LaRouche continued 6

[larouchetruth]

XLCr, thanks for the link to Howie's blog, which includes a link to a blog entry that he says you missed (which you clearly did), which bears posting here in its entirety. It is too perfect a capturing of the essence of the soullessness of these LYMsters, of the degree to which the normal human mode of interaction has been replaced by a frightening blankness, zombieness. We've certainly seen this manifested in various video clips in recent months. Here is an absolutely perfect description of one person's attempt to let them know that even though they disagree on politics, this person sees them as fully human--or at least did until he tried to apologize for blowing them off earlier in the day. Enjoy:

http://68freesamples.blogspot.com/20...-personal.html

Political is Personal Wednesday, November 11, 2009

I’ve always wondered what I would say to them if they ever spoke to me: bundled up grad student-aged white men and women wearing dark blue and orange standing behind a table with Barack Hitler’s face on it. They always look unassuming and quiet. Approachable, but not like they’d have anything interesting to say. The kids who only have conversations with professors and the seats on either side of them are empty in lecture. It’s nice that in a community this large they can find each other and unite. There were three of them there today.

No, they had never talked to me before. But I always wanted to talk to them. Tell them how ridiculous I think they are. Tell them how highly I think of the man in the House. Tell them how my dad listens to their radio station for comedic relief after his day at work. Negative brain waves are as far as I have gotten and with the stern, solid super hero capes strapped so tightly around their necks, I’m not positive the negativity registered. They’re still desperately trying to save the world.

“Hello!” one of them said to me, cheering and hopeful as I turned the corner to walk into the Husky Union Building. Our president’s enlarged face was blowing in the bitingly chilled Seattle wind and he likely felt it moving the artificial tiny black moustache they placed on him as a “political statement.” Their shifting feet moved across bricks that blanketed a school which suggested Dreams From My Father as summer reading. I wonder if they read.

“No thank you.” It was the first thing that came to mind and thus forced itself through the bit between my lips as I walked past them with the most distance attainable, refusing to make eye contact with the people who I think are so mislead, with whom I entirely disagree. As I jetted through the liberal and conservative faces of the University’s students lunching in the cafeteria-like basement of the HUB, I experienced that joyful “hello” resounding on a reel of guilt through my consciousness. He got up today to the same Seattle I did. Put on his clothes as I did: one leg at a time, right? He walked to work, to volunteer behind that table probably thinking, I’m going to change some minds today, enlighten some people. Get them educated, you know? He must anticipate rejection. He has to in a city like this, and with such a bold statement as the sign hanging from his sad empty table, he must experience it often. But he pushes through. That’s commendable.

“Hello!” There it was, in my head.

After the shuffle of getting a dissatisfactory lunch as I always do at the HUB and eating it, miscommunications with a barista, and a disagreement with a pastry bag, I was still haunted by the rude remark I handed to the optimistic Obama-hater. I returned with the mismade latte and an apology.

“I just completely blew you guys off,” I said, looking at them directly in their ice-cold eyes, trying to reach any substance and pull it to the surface. “You said hello to me and I just totally ignored you.” Their lips pursed while they blinked. I offered them my mistake latte. Shifting feet over red bricks. They felt awkward. I pressed on: “You know, just because I don’t—” I had to stop for a moment. The idea of three souls staring right into me, hardly listening to me, seriously judging me, scared me more than anything else in the world. But that’s the Republic of Discomfort they step into every time they move behind that table. It was suddenly the most important thing I could possibly say to them. So I continued. “Just because I don’t see the world as you do doesn’t mean I don’t recognize you as people.”

If we were cartoons, the high-pitched “boink-boink” noise would have accompanied their stark blinks. There wasn’t even a hint of thought indicated by their one-layer, wide-open eyes and pale faces. Did they know what that was, dehumanization? The term doesn’t exactly fit comfortably with their agenda. I wondered what kind of shapes their hands made inside their pockets.

And they still hadn’t said anything. Not a sound except for the cartoon “boink-boink” of their opening and shutting eyelids resonated in that vast brick-covered space. Not an idea of what they were thinking (did they have thoughts?). No energy at all. Not a single inkling.

