somewhat more effective.  BUT… good luck to this young Christian woman in offering up the Larouche recruiters your faith in God, I suppose
They invited me to a meeting to discuss these issues and hear more research and speeches on these ideas. I’m going to go. Maybe I can influence some to hope and pray to God for those things. The idea that we can change the world, its great, really. But more than the things that we could achieve, is the idea that all we truly need is faith, hope, and love, mostly love.
— but remember: they don’t believe in love… they believe in agape.  A distinction that would allow for (from evidence put forth in the recently historically reimagined Alexandria Trial, first box here):

The trouble with you people at the national center is you are too soft. You identify too much with people’s concerns and their problems. You have to have only one thing on your mind. That is getting the money. No matter what the person you are talking to says, get the money. If you are talking to a little old lady and she says she is going to lose her house, ignore it. Get the money.

Which reminds me — we can see the imprints of the Historical Revisionism regarding that trial here:

AND, more curiously, see where the most recent “Molly Kronberg Defeated Larouche HBPA in South Dakota” story found its way to.  This is a forum to a 9/11 Truth page, and while it is not terribly surprising to see a Larouche story provided by a Larouchian strolling around the “9/11 Truth”space, it is a bit puzzling for him to pluck out the story about Molly Kronberg.  A story I frankly don’t believe would register much for this spectrum of the political fringe, concerned more with measuring dust mites in frames of the footage of the second tower collapse than in assessing the persecution of this “movement”.  But maybe Jerry Pyenson is working off of auto-pilot.  (When I say it’s not surprising to see Larouche in 9/11 Truth space I point to this from a forum off of an Alex Jones site):

A Larouche Fan Says:
March 10th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
I see people saying alex jones is a shill, cia. etc. But compaired to the corporate media, he atleast tells the truth. Or if he dont tell the truth. its godamn close. and btw jessie did say fudge. He is a little respectable. basically saying they been f’n up. We are adults. You can say the f-word as much as you like. Lyndon Larouche told the truth during the 9-11 attacks LIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You can keep being fooled, or you can just see the truth. I didnt sleep for a month. but such is life. Yes alex is a salesman, BUY GOLD NOW! etc godda make a dollah to hollah.. looken at the history of gold.. I would have to assume him.. correct.. The fed.res needs to go. Viva Revolutiona!
Lyndon Larouche , Ron Paul. = Real Change!!

An odd occurence happened with Mr. Pyenson… he popped into this Ground Report on the Lobbying for the HBPA Resolution, which I guess makes sense as he is a front-line soldier in the Cause:
“You were lied to by the economists,” Pyenson told the council as he warned that, without action, the U.S. would be up against something darker than the wrath of Hitler and Mussolini. He noted that Newark, Paterson, East Orange, Edison and Orange had all passed similar resolutions.

Five speakers down the line, fellow LaRouche supporter Adam Rodriguez addressed the council, railing against the “London-centered banking system” and warning that we were “heading for a new Dark Age.” As Rodriguez began his remarks, Jersey Journal columnist Earl Morgan sighed loudly and ambled across the room to chat with business administrator Brian O’Reilly.

Nary a council member responded in any way to Pyenson’s or Rodriguez’s remarks.

In consideration for Jerry Pyenson, it’s worth pointing to  this – a demonstration of the type of history gymnastics that he’s forced to pull here.
Can we plaster away these past prognoses on a dime?  Yes We Can!
……………………………………….

As well “yes we can” post this Malarky to a long dated American Prospect blog post:

I can’t take anything that Molly/Marielle/Ms. Kronberg says at face value, now that I know she has taken to fraternizing with Dennis King and Chip Berlet. Nothing that LaRouche has said or done, publicly or privately, could be so bad as to justify collaborating with those two soulless ladies of the night.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 4, 2009 5:09 PM

Presumably this latest item spurred by Molly Kronberg writing article to Dennis King’s website, but it’s in the blood — as seen by Leatherstocking at wikipedia here:
Dude, I know that you and Dennis are buds, but …
BUT… it don’t stop there, as “Howie G” asks this new blogger, of interest to those interested in this (which, if you’ve read this far down is probably you):

March 11, 2009 11:59 PM  How much are the friends of Smith Richardson and Mellon Scaife paying you? How does it feel to be a five-and-dime store version of Rush Limbaugh?

Smith Richardson and Mellon Scaife care… why?

In other news, Robert Dreyfuss is being kicked around a bit again (look it up). Larouche expressed outrage that Teriq Aziz was sentenced to prison time, and he expressed approval of a rail-line’s completion.  Also, Webster Tarpley, called out in the org for lying about the future, has his “Obama Deception” film with Alex Jones as the most viewed video at yahoo.  I see no posting at LPAC on Seymour Hersh’s comment about Dick Cheney yet, which leads me to question what kind of ramshackle outfit these guys are running these days — that should have been plastered up with a supposed comment from “American Statesman” PRONTO — I mean, at least with no longer a lag time than they got up the “Dennis King Suicide” piece… What, are the Internal buttressing matters more important than the External Show?