Within a massive jabbing dump on the part of “revenire” in April, there was this:
i love the bevel stuff, sort of reminds of of the murder of martin luther king and how he was accused of having sex with women…
This was followed up immediately with:
lol, keep on trying jumper brigage
Which in the context of this weird ordeal meant a suggestion that I was slandering the good name of Lyndon Larouche with my “slandering” of the good name of James Bevel.  (Or, as the case was, simply re-posting the news accounts of the testimony from his victims, and I suppose tying it to Bevel’s rationale for working with Larouche — eccentric ideas on education, apparently.)

His legacy in the civil rights movement was clouded when he was convicted in April by a Loudoun County, Va., judge for having sex more than a decade ago with one of his daughters, Aaralyn Mills, who was a teenager at the time. Prosecutors said the assault occurred in Loudoun County, when Bevel was working closely with the Virginia-based organization led by LaRouche.

The four-day trial divided members of Bevel’s large family, with relatives testifying for both the prosecution and defense. He was sentenced in October.

At that time, prosecutors revealed at least four other daughters had made similar allegations against him. The victims hoped for an apology and some reconciliation, but Bevel mocked the notion of an apology.

But his reputation is probably by then a little tainted, or at the very least has a bit of a bifrocation in terms of “before” and “after”, by dent of moving from associating with Martin Luther King, Jr to associating with Lyndon Larouche, Jr. — the 1992 vice presidential candidate, in fact.  Incidentally, I may as well address revenire’s cries months after the fact (at the time, I was diverted in pondering the meaning of “I eat this blog for breakfast.”)  Allegations of infidelity on the part of Martin Luther King, Jr. with consenting women don’t much concern me and transplant me to 1960s America and I’d let them remain the province of Jay Edgar Hoover.  James Bevel and his incestual relations are a rather more serious infraction — in his case, done in the context of a supposed family “educational” program.  Ironically the biggest crusade, on behalf of “the children”, during his time in the orbit of Larouche was “exposing the Franklin cover-up”, or better to say perpetuating a hoax — supposedly a massive Republican child molestation ring based which stretched all the way to the White House — a conspiracy which had renewed circulation when the former Nebraska state Senator, collaberating with Bevel in this conspiracy theory, stretched the story of white house “correspondent” and at times male prostitute/porn star Jeff Gannon  back to the first Bush White House as a member of this pedophile ring (skip to “update 3/26/05).  It makes total sense?  I guess these things tapping into the conspiracy well of people who want to believe, people who want to believe the worst about presidents named George Bush on one hand and people who want to believe the worst about causes of homosexuality on the other hand — and most importantly people who want to find secret orders in the workings of the universe in connecting “forgotten” or “hidden” histories beyond all sane comprehension.  (Or, better still, fitting into this hypothesis.)

But these matters bring one part of his civil rights’ work in either stark relief or with an item of moral ambiguity — and in light of subsequent events, puts a rather bleak light on how he thought about these matters.  The “Children’s Crusade”, which is characterized in the comments section here:

I remember when Bevel put the children in the civil rights protests; he drew strong criticism for it. No one thought it wise to put the children in danger like that, and they were right, as history shows us.Bevel knew it would not matter to Bull Conner that the children were there, and THAT is what got the world’s attention! I guess it’s true that it takes one to know one.

So Bull Connor brings out his fire hose and moes down the children.  Public opinion turns a few screws more.  And … you have a bunch of physically pelted children.  At the hands of Bull Connor.  But they put there by Bevel’s strategizing.  Actually, I wonder if it would have worked best to cap the affair at high school students, who have a reasonable independence compared to elementary school aged to know what they’re getting into there.  Bull Connor’s faux “Law and Order” is exposed still.  Malcom X’s complaint “Real men don’t put their children on the firing line” is lessened.  Kennedy’s hand remains forced.  Well, it’s a thought anyway.

Unrelated, but I have to slide it somewhere:  frequent candidate for crap Gerald Pechenuk pokes his head up here regarding a trajectory I wondered when someone would get to from Blagojevich in the realm of Illinois politics — in this case from John Schrag.

I do not know what lead to this — I suspect the first step in that morning came through when the mouse of whoever has the final say in these matters had an accumulation of half a dozen dust mytes which subtley shifted the cursor of the computer in randomly selecting a letter in the middle of the the alphabet from ‘K’ or “M’ to ‘L’ — but yesterday’s featured front page article was the Larouche Criminal Trials.

The other possibility, in tandem with my “accumulation of a half dozen dust mytes” theory, is that the dust, which settled on that mouse, was blown into his house by a Mossad Agent — believing that the brief curiosiety-seeking exposure of a small slice of people breezing their way past wikipedia’s daily features on to, I don’t know — digg? Is that what the kids are into these days, digg? — will cause a negative impression of the lower 90 percent’s opinion of the man — slander, it is called.

Did the Dutch-Anglo Conspiracy against, oh for a quasi-random example, the ravaging of the people of Darfur and a power grab of their raw materials, work?  Anecdotally, I haven’t much.  Well, there’s this blog post.  But what is the connection between the Larouche Criminal Trials of the 1980s and the story of Jeremiah Duggan?  Damned the Oligarchy and its malicious ways!

A workably decent wikipedia article cemented on “Larouche Criminal Trials” is probably more feasible than on Larouche himself — an entry which is permanently a mess–, since the trials played themselves out in public, and were covered by news media that can be cited with comparative ease.