“Okay well. I just wanted to say I’m sorry.” Boink-boink. Compassion?, they may have been thinking, what’s that? Now my feet were shifting. “Alright—” I turned to walk away then turned back, “have a nice day!” The cold wind hit me and felt warm. I laughed to myself then was stopped by a voice from the table, the first voice I’d heard from LaRouche since the initiating hello that started this entire fiasco.

“Would you like something to read?”

I turned around. “No thank you, I’m pretty set in my ways. Thank you though!” My smile followed me all the way to work, where I entered a building to find the boss who makes fun of me for recycling absent. Figures. My latte was likely still untouched on that ugly table, getting colder faster than any latte had ever chilled. I got now why they’re always so bundled up.

An hour into things, a paper got slapped down on my desk. It was wrinkled and had writing in two columns. A diagonal crease ran down its body like it had been carried for a while. I turned immediately around. “Hi, by the way.” And looked back at the paper. First Steps in the LaRouche Plan, it read. How had it stalked me across campus? It, like my friendship with Erich, tight-roped between politically strange and personally hilarious. After all, personal is political right?

Boink-boink.

“I’m just surprised that these people are on a college campus,” my likely conservative (Jedi, of course) boss said.

“I know, what is this, 1980?” Shaking it off, I left brewing for a later hour.

When I got home, I read the last paragraph of the flyer:

And that’s what we have to make clear now. So, don’t waste our time, bringing up subjects that are not worth discussing! Because, either we’re going to do what I just indicated, or we’re not going to exist. So there’s no point in discussing anything different!

I read it a second time and a third.

I felt the soil beneath my feet from Sachenhausen in Germany and closed my eyes to see the baracks and the ovens.

I saw the Jewish museum in Berlin.

I read it a fourth time. And I wondered why they don’t call themselves dictators with such a demanding message. What kind of training had those extremists gone through? If Obama is Hitler, who are they?

Boink-boink.
Posted by Kelsi Jensen at 1:54 AM

[xlcr4life]

Originally Posted by larouchetruth

XLCr, thanks for the link to Howie's blog, which includes a link to a blog entry that he says you missed (which you clearly did), which bears posting here in its entirety.

I use google and yahoo for a daily search for any thing which has the word Larouche mentioned. There are often a blog or article which does not show up in my mail box which is why I always link Howie here as he will have material I do not find.

More the merrier!

I am now skipping some redundent mentions of Lyn in using him to describe someone else's lunacy since that point is basically a given today. Since I only have a few minutes each day for this, I tend to post the bigger stories of which that one sure is.


LTruth I have been bothered lately by this LPAC release by Lyn which I posted a few days ago.

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12391


In reading that release, tell me if you have not read the exact same lines from Lyn in the past.

Lyndon LaRouche said, "It's a fraud! It's a plan to decrease the world's population by two-thirds. It's a desperate effort to keep control for the moment. It's bad bull$hit,— that's the only way to describe it. Don't give it any credibility. They are who they are, out for genocide. Don't get excited about it; it's not going to work

I swear that Lyn has uttered the exact same line, with maybe a wee bit of difference to LYMsters in meetings which have been reported on in memos or in LPAC releases over a variety of topics.

My gut feeling is that Lyn erupts like this whenever a LCer or LYMster gives a short report on something in a straightforward way without either mentioning Lyn as the solution or how it all ties in with whatever Lyn has as the boogeyman for that fiscal period.


I reread that release to see if maybe I was making a mistake in how a company like Cargil with 160,000 worldwide employees has a business model which includes killing off 4.5 BILLION people.

I also looked at the Monsanto web site to see how they are diverting their R&D resources to working with Cargill and John Deere in killing off 4.5 billion people as Lyn is predicting.

Somehow, the results were not the same for me as it is for a current member or Lyn.


http://www.monsanto.com/responsibili...t.asp?WT.svl=1

Produce More. Conserve More. Improve Farmers' Lives

Grasp tomorrow’s challenge. By 2050, say United Nations’ experts, our planet must double food production to feed an anticipated population of 9.3 billion people. (That figure is 40 percent higher than today’s 6.6 billion.)

Then factor in a pressured water supply, an energy-supply crunch and climate change. How do we surmount these obstacles? Agricultural innovation holds a key solution – and Monsanto pledges to do our part.

