LaRouche is getting more desperate in his antics against Obama. What will he accuse Obama of next? Being Rosemary's baby?

Obama in Der Bunker
 

LaRouche's latest jab at the President accuses him of acting like "Hitler in the Bunker." He can be heard making this comparison on "The Weekly Report," and uses the phrase in his latest essay, The Folly of Chronic Wars.

I was wondering what this phrase might mean, so i decided to watch an old American movie on Hitler's last days called, The Bunker, which features Sir Anthony Hopkins playing Der Fuhrer. After watching this movie, I came to the conclusion that "Hitler in the Bunker" just means that Obama is being stubborn about leaving office, like Hitler was about leaving Berlin or giving up the war effort, when it was clear they had lost and should surrender. So, Obama in the Bunker is just another exaggerated comparison that gives LYM a mental picture of a deranged madman on his last legs as his government is about to fall. Hiding out in a secret location, fearing for his life and safety, while vengefully plotting how to destroy his enemies, as his country is taken from him by invading armies.

I can't imagine a starker contrast to this picture than watching President Obama this morning sitting comfortably on a sofa chatting up the women of "The View", in front of television cameras and a live studio audience. I'm sorry, but watching that totally ruined the impact of that metaphor for me. Instead of sounding like a sophisticated metaphor, fully of historical truth for the initiated. It sounds like the ignorant use of a historical allusion that reveals the level of disconnect between those who watch televison and live in reality and those who choose to live in the imagined parallel universe created by Lyndon LaRouche.

"Hitler in the Bunker" is a phrase that Lyn hurls at Obama but that turns out to be a boomerang.

The image of someone "hiding out in a secret location, fearing for his life and safety, while vengefully plotting how to destroy his enemies, as his country is taken from him by invading armies" is a self-portrait by the great Renaissance artist Lyndon LaRouche.

Who will die soon, to the relief of the NEC. And Lyn knows this. He expects them to commit suicide, just like Hitler's nearest and dearest. But he's afraid of how happy they will be, in reality.

They are afraid of this, as well.I bet they do Beyond Psychoanalysis sessions on each other to try to deal with the guilt.

Chator What I found funny is that the LYM cult member looks like a mental patient with a sort of David Hinkleyesque mystique. The umbrella also makes this look like a Monty Python skit. On the other hand, the secret service or other orgs should always know that the end of the world hysteria could really trigger a member to go haywire. There is a never ending threat of a New Dark Ages with billions of people being killed with only the forces of the cult being able to stop it. These are very sick people with enough 55 gallon drums of connecto in the basement to justify anything to save humanity on behalf of Lyn.


The other joke is that when I read other articles in print about this, they never mentioned the cult. It is mentioned on web blogs though.


http://blogs.federaltimes.com/federa...ndon-larouche/





Larouche Palooza 2010!



-What's this? LPAC spambot and plagiarism?



http://www.wallstreetstocks.net/lpac...triple-curve-2





-Card table shrine in Pennsylvania with long, long time LCer Tony Esposito. Esposito has been bounced around the country to card table shrine for decades. Watch the video. Tony Esposito is so punch drunk that you can hear him mix up the NDPC candidates movement from the 1980s with the LYM who have squeezed him and other elderly LCers into the broiling sun or freezing winters in their later years.



http://www.berksmontnews.com/article...9981396203.txt








My thoughts exactly. Who can tally how many times Lyn secluded himself into a wine cellar, cleverly camauflaged as a Security Safe House over the decades? All of those emergencies also generated countless money mobes to stop another assasination threat and divert funds from the LC into either security scam artists or Rheingau futures.



xlcr4life@hotmail.com

The Man in the Iron Everything
 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...sea_clint.html

What a hoot. How painful it must be for Lyn not to be invited (vicariously) to the Clinton Family Ultimate Bash, when Lyn has done so much for the Clintons in the past, and when Bill Clinton interceded so decisively to free LaRouche from his "Man in the Iron Mask" imprisonment.

Bonus question: Who remembers that Man in the Iron Mask meme/theme/trope/motif?

Typical hysterical hyperbole. During his prison days, Lyn's face was not covered with a black velvet cloth, nor was his identity unknown. To put it mildly.

"Man in the Iron Mask"? Given that he mistook his colonoscopy for lobotomy, "Man in the Iron Diapers" is more like it.

Private [sic] Webcast
 

World Historical Announcement

Because of security concerns, LaRouche (LAR or Largest Analytic Rectum) cannot attend C. Clinton's wedding. This is obvious to anyone who knows anything about anyone [The Triple A Function]. Note, however, that:

1. A private webcast link has been established for LAR to view the ceremony and submit questions to THE PARTY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party#M...elated_parties) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_par...l_gathering%29).