“Weirdly named Schiller Institute”, you say?  As good a name of a German Intellect as any, I suppose, and that’s about the only thing that matters.  But… but… but the Schiller Institute is set up to expound on the works of Friedrich Schiller.  (The since banned but likely reappearing under different aliases argures on the matter of Schiller, with references to Edgar Allen Poe, in wikipedia’s discussion here.  And wikipedia decides to throw out a link to the “Schiller Institute” wikipedia entry at entry Schiller here, due to it being rather unrelated.)

Factnet is still perpetually $500 off from having the “working capital” to operate, but maybe this hyper-flationary return to Weimer Germany economics will get that one back off and running.  I’ve ended up sticking links in the comments section of this blog when I would generally pass it off over there.  Saturday was an interesting case, wherein I posted some item of concern here in the morning, and in the afternoon saw that two items of interest had surfaced onto the Internet.  Such as, for example, this, which sets upon a weird pattern I’ve been seeing — perhaps only because I have a broader net of what Internet ramblings come at me — of someone swearing by the analysis by Larouche, but stating that for some reason he doesn’t make that final connection…:

I wasted much of my life getting a conventional education, so I feel I am beginning my education anew.

Well.  An education anew.  Like the LYMers, I suppose… From the roster of historians comes…

Historian Jeffrey Steinberg could be referring to the US, Canada and Australia when he writes, “England, Scotland, Wales, and, especially, Northern Ireland, are today little more than slave plantations and social engineering laboratories, serving the needs of …the City of London…

Hm.  Historian Jeffrey Steinberg?  What school of History does he belong to?

Steinberg belongs to a group of historians associated with economist Lyndon Larouche. They have traced this scourge to the migration of the Venetian mercantile oligarchy to England more than 300 years ago.
Although the Larouche historians do not say so, it appears that many members of this oligarchy were Jews.

But… but… this is puzzling.  As Alan Osler pointed out, Steinberg is Jewish!  Doesn’t this “Henry Makow, phD” know that?  It’s a grand point pointed out by Alan Osler, which seeing as I’ve already linked to his post a few times and see that the comments section now drivels over to some oddly amusing stuntery, I’ll link to his comments page, and suggest to jump all the way down to Ashley Mcgee.  Another pointer-outer of the vast number of Jews who surround Larouche is the esteemable “revenire”.  Well, anyways, forward to the product of a Larouchian education, and some source materials…

According to L.G. Pine, the Editor of Burke’s Peerage , Jews “have made themselves so closely connected with the British peerage that the two classes are unlikely to suffer loss which is not mutual. So closely linked are the Jews and the lords that a blow against the Jews in this country would not be possible without injuring the aristocracy also.” (Tales of the British Aristocracy1957, p.219.) […]

According to Barry Chamish, “there would be no modern state of Israel without British Freemasonry. In the 1860s, the British-Israelite movement was initiated from within Freemasonry. Its goal was to establish a Jewish-Masonic state in the Turkish province of Palestine…Initially, British Jewish Masonic families like the Rothschilds and Montefiores provided the capital to build the infrastructure for the anticipated wave of immigration. However, luring the Jews to Israel was proving difficult. They, simply, liked European life too much to abandon it. So Europe was to be turned into a nightmare for the Jews.”

But this is all far more anti-semitic drivel than I’m terribly interested in posting, so I’ll go ahead and stop.  To get back to the Criminal Trials, there’s some general agreement that Larouche poked his head out and amassed the fed’s attention starting with his suit against NBC — in the Larouchian view it all becomes a persecution from the Power Elites, as discussed and dissiminated by that grand layman historian and blogger “Henry McKow, phD”– hitting some kind of wall especially with a particularly stunning speech Christmas 1988? 1987? — heavy dose of Christian imagery on the trials and tribulations of Jesus Christ, and … we’re off.  Whether they  ponder the case of Roy Frankhouser or not.

Anyway, I see a posting emitting from LPAC “The Triumphant Return of the Weekly Report” — which at one time was the Jeff Steinberg Report, but I think they siphoned someone else next to him as a means of dampening his post-Lyndon succession hopes.  This is Triumphant in a sense that I doubt anyone noticed it was missing — I know I wasn’t paying enough attention to notice its disappearance.

I saw them set up at two locations last week, entreating passerbys to ask about Newton’s Fraudulent Credentials.  (Seen too by a few other people, putting them back into some Portland resident’s conciousness long enough to make a snide jab at Bill Sizemore.)  As a result of seeing them at two locations, I could verify for certain that that car was theirs.  And I surmise that the automobile was used back in the Carter Administration when the organization (led by the Youth Members’ forefathers) was hawking their “plan” to save the Detroit Auto Industry back then.  Which does dovetail to one of those random comments I saw posted to a “Hey!  Look Larouchies!  Yesterday’s version of Ron Paul / Ralph Nader / fill intheblank supporters” blog post.

“Don’t know how they’ll survive once their leader croaks, but they seem to be hanging on with all the tenancity and tenuousness of Castro’s Cuba.”  Or something like that.  I didn’t bother saving it, and I can’t relocate it in enough time to justify completing a search for it.