By 2030, Monsanto commits to help farmers produce more and conserve more by:

Developing improved seeds that help farmers double yields from 2000 levels for corn, soybeans, cotton, and spring-planted canola, with a $10 million grant pledged to improve wheat and rice yields.

Conserving resources through developing seeds that use one-third fewer key resources per unit of output to grow crops while working to lessen habitat loss and improve water quality.

Helping improve the lives of all farmers who use our products, including an additional five million people in resource-poor farm families by 2020.

That’s sustainable agriculture. And that’s what Monsanto seeds are all about.

Sustainability Management Conference 2009


The Sustainability Management Conference 2009 was held in Denver, Colorado on February 11-13. The conference discussed how to incorporate agriculture into an initiative to help produce more, while conserving more. A collection of producers, ag businesses, industry reps, and academics attended the conference.
Learn more about the conference

Of course the business practises and results of using various seedstocks, information and supplies is always open to view and critique. However, what this LPAC release is to me is nothing but another exercise in eropding critical thinking skills of members in the cult.


To be in the cult today is very different with the web. Unlike the past, one can search anything and find actual sites run by the eeeevil orgs whom are all after Lyn. For a current LYMster, you can read Lyn's nonsense and then go here.

http://www.fao.org/wsfs/world-summit/en/

Here you can search all day and night to find how the UN world summit seems to be talking about INCREASING food production and DECREASING deaths while Lyn has given you the opposite.

An agenda for action

Poor countries need the development, economic and policy tools required to boost their agricultural production and productivity. Investment in agriculture must be increased because for the majority of poor countries a healthy agricultural sector is essential to overcome hunger and poverty and is a pre-requisite for overall economic growth.

The gravity of the current food crisis is the result of 20 years of under-investment in agriculture and neglect of the sector. Directly or indirectly, agriculture provides the livelihood for 70 percent of the world's poor............................................

Summit boosts agriculture to end hunger

The three-day World Summit on Food Security ended here today after committing the international community to investing more in agriculture and eradicating hunger at the earliest date. FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf, who hosted the event, said the Summit marked "an important step towards the achievement of our common objective - a world free from hunger".
Renewed commitment to end hunger
World leaders convened at FAO Headquarters for the World Summit on Food Security today unanimously adopted a declaration pledging renewed commitment to eradicate hunger from the face of the earth sustainably and at the earliest date.

Holy 1984 LYM and LYMettes. That is also not just a good book but also the year many of you were born.


This must be hitting a critical point in the cult as we have two vectors of boomers who are questioning and leaving along with LYM members who are questioning and leaving as well. In the prior years of the cult the vectors had Boomers staying and offering their kids and others leaving after the death of Ken Kronberg. The LYM grew following the Iraq war and has had a shall we say, entropic death spiral following the death of Jeremiah Duggan from a very slow start to a faster loss as they get laughed out of every venue they try to recruit in.

The massive press coverage in August involving our favorite Larouche-Hitler Hippie Chick AKA Rachel Brown was really a massive press coverage and support for Barney Frank where Rachel was uttered to card table shrines as the weather grew colder.

It is in this environment that I believe Lyn issued this new LPAC release.

As always, LPAC releases are really for the members to reafirm their leaving the real world to the play world of the LYM where they will believe that they are leaving the fantasy world of life and entering a real world of the Larouche cult.

The recent predictions of Lyn for an October collapse in which entire nations will cease to exist and the hillarious LYM dancing around this tells me that many members really expected this to take place and their entire life of devotion to Lyn, both multi decade and multi year to produce spectacular payoffs in recogniton and reward. Instead, the reward was either freezing at a card table shrine or being glued to a phone in an boiler room.

Lyn's intensity against the FEF in the 1980s for those who were not around revolve around money at the time and some of our very smart people like Eric L, Steve B and Moe L leaving. Lyn must be furious to see that Robert Zubrin, a card table lifer if he stayed in has a PHD, patents, a real org involved with Mars, sells books from real publishers and has been a recognised leader in the field of space travel and highly influential in planned Mars expeditons.

BTW, Zubrin was the one who did a lot of research and writing on Kepler back then. He also wrote some junk about science fiction being evil, but what the hey, we were all nuts to a degree. Now he writes science fiction.