2. Since LAR cannot hold two thought objects in his mind [sic] simultaneously other than "life versus death" which is continually swirling in his head creating tremendous TURBULENCE and providing the BASEMENT TEAM (now moved to ground level after the bulldozing and fill-in of the whole hole first announced on this board by Peter Tennenbaum) with physical data with which to study non-linear partial differential equations) an electrode has been inserted deep inside the reptilian section of LAR's brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lian_humanoids) (http://www.crystalinks.com/reptilianbrain.html) along with a large -- long and thick -- electrically charged pole in his rectum for possible back-channel communications. Note, crucially, that the back-channel enables two-way communications via pressure sensors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressur...ing_Technology), using, in particular, the piezo electric effect, or PEE (http://www.aurelienr.com/electronique/piezo/piezo.pdf) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezore...s_of_operation) (http://www.aurelienr.com/electronique/piezo/piezo.pdf) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezoelectricity):

Piezoelectricity is the ability of some materials (notably crystals, certain ceramics, and biological matter such as bone, DNA and various proteins) to generate an electric field or electric potential[1] in response to applied mechanical strain. The effect is closely related to a change of polarization density within the material's volume. An applied stress/strain induces a voltage across the material, and this voltage will reduce and dissipate if a current is allowed to flow. In order to run a chronic electric load (such as a light bulb) on a piezoelectric device, the applied mechanical stress must oscillate. For example, if you had such a device in your shoes, you could charge your cell phone while walking but not while standing. The word is derived from the Greek piezo or piezein (πιέζειν), which means to squeeze or press.

The piezoelectric effect is reversible in that materials exhibiting the direct piezoelectric effect (the production of an electric potential when stress is applied) also exhibit the reverse piezoelectric effect (the production of stress and/or strain when an electric field is applied). For example, lead zirconate titanate crystals will exhibit a maximum shape change of about 0.1% of the original dimension.

The effect finds useful applications such as the production and detection of sound, generation of high voltages, electronic frequency generation, microbalances, and ultra fine focusing of optical assemblies. It is also the basis of a number of scientific instrumental techniques with atomic resolution, the scanning probe microscopies such as STM, AFM, MTA, SNOM, etc., and everyday uses such as acting as the ignition source for cigarette lighters and push-start propane barbecues."


2. The electrode link to the brain can carry one of 256 standard channels, organized in a binary hierarchical structure represently "layers" of the PARTY APPARATUS (0 +(N+1) +1 + 2+ 4+ 8 + 16+ 32+ 64 + 128 = 256).

3. At level 1, LAR can see and hear either President William Clinton or Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, close personal friends and political allies (for proof, see, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder )

4. Note, however, that the COMMAND STRUCTURE of this hierarchy DEMANDS that someone assume a LEADERSHIP role to monitor all channels at each level and to receive and communicate an order to switch to one of the channels under his/her command. Therefore, at each level [b]there are N+1 operatives. This "1 or ONE" is the Level Commander, or LC

5. A Monad commands Level ZERO "0" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_%...rd_analysis%29). This MONAD is the totality of all zero-sum (+/- epsilon) exchanges of derivatives obligations, an amount that is now hyper-in-flatulence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatulence) and threatening to wipe out the human species.

6. Thus, via binary-coded-signals, picked up in the anal cavity during farting, LAR is able to communicate with the Monad and request channel changes; he can also submit questions. Conversely, the back-channel device, via oscillations, can reply to LAR's requests.

The above is a Forecast subject to error (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forecast_error).

Switching to another channel, we now bring you the end of...

"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations." [emphasis added by PT]

Abraham Lincoln


This STUB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stub_%2...d_computing%29) has been brought to you by Peter Tennenbaum, July 31, 2010 and is, officially, his 256th post on FACTNET although, apparently, multiple posts per day are counted as one post.

256 posts? Your grade is a gentleman's "C."

Sharp Response
 

Yes, thanks for noticing. You get an A for being an ASSET to this board and A genuine human being.

But now I am getting ready to sharpen my numbers and improve my grades.

If Warren Hammerman (sic) was correct about 256 Hz and DNA resonance, then, assuming that LAR's head is made from DNA material (a huge assumption given the existence of the non-biological LYN memo generator) a high AMPLITUDE resonance might result from the shockwave of my previous 256th post (or this one, depending on how the numbers work out).

We can only hope and pray that LAR's head will explode from within, "naturally", during filming with the new high definition camera. Mathematically, resonance occurs when the vibrational amplitude becomes unbounded, when it goes to infinity. The physics here on earth involves friction and other real world considerations that dampen these oscillations. On the other hand, resonant disintegrations of super structures have a long and storied history. WORLD HISTORICAL, BABY. Anything less would be immoral.

Imagine a live broadcast where Steinberger and Hofflelessness get splattered with LAR's brain juices from a resonant explosion of Lyn's head due to internal oscillations coupled with the sweet tone of Kepler et al. Will the sycophants lick their lips, swallow the precious bodily fluids, or spit it all out?

Long Live 256 Hertz AND THE CONTINUUM OF FREQUENCIES that the Good Lord provided us.

ALERT TO ALL SCIENCE PATRIOTS: We may need a modulation, or carrier wave. Assume your battle stations. We are defending our country from an insidious cancer -- AN EVIL THAT IS EATING US ALIVE. Launch your musical waveforms gently and lovingly. Let the Lord be the wave-guide.