I was reading over some of the old — I guess we can call them”flame – wars”, though that suggests some form of a game I was never really interested in playing– with revenire, always having planned to go back and plaster together something into a file onto the sidebar — mostly by way of some observations from ex-Larouchies which pertain specifically to Wiesbedan (fewer of them than I remember… I myself offered relatively little of substance and can summise my favorite moment of his washes ashore as this exchange… Revenire:  Don’t ‘Um’ Me.  and Me: Um.  Ba de dum, be da bing, you’ve all been great!), but was generally struck by the ridiculousness someone so cock-sured on the viability of Larouche — there’s an odd paradox with a cult that you simultaneously want and think everyone is thinking about your man and nobody is.  Revenire did make a fairly interesting comment near the end of his last stay, to wit:

April 15, 2008:  you jumpers have been drive insane by the fact larouche has been right all along… and you have been wrong and his public record proves it
you have no public record, except your hearsay etc. from losers who could not stand the heat in the kitchen… cowards and fools, like rachel
duggan was a suicide and kronerg jumped… larouche is alive and doing quite well
you have tired old re-hashes of high times writers and mothers being used by people she has no clue about where is the new investigation into duggan?
THERE ISN’T ONE

Well, pooh.  There is now.  Or a start to one.  Somberly, it’s something worth noting more than “gloating”.  But does revenire’s statement count as one of those Larouchian forecasts?  Somewhere with the premise of Erica Duggan being “used” by former High Times writers on one hand, and Dick Cheney and the British Government on the other hand, she pushed it forward herself for the past five years.  I was going to simplify this quote, leaving what I highlighted in bold with a preceeding summary that goes [insults of various people, insult of Mrs. Duggan in the cloak of a sort of faux humanitarian sympathy — belated at that].  What fascinated me about revenire was upon his introduction, his interest was Jeremiah Duggan.  This was a little odd, as I’ve always felt I was just a little bit lax with the topic, always stating that legal issues notwithstanding the Organization was morally culpable for the death of Duggan — their best case on that regard scenario looking quite awful.  (Revenire also having a knack to disbelieve everything from the outside world.)

That “Justice for Jeremiah” conference was heavy on the anti-semitic angle.  Larouche is an esoteric enough topic that I have few foils to work with with differing thoughts on their activities, and that is why I once again have to go back once again to Alan Osler’s observations on watching the conference… and, I always come back to this because it really is a bizarre piece of commenting on his part… and Chip’s penis (link provided in previous postings, go down in this category).

Here’s a thought on why so many of there people in that room didn’t know what “antisemitism” means… […]

And “really anti – British”.  In traversing the Internet regarding Larouche, it is funny how I always come up against these things.  As though some neo-nazis on the furthest extreme of the “right” take that “code word” business seriously and see a sympathetic analyst for their position.  By accident, I suppose.*

The worst thing about this little shitfest was that the Duggans’s grief was hijacked. Wasn’t it supposed to be about reopening the investigation? But no one wanted to say “The police fabricated the evidence”, so were were left with 2hours of pure, undiluted bullshit.

“2hours of pure, undiluted bullshit”, and a re-opened investigation.  Which will either drag nowhere or gets somewhere.  And legal issues aside, the very least it will at the very least broadcast the organization’s culpability in something beyond a Simpsons punchline.

For what it’s worth, I thought about Larouche when I saw the headline London Times Reports British Tortured Obama’s Grandfather.  Good fodder for the Larouchian engine which insists the “British Empire” is out to assassinate our Presidents.  Sure enough, and skip to the end:

Lyndon LaRouche has recently stated that there is a battle royale around the Obama administration. Obama as a president and Obama as a candidate are two different things. As a candidate he was controlled by the British, by George Soros and others. But now he’s in the thrall of the institution of the presidency, which means the potentiality of dealing with what he is faced with is different, especially now, in the context of a new fourteenth century dark age.

Love that “Fourteenth Century Dark Age”.  No matter how bad things might get, an impossibly bleak outlook is made available for comparison’s sake.  Well, it puts him off of one crusade for a while… though, off I guess he’s off the video-game crusade and onto a Satanist kick.

* Mental note:  I need to compile a number of these sort of things.

Okay.  Where were we?

Writing in the Oct. 31 edition of Executive Intelligence Review, leading U.S. statesman and economist Lyndon LaRouche issued a major report, one which, he wrote, “may come to be considered by some among the world’s leading circles of today, as the most important political document you have read, or might have read, during your lifetime to date.”

You know how television shows always advertise with “The final 15 minutes of Tuesday’s night program will be the most shocking 15 minutes in television history”?  You know how the major comic book publishers always used to plaster their covers with “Special Collector’s Edition”, salted liberally?  You know how a used car seller or a mattress seller advertises with “The Deal of the Century”?  How many of these proclamations of “most important political document you have read, or might have read, during your lifetime to date” can there be?

But this is all old and stupid.  When I get the chance I am going to look into the functionality of Alex Jones’s websites — are these things user input with a helpful editor that tracks the desired conspiracy mongering to the front?– because I note this:

Conspiracy theories abound throughout the Internet, as occurs when anything of this magnitude occurs – and one of the most astounding theories I’ve come across is that Great Britain was actually behind the attacks as published on Alex Jone’s site.

That actually is a rather unastounding and very boring theory.  And you know why that is.  If I hadn’t plucked this from the realms of the Internet by way of the keyword search “Larouche”, I would still know the source of this crap.  The British Empire — to quote the fellow, “And the British are also in heat right now.”  Is there no end to their sex-starved treachery?  What will they think of next?  (Well, this.  But that’s been floating in Larouche’s mind since the summer.  To paraphrase a drunk Mel Gibson, “The British are responsible for all the wars in the world.  And presidential assassinations.  Are you a Brit?”  I look forward to the upcoming Robert Beltran narrated L-Pac video on the British treachery of germ warfare which gave President William Henry Harrison pneumonia.)

Continuing:
This is an article that all should read, and when I first read it, my first thought was “WTF???” Then, I took the time to read-up on Lyndon LaRouche’s track-record for being correct – and if you read it yourself – it’s mind-numbing how often Mr. LaRouche has been correct in his predictions and analysis of several issues that have actually been absolutely correct, and this time, I hope that he’s dead-wrong!