Lyn on the other hand is a convict who runs a cult circus who is a laughed at old man and has members who can find The Mars Society in seconds on a computer.

http://larouchepac.com/node/12424

BRAINWASHED!

BRAINWASHED!

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

November 16, 2009



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


For those among us with any significant experience with commonplace instances of victims of what is called "brainwashing," there should have been nothing surprising in the fact that certain former associates of a political association, who had spent as much as decades of their life briefly either in or long-since departed from of that association, should have been changed, by what is appropriately called "brainwashing," into a decades-long obsession with hatred against me, not for any actual reason of what I might have done to them, but for what they, seemingly without rational intent, attempted to do on behalf of those well-known enemies of mine on which they had come to depend for the fears which controlled a crucial aspect of their personal mental life.

For many relevant such cases, for which the case history is more or less defined, the nature of their mental aberration should be obvious: the commonplace term which can, and should be used to describe such behavior most efficiently, is "brainwashing," as that phenomenon might be described as follows.

Over the recent forty years, there has been an accumulation of what are fairly identified as "pathological" cases of departed, and somewhat depraved more or less long-departed members our association. There is a pattern of such cases, chiefly directed by certain intelligence organizations. The behavior of those persons is a clear case of mental illness to be considered as the root of their sick behavior, even years, even decades later, today.

I explain.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The characteristic distinction of those former associates which had largely defined their personalities, as much as decades since I last encountered them directly, is usually obsessively irrational hatred against me. The relevant evidence testifies to the sometimes powerful role which fear of my enemies provokes among a certain class of my enemies' victims and other dupes.

The common term of description for such cases is "brainwashed:" a fear-driven, obsessive degree of deformation of the victim's personality, that in a form and degree which persists like a permanent mental disease-syndrome over a span of decades of the remainder of the life of such persons, and even spreads to other members of their families, and more widely, still today. That obsession by such persons, still, years or even decades later, is not to be considered "normal mental behavior." In such cases, the word "brainwashing" comes to one's lips.

How are once fine, and, relatively speaking, intelligent persons, even of formerly high moral standards, transformed into the often more or less permanent state of depravity exhibited by the types of cases to which I am referring here?

The simpler description of the cause for such failures of formerly superior qualities of once young personalities, is nothing other than "fear," particularly, in most relevant cases, fear of my enemies' seeming capricious power to deliver fear or favor, a kind of mental and moral weakness often induced among the victims of classroom, matrimonial goals, or employment. This "behaviorist" type of syndrome among victims of such influences, is sometimes identified as "brainwashing," a term which applies in a number of cases which I have been enabled to examine more closely.

I illustrate the nature of the problem so posed for consideration, by a real-life example, from the 1980s transactions within the science organization known then as The Fusion Energy Foundation. The subject is the moral and mental illnesses which are native to the commonplace depravities of a society, or a contemporary scientific community, which manages the "human animals in the cages of society" who are regulated through the "behaviorist" instrumentalities of the creatures' perceptions of pleasure and of pain.

Consider a case which illustrates the point:

The Disease Called Newton

Two nationwide assemblies, held in Leesburg, Virginia during the mid-1980s, featured an enraged eruption among a large ration of the scientists participating. The reaction was provoked at the first of these two sessions by my putting on the table, the need to turn attention to the crucial importance of the work of Johannes Kepler for overcoming certain blocks in the work of science at that time.

The wild outbursts against my remark from some of the leading U.S. scientists participating there, are typical of the way in which what is fairly identified as the empiricist mode of "behaviorist forms of brainwashing" dominates not only the entire policy-shaping of President Barack Obama up to this time, but, also, much of the social life, including national policies, as in the U.S.A. and Europe, still today.

The absolutely unique originality of the crucial, keystone quality of contributions to modern science by such successive keystones as Brunelleschi, Cusa, Leonardo, Fermat, Kepler, Leibniz, Kaestner, Gauss, and Riemann, is beyond any competent degree of doubt. Nonetheless, entirely as a result of mass-brainwashing, by "behaviorist" methods, of many otherwise qualified modern scientists (excepting those of radically positivist persuasions, such as the followings of Ernst March and Bertrand Russell), there is absolutely no scientifically competent reason for rejecting the crucial part of Kepler in defining all modern science, especially that of astrophysics. It is only outright incompetence which would permit any ostensibly trained modern scientist to uphold Isaac Newton as a salient intellectual figure of modern science.