Above all: Have fun!!!

Peter Tennenbaum July 31, 2010

Adventures in Special Relativity
 

Can't wait for the full production--meanwhile, here's the trailer.

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/15241

"Einstein and the Agapic Personality"--with the trailer's hilarious last line "So, lightning's pretty fast."

Next: General Relativity Leads the Troops into Battle.

Wow
 

Is this a self-parody? Has the organization finally developed the humility to laugh at itself? I mean, Hardly Schlonger and the other Show Jew gassing about matters on which they have zero expertise and less authority upon which to declaim? Surely, zees ees a joke, no?

Einstein had no patience with the Prussian state; how long do you think he would have tolerated these LaRouche knucklehead would-be authoritarians?

How can LaRouche try to wedge Einstein into his pantheon when the latter owed much of his philosophical development to Ernst Mach, no doubt one of the Sarpi faction?

And agape? What would LaRouche or any of his morally and emotionally twisted ogre epigonoi know about that without reference to the dictionary?

All a typical, if hysterical, LaRouche mash up of names and collops of concepts.

Lightning is pretty fast. Never did thunk upon it that way.

Larouche Palooza 2010



-Wonder of wonders, we start off with the proverbial crazy uncle and the Chelsea CLinton wedding.


http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/...sea_clint.html



-Spambot to the taret audience who know no better. Everything ends in September.

http://www.morningliberty.com/tag/wh...ears-larouche/

http://www.mail-archive.com/apfn@goo.../msg02018.html

-Card table shrine in NJ.

http://www.northjersey.com/news/opin...ate_stop_.html






-Howie has a new column on his blog.

http://www.struat.com/election/2010/...le-washington/


Dennis King has a new entry which is based on the famous "Whoa Boy" internal memo from the past.

http://www.lyndonlarouchewatch.com/larouche-newest1.htm





xlcr4life@hotmail.com

I am certainly not going to criticize Campus Watch for pointing out that Norton Mezvinsky was supporting the anti-Semite LaRouche last year (whether he still does, I don't know--but even if he backed away after LaRouche starting babbling about the Lost Continent of Atlantis at a Mezvinsky sponsored event at U. Conn., it's bad enough that Chelsea's uncle in law didn't publicly denounce LaRouche). As to why Uncle Norton wasn't invited to the wedding, has anyone considered that Clinton family consigliere James Carville (Debra Freeman's reputed phone pal) might have played a hand?

Considering the harsh stuff in the comments below the Campus Watch article, it's only fair to point out that Marc Mezvinsky's parents publicly opposed LaRouche in the mid-1980s when he was seriously trying to infiltrate the Democratic Party.

Mass confusion in the ranks
 

Absolutely correct Sancho. Let's see, at one point, Einstein was ranked fairly high in the LaRouche pantheon of "other great thinkers" but definitely below Riemann and Cantor and probably Gauss. LaRouche of course professed to complete what Einstein couldn't namely a general unified field theory to link all aspects of physics with biology and everything else in the cosmos. But then Einstein descended into the nether regions because he was a peacenik, of course he was Jewish if not religious, and worst crime of all he was associated with Bertrand Russell in the campaign for nuclear disarmament, see the Russell-Einstein Manifesto.
http://www.pugwash.org/about/manifesto.htm

And Einstein did a critique of Russell's theory of knowledge in which he lauds the contributions of Hume, Locke, Kant and later Russell, although warning against having metaphysics confuse the thinker who wants to gain actual insight into the empirical universe.
http://evans-experientialism.freeweb...in_russell.htm
"It will now be clear what is meant if I make the following statement: by his clear critique Hume did not only advance philosophy in a decisive way but also -- though through no fault of his -- created a danger for philosophy tin that, following his critique, a fateful "fear of metaphysics" arose which has come to be a malady of contemporary empiricistic philosophizing; this malady is the counterpart to that earlier philosophizing in the clouds, which thought it could neglect and dispense with what was given by the senses.

No matter how much one may admire the acute analysis which Russell has given us in his latest book on Meaning and Truth, it still seems to me that even there the specter of the metaphysical fear has caused some damage. For this fear seems to me, for example, to be the cause for conceiving of the "thing" as a "bundle of qualities," such that the "qualities" are to be taken from the sensory raw material. Now the fact that two things are said to be one and the same thing, if they coincide in all qualities, forces one to consider the geometrical relations between things as belonging to their qualities. (Otherwise one is forced to look upon the Afield Tower in Paris and a New York skyscraper as "the same thing.")* However, I see no "metaphysical" danger in taking the thing (the object in the sense of physics) as an independent concept into the system together with the proper spatio-temporal structure.

In view of these endeavours I am particularly pleased to note that, in the last chapter of the book, it finally turns out that one can, after all, not get along without "metaphysics." The only thing to which I take exception there is the bad intellectual conscience which shines through between the lines.

* Compare Russell's An Inquiry Into Meaning and Truth, 119-120, chapter on "Proper Names."

Although Einstein critiques Russell, he does it as a fellow thinker not with the typical idiotic diatribe that LaRouche and his followers invoke placing Russell in the ninth rung of Dante's inferno (at the very least) who wants to eliminate billions of human beings, etc. etc.