Is there some sort of memo on how a Larouchie interacts on the Internet?  “Always act surprised, yet intrigued at the reading of a Larouche tract.  State that you’ve heard about him, and some bad things, but have never looked into him yourself.”  Anyway, I’m eating my 20 dollar loaves of bread and am waiting with the horror of our up-coming Michael Bloomberg Administration.

The link, I guess, came to us from sort of the fringes of the Alex Jones website.  Meaning, the fringe of the fringe.  The front page would tend to entreat you with information that Webster Tarpley will be on the next Alex Jones show, Alex Jones to be on the next Webster Tarpley show — Tarpley having more credence in the world of Kookery than Larouche (though, this may be by design).  The last time I spotted, in my slightly askewed glance over the Internet, Larouche being in the Alex Jones web-sphere — it was with a youtube clip where Larouche babbled on about how everyone is going to be killing everyone else — and, if you imagine 2 straight days of speeches along those lines, the not entirely unfeasible portrait of a lone LYM taking things into his own hands at an isolated conference in Germany becomes a little easy to picture.

If the Alex Jones sites operated with this sort of user-based variety, I can entertain myself with an odd version of how things work with dailykos — where we see this post has been deleted.  Karole Noymann contributed for consideration and deletion an entry which began:  Maybe Lyndon LaRouche isn’t so crazy after all25 Nov 2008
OK maybe my title is a bit misleading since this diary is about Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, for over thirty years the wife of Lyndon LaRouche, who has worked closely with her husband and reflects his own views and philosophy.  Perhaps this makes Markos Moulitsas and his website are one of those dreaded “Gate-keepers” conspiracy theorists talk about, keeping this view or that view outside the purview of respectable opinion.  I wonder if I were to create an account and post some rather tame donkey versus elephant partisan horse race item at Alex Jones’s website if I would be similarly deleted.  Well, it’s a thought.

But, in terms of the Internet, wikipedia is probably the front-line of any Larouchian fight.  I tend think the wikipedia article on Larouche right now is a little lame, the Larouchies have successfully gotten a good focus on their roaming batch of any figure who has given the man validation.  On the other hand, I appear to have indirectly affected the entry on “James Bevel”, this post seeming to have lead to a further explication of Bevel’s career of the time — which had been posted at wikipedia as simply “getting his educational viewpoinits to the public” (appreciate the dark humor there) to include such items as “booed off stage in front of black Nationalists” and more importantly the Nebraska Child Molestation hoax he played a part in propagating (irony or ironies) and… Perhaps there is more to the story of Bevel’s career in his Larouchian phase and why, but researchers would have to figure it out and document it.

In other news, Funny this, though ironically something of a Larouchian tactic:

The lowest of low blows was lodged anonymously against a House GOP leader candidate, New Hampton Rep. Fran Wendleboe.
Titled “The Truth About Fran,’’ the two-page attack called her the “Lyndon LaRouche of NH politics’’ in referring to her past unsuccessful bids for Congress, party chairwoman and state Senate.
It had a character assassination of Sam Pimm, who had led the Reagan Network political action committee that Wendleboe formed and which opposed the renomination of moderate-to-liberal GOP House members.
And it contained a picture of Miss Piggy the Muppet and a picture of Wendleboe with the caption “Separated at birth?’’
The letter was sent with no return address to all House Republican members the weekend before Monday’s leadership vote.

And,  Satanists are upset with Larouche.  Supposedly a pivot for the org would be to seek funding sources and feign support for and around a sort of Sarah Palin supporting Christian sources — this  a good start to that goal, I suppose.  (Look into this story yourself.)

In other news — David Icke has been making some rounds and figuring in the Franken — Coleman recount here in the states… in Britain — it gets even odder.  (Franken is seen here playing Henry Kissinger in an enactment of the scholarly polemic “Henry Kissinger and the Politics of Faggery.)

I am mildly uncomfortably leaving my last post before the Thanksgiving Day weekend on this blog in the category of esoterica into the “Lyndon Larouche Challenge”, but those Larouchies have left me no choice.  Tell me if this isn’t just a little … disarming…

So, I see that there’s this blogspot.  “Larouche Club”.  It appears to be an attempted building block for a Canada “movement”.  Take it for what it is.  But run down the list in the archives.  A warning for anyone who pops in to talk to a card table shriner in Ottawa:
Prospective members will be listed soon. Those who turn it down will also be listed– with the reasons for the turndown.

How will this list read?  “Name:  John Doe, 879 6th Avenue.  Reason stated:  “You’re f’ing Nuts.  Real reason:  Psychological breaking at Tavistock Institute inflicted by the Cheney — Brzezinski Cabal.  Also addicted to his Mother’s Milk.”

I guess is an interesting means of recruitment, though it strikes me as either approaching a vague status of quasi-criminality in and of itself or an item of circumstantial evidence to toss into a profile for the Jeremiah Duggan Inquest.  (Incidentally, I had forgotten about Alan Osler’s blog post on the topic until I looked over some things yesterday, so incidentally the last two Alan Osler comments found here have some hilarious lines.  “Even though he prints pictures of the Queen of England to make his point.”  Hilarious.)  The Ottawa comments also serve as an answer to the question posed here for the Burlington club:
Where can we find new members? What should be member be?
And I’m not entirely sure what this means, but sure… advertise away.  Another interesting spot for potential recruits, a favorite spot of the leader of the “Larouchian Cryonics Movement” and this random commenter, “Real Jew News“… maybe they read it in Canada?

And now I invite anyone and everyone to take the “Leatherstocking Challenge” (as from the wikipedia discussions here ) — Leatherstocking being an… um… impartial observer… interested in maintaining balance… not a Larouche advocate, you understand… right?:

Here is how I would handle the problem of keeping fringe viewpoints out of the intro to this article (the word “fascist” in the introduction): take a sampling of how “newspapers of record” like the New York Times have described LaRouche over the past decade or so, and use that as a guide for how the intro should be written. (By the way, there was a big push by the anti-LaRouche team to say that LaRouche was not an economist, and I found this: [2].)