Why do some otherwise competent scientists defend the virtually religious form of worship of Isaac Newton on matters such as the uniquely original discoveries for mathematical physics of Kepler and Leibniz? The answer is "brainwashing"! Fear of being penalized in their careers by a brutish "Babylonian priesthood" which reigns, through certain career-making-and-breaking agencies, which determine who is appointed and ruined, according to the dictatorial powers enjoyed by what is nothing different in character than a Babylonian priesthood, or that of a Tower of Babel!

Or, the Case of Economy

Although it must be admitted, that the circulation of my economic forecasts, which began as professional reports during the latter half of the 1950s, was not widely presented in a relevant degree among economists until the late 1960s; those forecasts have always been accurate in respect to which the claims I made for them, from 1956-57, to the present day. In nearly all cases, every putatively rival economist, had been in error on these matters, consistently, until a recent time. Only recently, have serious forecasts been presented which had any relevant competence in respect to those matters of forecasting in which my work is of outstanding global significance for sane governments of the world today.

The case of my December 1971 debate with Professor Abba Lerner at Queens College is exemplary; since then, my forecasting is widely accessible among all relevant economists and governments, all of which had generally failed to come up to the quality of standard which I have represented.

The question should be, therefore, since so many among the news media and other relevant circles, world-wide, spent so much effort on denouncing me, always fraudulently, why has any serious agency of government or major economic functions, doubted the competence of my forecasting? Shall we believe that they are each insane; or, shall we believe, rather, that they have found it more comfortable, to pretend that my forecasts have not been competent, in fact, competent repeatedly, when their own were not?

Politics Generally

Any among a very large number of political leaders from around the world, as also relevant professionals otherwise, have reported that wish they could meet with me personally on these subject-matters, but that it would not be prudent for their careers to be known to have met with me. They have often added, that it would be very, very difficult to keep any meeting with me from receiving the highest and widest attention from powerful political adversaries from around much of the world. Hostility explains some of this behavior; but, more often, what can be called fear of loss of career, and of heart-felt desires for related comforts of personal life.

In relevant cases of personal associates who have been ostensibly "brainwashed" into a reversal of their earlier attractions to association with me, there have been indicatively frequent instances in which the threats and offers delivered, such as offers of assistance in securing careers, rather than the alternative of destruction of the comforts of personal and family life, have been a part of the pattern of "behaviorist" modes of conditioned change of belief, as by what is commonly termed "brainwashing," which has become a more or less widespread pattern within a still-active group of so-called "defectors," or, if you prefer, "defectives," accumulated under the effectively active control of either governmental, or quasi-governmental institutional control. This accumulation dates to even earlier than 1968, but has been much more notable in an accumulation of still-active recruits by such "Mutt-and- Jeff" methods of virtual brainwashing ("conditioned reflex") since 1968.

The evidence assembled through attention to relevant "internet" activities, provides an excellent sample of the evidence bearing upon what I have identified here as "behaviorist conditioned reflex" modification of mental habits ("e.g., what is called "brainwashing").

The case of the rather violent mid-1980s reactions to my presentation of the essential significance of considering the systemic implications of the original, fundamental discoveries of Johannes Kepler, even as echoed in some putatively scientific circles today, is an example of what I mean by effects of "brainwashing."

Fear becomes, in the morally weakened victims of the phenomenon I have described, like a renegade's life-long fear, which has bred a treasonous quality of capitulation to a life-long hatred of that enemy's enemy, one's former friend.

As usual, I view what Lyn writes as a description of what is being done or will be done to members in a creepy way of his.


xlcr4life@hotmail.com

[larouchetruth]

Wow, XLCr, just when I thought it was safe to ignore the LPAC site for a few days, LHL (Lyndon, His Lunacy) comes out with an almost unique whopper that is more utterly revealing of himself than almost anything else I can remember, while at the same time betraying a boatload of implications of what is happening inside the org.