The Three Body Problem
 

I recall an item from an early Campaigner wherein L. Marcus states that he at one point had "internalized" certain minds, among whom were Einstein and, curiously, Felix Klein, a great mathematician, but no more so than his chief rival Poincare. Of course, this is like the raindrop boasting that it had "internalized" the oceans.

The fact that they keep tossing a bone to Einstein - who would have found LaRouche et Cie even more absurd than Schiller would have - suggests to me that they wish to make a Show Jew out of him for LaRouche. Why else would you drag out these two schlepps Schlonger and Fill, who are scientific illiterates, to front for this all-too-transparent stab at rehabilitation. (Anti-semite? What? Who? Me? I like Einstein!) I know that Fill some centuries ago had earned a degree in philosophy, but it would be hard to imagine that that credential would continue to have any cachet in an organization now entirely given over to the young vandals. And, as Boris' quote suggests, philosophy (i.e., jibberjabber) is not science (i.e., the formulation AND TESTING of hypotheses). But perhaps an ancient BA in philosophy is the closest thing left in that photon of an organization to "relevant" scientific "competence".

Is There a Less Euphonious Word Than 'Agapic'?
 

Great Scott! Who in there has a BA, ancient or otherwise, in philosophy, ancient or otherwise?

(I mean, now that Ken is dead and Molly is gone.)

I have a dim memory of Will Wertz having something of the sort, but the weight of improbability says ... no.

As to Einstein: Lyn's relationship to Einstein has been vexed, like so many things in Lyn's life.

He may be touting Einstein now as agapic, brilliant, whatever--but let's not forget his previous attacks on Einstein, whose impact spread throughout the organization for years. Witness the famous "geometry" classes Zeke and Chuck used to teach to kids of members, in which Chuck, for one, became apoplectic when a kid suggested that Einstein was a great thinker. Chuck went bananas, and not in a good way.

Or 21st Century mag's love affair with Maurice "Einstein was a Plagiarist" Allais, seen in the Fall 1998 issue, par exemple, which I believe includes not just a piece by Allais, but an editorial by Larry Hecht excoriating Einstein.

Unfortunately for Larry, almost immediately thereafter Lyn decided to change his line on Einstein--probably because more than anything else in this wide, wide world, Lyn loves to discomfit and undermine and psychologically torment his own members.

Oops.

It seems prescient now, looking back, that one of the Labor Committee's proudest early productions was the notorious "Oops" Campaigner.

Oops is right.

Wrote a long post defending Norton, whom I knew professionally in the early 1990s. Forgot that this forum software logs a person out before anything of substance can be written (at least if you are a slow-ish writer like me.)

Bottom line: Using some of the same smear tactics that we deplore coming from the ICLC/LYM is counter-productive, imo.

Bottom, bottom line: Norton is a genuinely kind person and a pretty decent scholar, too. I actually know this from experience and not via some second hand jibber-jabber from folks who'll use any weapon to defame a person without regard for the truth.

Not to mention the obvious sequel: "To the Moon, Alice!"

Better Yet
 

A person who was around the LaRouche org in 1973 says that "Whoa, Boy!" was probably a memo circulated by LaRouche from Morton Street while he was in semi-isolation, and that it is not based on a speech. However, the first page of the memo seems to be addressed to an audience. Does anyone remember a speech? I would like to nail this down, because if indeed LaRouche was addressing the memo to an imaginary audience in his head it would shed an interesting light on his theory of mental image-objects that replace the real person during sex and acts of violence, as well as his self-described practice of conducting imaginary conversations with and among dead white male philosophers in his head.

For the record here's the final version of the lyndonlarouchewatch.org posting re "Whoa, Boy" where I think I expressed things a bit more clearly:


August 2: LaRouche on violence, sex, subhuman "muck," and what it feels like to be "psychologically dead." This is a PDF of "Whoa, Boy!" (March 20, 1973), a discussion paper (possibly based on a speech), that LaRouche circulated to his followers as they were undergoing training for Operation Mop Up--a series of violent attacks on their leftwing enemies.

LaRouche wanted his warriors to understand that "feelings do not exist as feelings....To call forth a feeling is to call forth the movement of the object-image attached to the feeling." And he provided karate training as an example:

"It is of course necessary to acquire certain habits of movement, develop certain physiological apparatus, etc., but the essential thing to striking a killer blow, etc. is to 'learn' to call up the feeling of the killer stroke and have all the musculature move in a coordinated fashion to actualize the object-image attached to that 'trained' relationship between the objective striking and the recall of the feeling for striking. Call up the strongest feeling, have the object-idea of the movements attached to that feeling, and the blow will sensuously actualize the force of the feeling to the very limit of your physical capacity."

Ah, the feeling of satisfaction in striking a "killer blow"! Reminds me of the defensive wounds (as the forensic expert called them) that were detected on the arms of Jeremiah Duggan's body--and the unexplained blood on his passport.