What world does he live in? How, exactly, does he think a “sampling of Larouche descriptions” from “newspapers of record” “over the past decade or so” reads? I gave it a whirl, with a few newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, Associated Press news service) and heading backward from 2008, I got as far as 2003 before deciding I had had enough.  I didn’t get too many straight up “fascists”, but I didn’t get “economist” either.  Both, I’m sure, if you were looking for them would turn up.  “Fringe” sort of dominated. Connected to “Perenial presidential candidate”. I did find one particularly artful phrase which I’ll mention if pressed.  I’ll keep the listing to myself — I wish to inflict the suffering of enduring fifteen minutes of this to anyone who has such an interest in surveying this landscape of throw-away lines. 

Mental note:  go back and review Larouche’s history of playing around with suppositions on presidential assassinations.  It’s a trope, rehashed, noise emitted signifying nothing.

 (edited.  I opted for a weasel phrase in there.)

I accidentally linked this to a completely irrelevant topic the other day.  When I saw that I posted it with the words “Um, I just said that”, I had a small mini-panic slightly, before reverting it to its original link — a map of the Southeastern United States — and realized that the effect of the link was akin to announcing “I am a doughnut.”  But, here’s the interesting line I can leave you to ponder.: 

One cryonicist in 1000 is a Larouche-Christian Humanist– we’ll see my club expand to 2 at 2000

When there are 2000 cryonicists, I expect there will be one more Larouche Christian Humanist among us. This would be in statistical keeping with the current trend of 1 in 1000– represented currently by me.

It is reminscent of a quote from Larouche, which I first heard from a Pacifica Radio feature— though I would have undoubtedly picked it up from somewhere in my shaky search through this voyage, on the basis for the formation of the LYM (though, it looks like the same basis for the NCLC) — with just a thousand people, we will conquer the world.  Larouche never quite got there, and he was implicated in  a few too many deaths besides**, and didn’t restock his supply with enough rich Trust Fund cases with daddy-issues. ***  At least that has some gumption to it; Mr. Ossifur doesn’t even seem to be on the verge of taking over the world of Cryonics — he’s just searching for a second member for his sub-culture.  Many are called, few heed the call… or rather many are called, all of whom laugh the call off, none heed the call.

But, in the end, commenting on this for mockery is about like commenting for mockery on “Time Cube“.  (The problem of which is explored here.)

Back to Duggan, another odd salvo thrown on the Internet.:

Matilda: You Need Testimony from LaRouche Security
Did attorneys interview the LaRouche security team that was on duty
in Germany at the time Mr. Jeremiah Duggan was murdered?
Security knows what happened to Jeremiah and why they wanted
him dead.
I can help you to locate people in LaRouche security.
Contact me if you want me to send you a list of names and details.Best regards,
Victor G. Jackson

Relevant authorities may do with that what they can and will, if they have not already.  And to think, I waded through the transcript of the latest Larouche “web-cast”, a pointless exercise, where nothing is happening.  The man explained why solar energy couldn’t work based on his in-depth understanding of photo-synthesis.  In other Larouche pronouncement news, John Maynard Keynes and his economic theories are roads to fascism — interesting and slightly jarring assessment since, from where I sit, if you can come up with any flaccid of an economic theory Larouche is feigning, I always thought it was a sort of hyper-Keynesian — though, the “Economic Investments” being somewhat pointless.  (re: Meglev Train between Russia and Alaska, an extent project he glommed onto.)

In other pesterings around the Internet, I ran into the figure of Kassim Ahmad.  Where we learn that:

LaRouche was leader of a Quaker political movement which later became a faction of the Democrats. His ideas were and are revolutionary, threading the development of political, economic and scientific ideas carefully from sources in the Greek beginning to reach for a future humanity.  But Kassim, in the process of these flights to fulfill some emptiness in his life, lost his new friends and lieutenants, something he seemed to find difficult to explain in his book, and perhaps also to himself. Yes… the leader of a Quaker movement (His father, I guess, leaving his mainline denomination because of a difference of opinion over Adolf Hitler), and the leader of a faction of the Democratic Party.  (The function of which is basically to occasionally bug Barney Frank before Frank tells the pestering Larouchies to please leave his office.)  A search of wikipedia shows us that the Parti_Rakyat_Malaysia, or

The Malaysian People’s Party (Malay: Parti Rakyat Malaysia; PRM) is a democratic socialist political party in Malaysia. Established on November 11, 1955 as Partai Ra’ayat, it is one of the older political parties in Malaysia and traces its pedigree to the anti-colonial movements from the pre World War II period like the Kesatuan Melayu Muda.

Continue with an explanation of its origins in the Malysian anti-Imperialist Independence Movement against Great Britain, and skip forward to the introduction of Kassim Ahmad.:

In the leadership vacuum, a group of young intellectuals led by Kassim Ahmad took over the reins of the party and it underwent a radical change.  The party was renamed Parti Sosialis Rakyat Malaysia (English: Malaysian People’s Socialist Party; PSRM) and it officially adopted scientific socialism as its ideology.  Despite the reorientation of the party, the post 1969 political scenario meant that the party remained in the sidelines.  Other leaders were also arrested under the ISA like Syed Husin Ali in 1974 [17] and Kassim himself in 1976 [18].  This cost the party significant organizational cohesiveness that continued to plague it right into the next decade.  Leaders like Kampo Radjo and Syed Hussin helped keep the party intact over the next decade. 