I say almost unique because this is only the second time that I can ever recall that he has made explicit reference to former members as a group. He did so a few weeks ago, which I believe is the first time ever (correct me, if anyone remembers a previous instance). I regard these references as confirmation of MY prediction, namely, that THIS forecast, uniquely, would come back to haunt him when it spectacularly failed, that is, that unlike virtually all previous forecasts, and probably all of them in fact, members (some of them, of course, not all, at least not yet) would hold him accountable and would create a kind of problem internally that is unprecedented, of members talking among themselves in a relatively widespread manner about the manifest failure of his "nations will disintegrate in October" forecast to materialize--for anything of any kind whatsoever to even show a slight decline in October. PhaSMA, as I pointed out a few weeks ago (Phase Shift, My A*s).

Truly, can anyone remember a more defensive piece by His Lunacy? I can't. The only way he can, evidently, attempt to attack present members for doubting him, is to attack former members for being "brainwashed." Presumably, the way it is supposed to work is that present members will recoil from being lumped with former members, and as a result will mend their ways. Talk about delusional. Even King Canutlarouche cannot command the waves of discontent over this latest forecasting fiasco to simply go away by such means.

The fact that this piece is so minimally coherent amplifies the almost comical effect. First of all, there are multiple sentences, especially toward the beginning, that are missing important words, that no normal person would leave out even in a first draft, and that no one editing this (if anyone even did) caught, somehow. Something is slipping upstairs behind that high forehead of his. But his argument about brainwashing also makes no sense. He simply asserts that former members are working for Lyn's enemies, and enemy intelligence agencies, without even a shred of even lying asserted evidence--evidence of any kind whatsoever has been done away with. Does he really think the errant, still nominal members, will be convinced that these former members--whom in a few cases they are still in touch with--are tools of such agencies? Evidently so, but since that stupid charge won't wash, this further erodes his credibility.

As for brainwashing, he confuses a garden variety sort of conditioning that probably takes places with every person who has ever lived, that he/she will adjust certain beliefs to accord with his social surroundings, tend to believe what those he chooses to associate believe in, in many cases, with anything that could be called actual brainwashing. It's rather amazing that the only reason he can come up with why someone might leave his association is that they are threatened by enemy agencies (as if any of us have had any contact whatsoever with any agency that could remotely fit the description he provides), causing "fear" (of what, he never speaks--of being "outed" as former LaRouchies perhaps?) leading to clinical "brainwashing." Of course, the social pressure of this sort is more intense within his association than in almost any group outside--whether it rises to the level of clinical brainwashing is an open question in my opinion, so if that is what he means by brainwashing, then he is more guilty than anyone else of doing it.

But then we come to his reprise of his disastrous FEF meetings in 1985-86. What a hoot! To pick this as an example of the brainwashing he is talking about! Suddenly, he is no longer referring to former members being threatened by enemy agencies, but by "institutional" brainwashing of academics by academia. Not the same thing, even in a Larouchethink environment, one would think. But since words mean nothing to LaRouche, anything goes, I guess. Where is our Lewis Caroll to write LaRouche in Wonderland? Anyway, he destroyed the FEF, and blew off every competent scientist (save one former scientist, the personally sweet but intellectually over-the-hill Dr. Moon) over his insistence that Kepler's work on the claimed harmonic ratios embodied in the aphelions and perihelions of the orbits of the inner 6 planets was the most important breakthrough and critical insight for contemporary astrophysics--he certainly threw in his hatred of Newton to boot, and the result was utterly predictable.

On his discussion of his predictions, nothing needs to be said, since they have all been wrong, obviously, and it is really hard to imagine how any members could actually not know this is the reality. On his discussion of politics, I believe this is a first, or the first for a very long time--admitting that political figures would give a bear-hug to a leper light-years before they would publicly acknowledge they had met with LaRouche. He acknowledges his own pariahdom. Could this actually be a first time saying this?

If so, it must reflect another current in the org, namely, impatience with the constant claims of high-level people meeting with LaRouche, or at least following his writings and webcasts and tacitly supporting him, waiting for the right time to go public, with never any instances of anyone actually going public.