Jeremiah's death occurred while he was participating in (but planning to flee from) a LaRouche indoctrination session in Wiesbaden, Germany on March 27, 2003--only one week after the 30th anniversary of LaRouche's killer-blow pronouncement.

Probably the individuals present in the LaRouche movement's Wiesbaden offices in the wee hours of March 27, 2003 either had never read or had retained only a dim memory of LaRouche's pre-Mop Up "Whoa, Boy!" memo. Nevertheless, over the years following Mop Up, LaRouche assiduously stimulated hatred, rage and sadism in his followers--and glorified violence in an attempt to influence both his followers and the general public--through a thousand and one other exhortations.

These rants made it inevitable that deaths would sooner or later begin to occur either directly at the hands of LaRouche's philosopher-thugs or through cowardly incitements of the type that occurred in Chiapas, Mexico; Spain; and elsewhere.

"Whoa, Boy!" is one of the earliest examples of LaRouche attempting to steer his followers into this path of hate, and may have been especially effective with some of them because he couched his message in pseudo-intellectual terminology, thus appealing to their vanity. The document is presented here as a kind of psycho-political daguerreotype depicting Der Abscheulicher's malignant narcissism--and his movement's resulting nastiness--in their germinal stage: the seed of the poisonous tree.

Some of you tickle me. What kind of person would I be if I didn't stick up for a friend? And HH, I'm a little surprised as I suspect that you and he would get along pretty famously were you to meet and exchange ideas.

It's definitely a memo and not a speech. It is part of a series of papers LaRouche wrote like Mother's Fears and Challenge of Left Hegemony that were first put out during the crisis of Mop Up and which were rough drafts of what became Beyond Psychoanalysis, the first essay of which appeared in the Fall of 1973.

These texts were very important in the history of the LC because they represented the first attempt at the "depoliticalization" of the organization as LaRouche pushed for total power. More and more members were told that if they objected to this or that policy it was because they had mental problems or a fear of taking state power and not because the specific policies launched by LaRouche over the heads of even some members of the NEC were a disaster. If you look at the concluding chapter to the Chris White Affair in Smiling Man ("One Man Coup by the Philosopher King"), I discuss Challenge of Left Hegemony in particular as especially illustrative of this series of papers.

As for the origins of it all, on Factnet there were long discussions of proto-BP-like sessions in Europe as far back as late 1972 if I recall correctly but my memory is a bit fuzzy just now. (It may have been even earlier.)

My guess, then, is that the Spring 1973 LaRouche ramblings were partly inspired by what happened in Europe and so he may not simply be talking to ghosts but he may be trying to figure out the results of his European adventures and elaborating on them.

Anyway the precise dates for the German meetings are documented on Factnet.

What we also know is that right after the Mop-Up debacle, LaRouche returned to Germany in the summer of 1973, the Konstantine George "deprogramming" happened in early August 1973; the BP Campaigner/NEC "sessions" began in the Fall of 1973 and then the Chris White "brainwashing" took place in very late 1973. There also was a related scandal about real psychological abuse of people at OTS (Officer's Training School) that Carol raised sometime during this period but was covered up. (This was sometime between the Chris White conference and the May 1973 Memorial Day conference.)

With the introduction of the Konstantine George saga, LaRouche made it seem that any NEC member who was unwilling to submit to the BP ego-stripping stuff was somehow a potential security risk as well. So these early papers proved very important to the transformation of the LC into a cult as they were the first signs of what was to come. This entire process made it that much more difficult to voice objections during the Chris White debacle because LaRouche created an environment where anyone who did object could be seen to be "programmed" etc. Hence the Alice Weitzman incident.

Well the first thing I would tell him would be to read my book on LaRouche on LaRouche Planet. Frankly, I never heard of him or his research before reading about him on Factnet so I know nothing about his academic views except that he is critical of Israel's policies towards the Palestinians, hardly an original idea one would think.

But no matter what his views are on any specific topic, to associate with LaRouche in such a naive way is to invite scorn. Just on that point alone I have to wonder what he must have been thinking even from the standpoint of his own desire to sound credible. Having LaRouche speak on foreign policy is like having Pat Robertson speak on hurricanes.

But, then again, even Ed Asner played footsie with LaRouche and I loved him as Mr. Grant on Mary Tyler Moore.

So these things do happen.

Thanks for adding context. Without understanding the time and place it's easy to see the memos of that series as just bizarre pseudophilosophy or else as sexual pathology of some type. "Whoa, Boy", like the memo you analyzed in your book, is more than that. I focused above on the karate Mop Up angle to help in documenting the seeds of violence in the group for the Justice for Jeremiah effort. I'll examine other aspects of the memo later.

The German encounter sessions took place at Munchrath. Look at post #630 by Eaglebeak and #629 by Borismaglev to start. But there was a long discussion of Munchrath and its importance on Factnet around the time of these posts by other people as well.