That appears to be Kassim’s legacy to this political party, and the vantage point where Larouche can entertain his notion of leading a faction of the Democratic Party in entertaining Kassim. Beyond that, you have: splinter this, coalition with that, and splinter that, and in the end, well… it is hard to keep track of left wing Malaysian fringe parties. :

On April 17, 2005 the dissidents convened a National Congress in Johor Bahru, taking advantage of the fact that the party had yet to be de-registered by the authorities, and elected a new Executive Committee led by former PRM youth leader, Hassan Karim to resume political activities as PRM.  PRM has since contested in the 2008 general elections but has again yet to get one of their number elected into the legislature. A new coalition of Opposition parties, Pakatan Rakyat (English: People’s Pact, Pakatan), was formed after the 2008 elections but PRM has remained outside the coalition to date.

So, Kassim Ahmad failed to infect his country with “scientific socialism” (A term that should raise a red flag).  But He has a blog.  Influences?

RZ: Finally, which author/book/work of art do you count as your greater influences?

A 14. Many lives, authors and books have had great influence on me. On the literary level, Wordsworth, Keats, Shakespeare, Thomas Mann, Dostoyevsky, Hemingway, Yeats, T.S. Elliot, Keris Mas, Tongkat Warrant, Chairil Anwar and Pramudia. On the philosophical-intellectual level, Prophet Muhammad’s life, the writings and thoughts of of Mulla Sadra, Iqbal, Ali Shariati, Ibni Sina, Plato, Hamka, Abdullah Munshi, Malek Bennabi, Hassan Hanafi, Robert Briffault (who wrote the The Making of Humanity, a profound book) Rashad Khalifa, Saddam Hussein, our own Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and the American philosopher, economist and writer, Lyndon LaRouche, Jr.  Above all, the Quran has had a great continuing influence in the development of my thinking. I am a voracious reader. I want to read and re-read more books, but now I haven’t the time.

RZ: Rashad Khalifa? Why him? This is me being unnecessarily picky, but I thought his theories on the Quranic numerical code was said to be a fraud? Correct me if I’m wrong…

KA: Rashad’s translation of the Quran and his writings clarify for me many things that were not clear before. His call for Muslims to return to the Quran is essentially correct. I myself do not agree with him all the way, but, tell me, of a scholar or leader who is perfect! We should be grateful for a scholar or leader who has given us something good. Of his errors, we should be forgiving enough to overlook. […]

KA: […] In my case, I go to great trouble before I form a definite view on scholars and leaders, as in the case of the late Dr. Rashad Khalifa, President Saddam Hussein and Lyndon H. LaRouche. I read their biograhies and their major works before I form my views.

The wonderous and misunderstood philosophies of Saddam Hussein and Lyndon Larouche.  Wonderous.
……………………………….

A random awkwardly translated article on Jeremiah Duggan and the continued court battles.  Previously I have shied away from using the word “Murder” (a fact that I reminded of with Dennis King linking to a part of that long winded flame-war with revenire  — though I warmed over to “man-slaughter” (whether or not it fits the legal standards of Britain or Germany); now I am not so sure if I shouldn’t just use that “M” word. 

(**) My rule in posting blogs about Larouche: they will always concern itself with Jeremiah Duggan and/or Kenneth Kronberg.

(***) An observation: It looks like that Avi Klein Washington Monthly article has circulated well enouogh to become a sort of a “go-to” to quickly get a grasp of what is happening, referenced (however obliquely) as a pretty quick short-cut.

Hey now.  This just floored me.  From The Guardian, on the long-going determination to re-open the  Jeremiah Duggan case.

The power of the attorney general to make decisions free from the scrutiny of courts came under renewed attack last week, in a challenge by the family of Jeremiah Duggan, a British student whose death in Germany five years ago has been described by lawyers as “disturbing and bizarre”.

The attorney general, Lady Scotland, who is said to have considered the case personally, refused to consent to the Duggan family’s attempt to seek a fresh inquest into his death, stating that it had “no reasonable prospect” of succeeding.

The family are challenging her claim that the attorney general’s decision is “immune” from judicial review, the process by which the courts scrutinise the decisions of public officials, and the “long-standing practice” of providing no detailed reasons for such decisions.

Simple and straight forward so far.  But then there’s this.:

The family are challenging her claim that the attorney general’s decision is “immune” from judicial review, the process by which the courts scrutinise the decisions of public officials, and the “long-standing practice” of providing no detailed reasons for such decisions.

The case, which the high court last week allowed to proceed, could be the most high-profile challenge to the role of the attorney general since the House of Lords considered the controversial BAE affair earlier this year. In that case the court scrutinised the role of the then attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, in advising prosecutors to drop the investigation into allegations of corruption at BAE, following threats from Saudi officials. “It is a logical progression from the decision in the BAE case that our government should be more transparent and answerable,” said Frances Swaine, the lawyer representing the Duggan family. “This case could have wider ramifications. If it succeeds it would be a way of opening up our constitution.”

Good golly.  The BAE Case.  This is actually jaw-dropping.  I know next to nothing about the details of the BAE Scandal, except the manner that the Lyndon Larouche organization used it in the months after Kenneth Kronberg’s suicide.  It was a heavy handed flurry of distraction to get the members of the National Committee, in Leesburg, to quit thinking about what had just happened with Kronberg and get back to the matter of saving Human Civilization.  Perhaps it will be worthwhile for me to reconstruct this for precision (from things I posted on this very blog), but in general the events followed as thus.:  #1:  Lyndon Larouche “revealed” that Molly Kronberg had donated money to the George W Bush re-election campaign, and demanded to know “What more needs be said?”  #2:  A flurry of reports came out of the Larouche-pac site about the BAE Scandal.  #3:  The Internal Daily Briefings relayed the suggestion, from Jeffrey Steinberg, that History has changed due to the implications of Larouche’s most recent web-cast on the subject of the BAE Scandal, and thus we all understand how everyone is under such distress at the moment because of this history changing web-cast on the BAE Scandal.  #4:  The topic of the BAE Scandal was summarily dropped and never mentioned again and the organization moved on to other matters.  (Not quite in the proper chronology, so indulge me for this one:  #5:  a Larouche troll posts a comment informing me that I am an “empty husk of humanity”.)