I think he's in trouble, internally. Big trouble. Such a writing--especially such a writing put on the public, LPAC website--is clinical evidence of immense pressure on him. And it surely must be coming fom more than just boomers. Since I agree, XLCr, that the LYMsters seemed to genuinely believe that things would really fall apart totally disastrously in October (unlike the jaded Boomers who already doubted it totally), there could certainly be some cases, perhaps a significant number of such cases, where the failure to perform of this prediction is causing cognitive dissonance and perhaps the threat of further erosion, if not mass defections, from the LYM side. Cross your fingers, folks.

[larouchetruth]

From XLCr:

LTruth I have been bothered lately by this LPAC release by Lyn which I posted a few days ago.

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12391

In reading that release, tell me if you have not read the exact same lines from Lyn in the past.

Quote:
Lyndon LaRouche said, "It's a fraud! It's a plan to decrease the world's population by two-thirds. It's a desperate effort to keep control for the moment. It's bad bull$hit,— that's the only way to describe it. Don't give it any credibility. They are who they are, out for genocide. Don't get excited about it; it's not going to work."

I swear that Lyn has uttered the exact same line, with maybe a wee bit of difference to LYMsters in meetings which have been reported on in memos or in LPAC releases over a variety of topics.

My gut feeling is that Lyn erupts like this whenever a LCer or LYMster gives a short report on something in a straightforward way without either mentioning Lyn as the solution or how it all ties in with whatever Lyn has as the boogeyman for that fiscal period.

So, XLCr, I don't specifically recall him saying exactly the same line. Of course, he has been making this point, that various plans, including Obama's health care plan, are part and parcel of a deliberate plot to reduce the population of the world to 2 billion or less.

But what is remarkable is that this example, and a few others in recent months, seem to derive directly from transcripts of Lyn speaking to one of these internal, NEC or "Windy Hill Dialogue" meetings, that he seems to hold every week. In one case in late September, they printed a 2-page release that was nothing but a direct transcript. And what's amazing about these, that is, amazing that they print this, is precisely what is reflected in the snippet you quote here--essentially, they are his stage directions to his followers. They are incoherent to anyone outside of the meeting. They are not meaningful to an outside audience. So, when he says above "don't give it any credibility. They are who they are, out for genocide. Don't get excited about it; it's not going to work," this is spoken to LYM members, mainly, and is utter gibberish to the general public.

Truly amazing. Don't they ever read their own stuff? Are they so solipsistic that once spoken, every word is axiomatically assumed to be golden and cannot be edited? Evidently so, to quite comical effect.

[larouchetruth]

From Chator: "If you want to have fun, like ltruth typically does, there's larouche's webcast to pick to pieces."

From XLCr: "I agree Chator . his/her reviews are a great read and provide a "twofer" for us. You get both the technical analysis as well as the goofy analysis. I hope Ltruth has something coming our way soon."

Both were from a few days ago, a propos of Lyn's latest webcast. Or is the clinically precise term "weepcast?" As in "listen and weep."

I have neither the time, nor the energy, to do a proper analysis of the latest weepcast. It's another doozy, but not because of a lot of quotable absurdities. More because of the sheer illogicality of so much of what he says, plus the now-trademark irrelevancy of what he chooses to spend his time on, compared with what he should be talking about if his putative message had any reality to it.

Let's look at the first two paragraphs, and you'll get the picture. They are as follows. I have put in square brackets things he said that were edited out of the original--amazing, for once, there was at least a modicum of editing--but the editings-out represents verbal false starts, where he starts to say it one way, then backtracks and says it some other way, like Porky Pig avoiding words he stutters on. So, here are the paragraphs, first, as uttered, then, with my comments.

"Well, as you know, since July, the 25th-27th of July of 2007, I had warned that we were headed into a general breakdown crisis of the world financial-monetary system, and the economic system. Three days later, after that announcement, the beginning of the breakup of the world monetary-financial system occurred. It occurred in the form of the dropping out of the mortgage market in the United States, that is, the home mortgage market. And this spread quickly internationally. Now, another thing happened at the same time: There was a fundamental shift in the world economy, because, as you know by now, having seen the Triple Curve, you know that the world economy is governed presently, by a global, Triple Curve function. Forget all the forecasts by the Wall Street crowd, the statisticians: They're all incompetent, and they're always wrong. They have always been wrong, and will be wrong, because they use a wrong method. They use statistical forecasting based on accounting characteristics, and that does not determine the way economies function.