By serendipity, I found my old copy of The New Dark Ages Conspiracy by Carol White, who should have known better. She spends a lot of time talking about how Bertrand Russell was sent to corrupt Einstein, Neils Bohr and those wonderful German rocket scientists from Pennemunde (pages 217-226). So according to her theory, Russell would spread pacifism through Einstein, Bohrs and company while ensuring that the rocket scientists were available for strikes against the Soviet Union.
After going into an "analysis" of how the British aristocracy attempted to coopt Einstein as their resident scientific "pet", while acknowledging that his views were being bowdlerized by them (Russell especially) she then goes after Einstein for his affiliation with Zionism in the 1920s. However, she does end her synopsis on Einstein by saying that he never capitulated to the evil perverter of science, Neils Bohr who, according to Carol was the propagator of the uncertainy principle (I always thought it was Schrodinger and Heisenberg but apparently they suffered under the influence of the evil Neils Bohr). In the end though Carol does hold up Einstein as a figure who did resist the intrusions of Russell and supposedly Bohr and Heisenberg from making science totally subjective and independent of causation, so at best you could say that at least Carol had an ambivalent although respectful attitude towards Einstein.
:confused:

Cowboys and Indians
 

Actually Einstein and Schroedinger wore the white hats while Bohr and the Copenhagen School wore the black hats. Schroedinger's tiny What Is Life? appears to have been one of the few books that Lyn actually read, along with Oparin's opus (available in a cheap Dover edition). Although I agree with the dispositions of the white hats, no one can dispute the predictive power of the craziness that extended from the hands of Bohr, Heisenberg, et al. But when one can get almost every one of his forecasts wrong and claim that they are each right, who needs theories with predictive power?

By the way, I've always wondered whether C.S. Peirce had been an early (unacknowledged) influence on Lyn. Oh, but then that would have required the Young Kant - or was it the Young Leibniz? - to read, think, and - horrors - reflect.

Lyn and the Great Books--Grudge Match
 

At various points in his career, if that's the right word, Lyn thought highly of Heisenberg....

As to the pro-Einstein/anti-Einstein phases of the "Conceptual History of the Labor Committees," Carol was definitely associated with the pro-Einstein, or at least Einstein-neutral, faction.

Chuck and Larry were not. Larry's editorial on Einstein was perhaps his maiden effort as the editor of 21st Century; he became editor, obviously, only after Carol had quit.

At that point, the team of Tony Papert and Larry Hecht became the arbiters (under Lyn, of course) of "science" in the org.

Tony and Larry would sit in one of the smaller rooms of the 21st Century offices at Sycolin Road for hours and hours and hours, thinking their important thoughts. It was deeply disturbing for those around them.

What there never was, was the capacity actually to examine an idea in detail. The organization adopted LaRouche's psycho-intellectual defense mechanism of Attacking the Bad, Slavering over the Good.

Simply to think about content was tantamount to heresy. Tony's contribution to the first Children of Satan pamphlet was a case in point. Here was a man who was crafting the org's attack on Leo Strauss and its specifics by lifting wholesale from Shadia Drury--and was finally forced to admit, in a public forum at (where else?) St. John's College, that he himself had never read Leo Strauss.

He defended himself by saying it was "unreadable." Well and good, but if you haven't read it, you're not really qualified to talk about it. Are you?

And that, Curious10, is why Norton's embrace of Lyndon LaRouche as a serious intellectual is open to so much question. Because whatever it is, Lyn hasn't read it, and he can't talk about it (pace Sancho because, yes, in the early days, Lyn did read a couple of books).

With Carol also keep in mind that she wrote Energy Potential: Towards a New Electromagnetic Field Theory (NY: Campaigner Publishers, 1977) that was dedicated to the (gasp) British scientist Michael Faraday and as I recall was relatively sane. (I looked at it in a library about a year or so ago.)

The book also included translations of some of Riemann’s essays and as such it was part of the translation project that also resulted in the Cantor Campaigner. Energy Potential one of those books like Rosa L book on the Industrial Development of Poland that marked the LC’s last gasp at sanity before the “British invasion.”

As for Oparin and Schrodinger, here is a section of my appendix “Machines of Communism” from Smiling Man where I quote from Slava Gerovitch: From Newspeak to Cybernetics: A History of Soviet Cybernetics'.

[In the early 1950s] "From an ideological perspective, potentially one of the most damaging associations of cybernetics was Wiener's reference to the work of the famous physicist Erwin Schrodinger. Back in the 1930s, militant Soviet philosophers who opposed quantum mechanics had made Schrodinger, a leading Western researcher in this field, a target of ideological attacks; they had accused him of "a deviation toward subjective idealism." His inroad into biology in the 1944 book What Is Life? further complicated the situation. ... In the spring of 1948, at a meeting at the Institute of Physics, Aleksandr Oparin, the head of the Biology Division of the Academy of Sciences, called What is Life? "adverse to our ideology" and "harmful." Attacking Schrodinger became an essential part of the Lysenkoites' campaign against genetics." 110-111

That is a common problem and very frustrating when it happens. What I do is just write an email to myself and then save it to either add more material or be able to access it at another computer. The end product is just copy/pasted on factnet.org and I usually do a few previews to catch spelling or context issues as it often reads differently once posted.