All of this is sort of tangeantal and either demonstrates an element of irony from the fates, or is a hidden message from the British — relayed in the Guardian which, as we established five years ago for reporting on the death of Jeremiah Duggan — is a tool of the British Oligarch in its aims for war in Iraq, and the coming… Dark Age?

Actually, Larouche is on a bend saying Obama is not going to be president — which seems to swerve somewhere between a statement of Assassination and to the “birth certificate” story-line.  (But that one’s tipped off from one follower, the … um… cryonics guy).  Witness, and to get away from serious matters of manslaughter for a little bit of levity — if darkly tinged:

Obama is not going to make it to the presidency on jan 21– so all these morons like Emmanuel who think they’re going to be “in power” will be surprised to learn that there is a true american underground that will likely invalidate Obama– and at the same time “educate” the Obamatrons– about what the american constitution says… that yuo have to be natural born citizen of the US which Obama is nOT.

I thought the British were going to stop him, as opposed to the “True American Underground”. Which is… ?

To finance the Real American Revolution– against tyranny– invest in the Larouche organization! Start a Larouche Club in your town

Yeah, I’ll get right on that.  (And yes, I am here just reposting this.  The more pertinent and important press release from Erica Duggan and “Justice for Jeremiah” precedes that comment at the end of this here.)  More pertinent to this case, Larouche is now beating the drums against Gordon Brown… a proxy for the Queen of England, I suppose.

Meanwhile, back to that imporant matter:

The new evidence submitted by Mrs Duggan included reports by three crash investigators and a forensic photographer.

The coroner’s pathologist, who carried out a post mortem examination on his body on its return to the UK, said his injuries were consistent with being beaten around the head.

AND, I have some mixed feelings about the comments left to this here, but I guess it’s understandable where they come from.

I note that factnet is down as their funds are low, which is where I would have dumped a probably briefer comment perhaps stating simply “BAE?” and assumed everyone knew where that came from.  As is, I had to spell that one out.

Good god, Wikipedia can be dumb sometimes.  Look down the list of cultural references to Casanova.  This is a pointless list, as Casanova is an iconic enough figure in culture referred to constantly and by everyone sooner or later that to point to a reference made on, for instance, That 70s Show in a list of a dozen items seems rather trifling.

I suppose all of this demonstrates a bias of a certain type — the ” in the pop culture” section is infected by twenty-somethings who refer to a Beanie Baby with the name “Casanova” (might as well refer to various teddy bears heavily marketed for Valentine Day with the name) — presentism, I guess.

Punting over to the wikipedia input for “Lyndon Larouche”, and you see the constant battle from Larouchies to pull out every input from Chip Berlet and Dennis King, and (as I’ve already mentioned), reference every recent appearance on a foreign television network as a Major Development in International Relations.  Some conversation gets somewhat interesting — Mark Rudd probably devotes no mind space to Larouche, but Larouchies devote some mind space to Mark Rudd, and it is touchy to deliniate Larouche’s off-to-the-side place in the student New Left mileau of the late 1960s.  A little easier is to cut to size Larouche’s fantasy role in SDI, which the alertness to is, I believe, a renewed effort from the Larouchies.  Something else I notice here, an attempt to cut this out, found here:

In 2008, LaRouche commented on US Presidential candidate Barack Obama, “You’ll find Obama’s ancestry, if you chase his family tree, everybody’s climbing and swinging from the branches there–from all over the world! All parts of the world! This guy is the universal man. Every monkey in every tree, from every part of the world, has participated in the sexual act of producing him. And he works for organized crime–which is a branch of British intelligence.”ref:[http://lyndonlarouchewatch.org/larouche-obama.htm “Look up the Principle Which Generates the Concept: Saturday Dialogue with LaRouche, Pt. 1”]. 13 April 2008

The two problems, “Not found on Larouche’s website” (HA!) on to “Dennis King’s personal website is not credible”, and “How is this relevant to anything?”.  I don’t really know how a wikipedia article should approach what is relevant to a topic of a cult leader and how you slice his history in moderating with his true believers to something approaching reality, but I can note that “every monkey in every tree” is the most widely seen comment from Larouche of the past year, and that I saw it before Dennis King posted to it (factnet, obviously), and — hell, only by a fluke might have posted it to this stupid blog (which I always jokingly refer to as being “read by a half dozen people) before King posted it.

Related is something I see spouting up — various bloggers, the leader of the Larouchian Cryonics Movement for one, are linking to Larouche’s current line that the British Empire are plotting to Assassinate Barack Obama.  (And I never quite know what to make of blog/message board entries like this.)  And this looks like a reprise of these couple of “PUMA Movement blogs I saw which kept posting Larouche crap, except Hillary Clinton’s name has been scrubbed and replaced with “Mitt Romney”.*)

But the thing about the “assassination of Barack Obama trope” is that it is old news.  Not published in Larouche websites, to be disseminated by supposed Mitt Romney fans, but but I found it interesting enough to post it here, linked to from its original factnet spot.  Brush aside, perhaps, the timeline (Obama is not going to be the next president, which suggests that the British would have assassinated him by now, instead the apparently are going to assassinate him before he is inaugurated.)  So I’m not entirely sure why it’s now being posted around now — why wait?  Further, the reliability and predictability of its existence in pre-published form to its new existence as the current Larouche publication approved conspiracy theory fodder shows the “Obama miscegenation” quote is reliable — they came from the same stupid source.

Then again, the new appearance of the “British Assassination Plot against Barack Obama” has been cleaned up.  Witness the line:
You know, one of Molly Kronberg’s friends’ll probably kill him or something like that—and put the blame on us! [laughs]

And, meanwhile, back in Britain — I suppose right there at the seat of the British Empire, the Inquest into the Death of Jeremiah Duggan has opened up again, previously shunted evidence newly admitted.  They, I guess, count as “Molly’s friends”, but to dissect the intersections between the Persecution Complex and the British Empire and Obama is to entangle myself in a spider web I don’t care much to entangle myself.  The answer to this question is, of course, yes.  And I suppose they can keep some of their supposed “Heroes” (nothing wrong with FDR – though his record is as always open to dispute and complicated as Heck… in Larouche’s case it is a matter of projection, largely), they really do need to readjust their enemies list:
The LaRouche organisation says Mrs Duggan’s campaign is inspired by US Vice-President Dick Cheney in order to discredit them.

But so do all Conspiracy Theorists.  Watch it, though: Obama’s new Administration is going to fill up, at least in part if not in major part, by Clinton retreads — and you are supposedly a Clinton Democrat in factional Democratic Party disputes.
*Puzzling claim.  Obama is supposed to be assassinated by the British and never see office, right?  That would make Biden president.  Biden was a major Drug Warrior, particularly through the 1980s.  So where does this Soros control come into the picture?

I should have posted this a bit earlier than now, but there it is.  It is the steadily increasing uploads of the “Justice for Jeremiah” conference in Berlin — also now posted to the “Larouche Corner” section of the sidebar.  I have watched the first four installments, and am not going to force myself to state a novel insight.  On a less than serious note, I will say that judging by the seating arrangement, it would appear the individual who posted on his blog about this conference — go down to the next posting or two in this category to see the link — was seating off on the side, as the state of Chip Berlet’s pants is obscured by the sign over the table.  I don’t see how I could possibly have taken note of that even if I really really really was inclined to do so — it appears to be a “that blogger” problem.  As though that wasn’t obvious.

One place to pursue some items of controversy is not the wikipedia article on Jeremiah Duggan, but the archives for the talk function for the article.  Further, the arbitration for the Banishment of a misusing Larouche supporter with a Jewish Simpsons reference as a handle. Worthy of an aside, I once watched someone with a Jewish name as a handle post on an Internet forum that I frequent a Denial of the Holocaust — that is some odd common tactic in neo-nazi and anti-semitic culture — adopt a Jewish handle.   Not that Herschel Krustofsky is a neo-nazi; he’s just mindful of the anti-semitic charge that comes at Larouche, or more probably just making an obscure Simpsons reference.  But if there is a “Herschel Krustofsky” the writers of the Simpsons used as inspiration, please clue me in..

An odd little item that springs out at me from there, witness this:

The LaRouche user accounts have caused so much dissent that there are now numerous breakaway articles about LaRouche and his groups, when in reality his movement does not warrant this much space. The LaRouche talk pages amount to over 185,000 words: see Template:LaRouche Talk. There are omissions of fact and omission of mainstream opinion which render the articles misleading. The Schiller Institute page, for example, stresses the cultural activities of the organization, whereas in reality, it is regarded as a far-right political cult, whose members have complained of brain-washing techniques, but little of this is mentioned.

I am not sure the unbalanced nature of this topic, as per words, is a problem.  The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, of the radio and book franchise of the same name, as near a fictional precursor to to wikipedia, has “Earth” down to “Mostly Harmless”, though obviously not those two words (er… Jeremiah Duggan, Kenneth Kronberg — heck!  Dennis King has — for whatever reason — popped the “International Death Squad Support” to the top of his list at his website).  In the grand scope of things, if you were to pare “Lyndon Larouche” down to his impact on human culture, it would be about the same length — compare the number of words to all those connected to “Albert Einstein”, for instance. The disparity compared to disparity of worth will almost certainly be unbalanced, but I don’t see how that would be a problem.  Put up that disclaimer, wikipedia.  As silly as it is to have an item on every stupid sub-variation of the cult (“Schiller Institute”), they at least don’t post — as per the request from Larouchies — every appearance he makes on Russian television.

I might also note the ratings comparison of the Obama infomercial with the Larouche infomercials.  The news media have been reporting the Nielson ratings for Obama — roughly half the ratings for the second presidential “debate”. The immediate comparison they can come up with by way of rough comparison with that format is Ross Perot’s chart-heavy infomercials for his two presidential campaigns, and sure — the ratings are better for Obama.  It is up to blogs such as, to pick one out at random in a search, this one to sarcastically reference Larouche’s infomercials. But they fail to note the ratings, largely forgotten to history.  I once saw the Nielson ratings for various weeks where Larouche bought a half hour of time.  (Two years ago, when I read seemingly every mainstream mention of Larouche of the past four decades, which sort of had me on this topic 18 months ago, and you remember what happened then.)  Basically they were dead last in the ratings, with about half the viewership of the second to last rated-show (and in the days of upstart Fox having about 100 affiliates on a lot of lower-powered UHF channels and only nudging into the not as big cable market, dominating that final tier of ratings listings– well, that particular ratings list was amusing).  I was trying to find those ratings yesterday, but I was not able to within the time that would make that hunt worth it, so you will have to take my word and faded memory for it.