What I wonder is how the cult hooked Norton Mezvinsky into paying for Lyn's visit. The money must be so low that maybe there was not enough to hijack to ship Lyn and the entourage. Maybe this is now a poorman's cult with Lyn going low budget with a Chevy Aveo rental intead of the armored Mercedes Benz of the past.


This popped by memory for the one time I was able to talk to Helga's former Best friend for life Shiela Jones before a national conference. Sheila was the darling of Helga and was now involved in being a producer of plays in the Chicago office. While I was with Sheila, she mentioned that the LC should be writing plays since we know so much and then some compared to Marlowe, Shakespeare and others. In the course of this she mentioned that she was going to work on this and hoped to present some sort of short act at the National Conference.

For some reason, the mysterious hand was at work and I told her that I was working on a short play called The Honeymoonies as well based on a bus driver, his sewer dept best friend along with their two wives. With a straight face I told Shiela that the lead guy is named Ralph and he always wants a get rich quick scheme. He sees a cult of Krishnas on the street corner on his bus route and the money they are making. He then tries to get his best friend Ed Norton and his wife to join a cult he is starting. Ralph's wife then puts a stop to the whole thing and Ralph explodes in the room.

It ends with Ralph screaming "Alice, Alice, one of these days, one of these days, pow, zoom, right to the Moonies!".

Needless to say, Shiela did not quite enjoy this preview and generally did not view TV as being worthy of mortals time.

TV was one of the vice I had which kept me sane in the cult and always with one foot out of the door and my brains above the Bizarro World. I was watching one of my favorite shows on my DVR this weekend, Penn and Teller's "BUll$hit" on SHOtime. The episode which gave me a Larouche flashback was on Area 51 and UFO conspiracists. I do not have the Doctor's name, but he was from a neurological research hospital and had some very fancy MRI slices of brain acitivity on his computer screen. What caught my attenton is when he mentioned that there is a mental condition where the person has to have elaborate government plots to kill them or stop them to prove that they are very important in the world and they have secret info which no one else has! WTF!. I was expecting him to wave a copy of EIR next instead of talking about UFO/Alien conspiracy people.

Lyn's value as a fool is well known to us on the web, but there are so many others that have eclipsed him in the crazy dept that it sure seems like that 330 million dollars and 40 years of lunacy should get you fame and a cup of of coffee.



This past week I received the latest copy of MAD magazine in the mail. In the new issue they have a two page spread about anti Obama nuts. At the bottom of the page you will find Obama as Hitler on a big carry sign. Not a drop of ink about Lyn or the cult and they have the lady carrying the sign with a GOP elephant pin .


When is mentioned Howie's new blog entry it was about technocracy.


http://www.struat.com/election/2010/...gton/#comments



In returning to his blog I see that there is quite a bit of back and forth with someone about this field. This is something of keen interest to explore.




Larouche Palooza



-I do not think that the Tea Party will ever be able to fumigate themselves after being stinkbombed by the cult.


http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opi...0,464486.story


-We find the good work Rachel Brown has done for the Tea Party here.


http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po...ds_to_fra.html





-It looks like the spambots the cult has sent out have regrouped to form a Larouche web site.



http://girl8teen.com/forums/Lyndon-LaRouche.html





xlcr4life@hotmail.com

http://www.youtube.com/user/TechnocracyInc2

Apparently the natural landscape of Ferndale, Washington is a mass of ones and zeros.

The movement has been growing exponentially the last five years or so… because of the internet.

Sure.
And I've reached another dead end.

Mostly we are attracting really smart young people… my opinion anyway… from around 14 to 28 years old for the most part. People sick of fake alternative things… like Zeitgeist, political crap, fake solutions of reform.

Well, in their defense, nobody's turned up dead fleeing a "Tech Inc" conference.

How freaky is it that on your blog one guy says he believed LaRouche ordered a bunch of Technocracy stuff in the 1960s!

In a phone conversation back in the middle 1980s, the late Bob Miles (pastor of the Mountain Church, an Identity outfit, and formerly a Klan leader) told me that LaRouche had been into Technocracy in the 1940s or 50s. I can't recall if he'd heard it from LaRouche or from someone who'd been around Technocracy in those years. Miles thought this was significant. I never had the time to follow up on it, and am glad that HH has done so.

I personally encountered Technocracy in the summer of 1959 when I was wandering around the Pacific Northwest. I met a member in Vancouver, B.C.; when he heard I was from North Carolina (a state whose citizens would have rarely shown up in B.C. during those years), he asked me to speak at the local Technocracy meeting that night--they wanted to hear about segregation. I spoke and told them I thought the civil rights movement would eventually win, although I didn't really know much about it at that point. I recall dimly it was a shabby meeting hall but the people were very polite, deplored segregation and had an interest, like me, in science fiction. My antenna were up after a brief visit to the I AMer compound near Mount Shasta a couple of weeks earlier, but I came away from the Technocracy meeting with a positive impression, for what it's worth.

LaRouche was always looking for technological fixes, despite his talk about Marxism (in the early days) and mass movements and the like. If it wasn't talking about fixing exchange rates and restoring gold, it was maglevs and such. To me it goes back to the positivists in the 1890s and later who brought us the utopian ideal that technology was going to solve all of man's problems (maybe adding in a little redistributionist philosophy that if we just took so much income from the wealthy and gave it to the poor no one would be in poverty). I certainly recall that Marx and others had their run ins with the positivists. When I read this college course description of the work of Auguste Comte and his belief in a scientific-engineering elite that was going to replace the religious orders that dominated mankind's thinking, LaRouche came immediately to mind.
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture25a.html

Quotes from the above show how closely LaRouche's pattern of thinking mirrors Comte.
"The task then, was to provide a new religion and a new faith. And, of course, a new clergy was needed, a higher clergy. To replace the Catholic clergy Comte proposed a scientific-industrial elite that would announce the invariable laws of a new social order. The ancien regime and its destruction by the French Revolution had to be synthesized and made meaningful by a new clergy of elites: the technocrats. This was absolutely necessary to meet the problems brought about by the collapse of the ancien regime as well as those problems created by industrial society. This insight, religious in nature and intuitive in form, was then reformulated by Comte and his followers in terms of what they were to call a "positive science."

And doesn't this sort of remind you of LHL?

"Before we leave off our discussion of Comte a few final thoughts seem to be in order. The goal of Comte’s positive polity was never an affluent society. Affluence meant very little to Comte. Instead, what he sought, indeed, what he spent his entire career trying to obtain, was moral order. The positive religion urged everyone "to live for others." Comte perceived the existence of class conflict -- he understood the selfish character of the capitalist. He wished to see an end to class conflict but not by the destruction of one class by another, as Marx had suggested. Instead, Comte sought to moralize one and all, a cure for humanity not for one class at the expense of another."

Whoa, Boy! was part of the Beyond Psych canon at the CEC. Along with the BP paper, the "important" sections of the Puerto Rican Socialist Party one, and a page or two of the Feuerbach one. Whoa, Boy! is the one that got dragged out when the executive were prying into the sexual lives of the LYMers.

For what it's worth, I'm familiar with the martial arts / killing blow metaphor from other places. I've seen piano teachers talking about learning piano in much the same way. It's a more elaborate version of Yoda's "do or do not, there is no try" argument.

You are right about the metaphor since it is virtually an axiom in karate, Zen, and for any other activity that requires total concentration. I think however, in Lyn's case it is being used more in the militaristic sense, since this former Quaker conscientious objective loves to imagine himself as the world's greatest military planner since Gen. Patton and also liked to use the metaphor in the sense of "slaying" psychological fears like mothers' fears.

I have met Uncle Norton. As curious guy has stated, he's a very nice man, and appears stable. His conclusions warrant some questions about his capacities after four decades behind the podium, but its my experience that all elder professors are short a few screws. Still, he's a nice guy.

I remember that show at CCSU last May. Uncle Norton expressed dismay at the veritable street fighting a la Berlin 1932 between LYMer pamphleteers and opponents occurring all across campus. Then he announced he'd personally funded the DEAR LEADER's expenses for him to be a CCSU so people wouldn't complain to the Department Chair or school president.

Finally, the DEAR LEADER was the last speaker in a series on the middle east, and it was also the last event before exams in that semester. Uncle Norton retired a week later.

Having Lyndon Baines LaRouche appear at that moment was highly strategic. When Uncle Norton referred to the DEAR LEADER as controversial, he knew what he was talking about. And he was not about to take any chances.

Uncle Norton's middle east lecture series was already a target by critics for its general anti-Zionist sentiment. Adding the DEAR LEADER to the butt-end of the series was the final nail in the coffin. Uncle Norton figured nobody could hurt him after he retired.

But then his nephew married Chelsea. And the CCSU imbroglio was torn open again. Poor uncle Norton.

Concerning THE AGONY OF JOHN HOEFLE...

It would appear poor John has been demoted. Formerly occupying the all important middle seat during the Weekly Report, John has been unceremoniously kicked to the right side, while the DEAR LEADER has assumed the central seat for himself. Henceforth, it is John who approaches from the right pane, much like evil villains in classic film.

I presume Lyndon Baines LaRouche was tired of being the slumped-over villain appearing from the right pane.

Ah yes. THE AGONY OF JOHN HOEFLE.

I found most significant that the karate quote was placed in the context of a "philosophical" outlook in which people outside of LaRouche's mind are regarded as object-images in his head. In the case of karate itself the object-image of the human being is not even mentioned, and we are left with only the mental image of the pure action itself. This all fits with LaRouche's extreme narcissism in which other people only exist as extensions of his own needs.

Also, you'll note that he describes karate as a "sport," although exercises in preparation for Mop Up were already under way. I'd say the reference to "sport" at that point was pure deception, or at least pure euphemism. If he'd said it a year earlier -- without the object-image solipsism -- it would of course have been just a commonplace of sports (or concert pianist) training dressed up with a bit of philosophical jargon.

In political science this phenomenon is called Stalinism, Dennis, as LaDouche himself explains in his "The Question of Stalinism Today."