"Economies—[stumble, starts saying “three …”] today, and in European civilization, off and on, largely, for several thousand years—have been determined by a threefold principle of economy. On the top, you have international monetary systems. Even before the fall of the Persian Empire, you had monetary systems [controlled] controlling Asia, especially East Asia and South Asia. And the fall of monetary systems was usually the trick which tipped off the collapse of economies in those regions: physical collapses of those economies, as the result of the monetary processes, and the effects of monetary processes. With the collapse of the Persian Empire, and the Peloponnesian War, there was a change. And that change, which occurred with the Peloponnesian War or its aftermath, has determined the history of economy in European and broader civilization ever since that time."

OK, I find more wrong in these two paragraphs every time I read them, so you may have missed some of the idiocy, though much of it surely is apparent on first read. So, here goes, to satisfy my public (tip of the hat to Chator and XLCr):

[this paragraph is his OPENER? It is incoherent, and says almost nothing, actually. And doesn't say what one would think he should say, about the present prospects for the economy. But oh, well.] Well, as you know, since July, the 25th-27th of July of 2007, I had warned [no, bad grammar. Should be either "I have been warning," or "since should be "on"] that we were headed into a general breakdown crisis of the world financial-monetary system [no, the general breakdown crisis can ONLY be of the real economy--unless THAT goes, no amount of financial collapse per se would constitute a general breakdown crisis], and the economic system. Three days later, after that announcement, the beginning of the breakup of the world monetary-financial system occurred. It occurred in the form of the dropping out [?? unraveling, perhaps, but "dropping out?" dropping out of what? or is this a curious elipsis of "the bottom dropped out of the market"? actually, that's probably it--again, his ability to speak effectively is far eroded from the days of yore] of the mortgage market in the United States, that is, the home mortgage market. And this spread quickly internationally. [What did? the mortgage crisis? The breakdown crisis? Again, total imprecision reigns, the clear indicator of an absence of rigorous thought (or in his case, probably of any thought at all)] Now, another thing happened at the same time: There was a fundamental shift in the world economy, [this is truly stunning. He mentions a "fundamental shift," but never even hints at what he thinks that shift might be. Citing the Triple Curve avails him nothing, as he never states what that shift is, whether caused by the Triple Curve or the Easter Bunny's third cousin seven times removed. What is he talking about? "We" know, from other documents--he would cite, if pressed, state budget crises, alleged 33% unemployment, etc., but the point is, he never even mentions any of these specifics, here or elsewhere in this weepcast. The point I am stressing here is what his manner of exposition reveals about his mental processes, his ability to articulate even his own idiocies with any even internal coherence--and what we see is that he is speaking in a virtual code, where 90% of the content is tacit, unspoken, and hence opaque to the general public. Amazing!] because, as you know by now, having seen the Triple Curve, [here, he is speaking only to the audience in the weepcast room, which surely "by now," HAS seen the Triple Curve. But isn't the weepcast supposed to be for the general public listening in from around the country, and the world? He blithely mentions the TC as if it was a household word and needed no introduction, and self-evident to boot. What a hoot!] you know that the world economy is governed presently, by a global, Triple Curve function. [What a cornucopia of idiocy! What a marvel of compactness, where in just a phrase, a few words, he can commit logical fallacies and make negative sense to such a degree that it can take quite a number of sentences to fully elaborate what he has done. First of all, did you actually get what he actually said: "the world economy is governed...by a...Triple Curve function." What?? Now the economy is governed by a graph? Or by a [misnomered] "function"? So, the causality here is that we have this Triple Curve thingie, that nobody in the world has any inkling exists but LaRouche, and it GOVERNS the entire world economy? Glory Be! How could that be? I thought any such representations (recall, if you will, that until 5 years ago, they actually attempted to put numbers to the Triple Curve, and show monetary values for the growth of money and financial instruments, and for the third line, they used percentage of manufacturing employment to ensure a steady decline in this measure--point being that the Triple Curve is a REPRESENTATION of something happening in the financial, monetary and real economic spheres. Got it? It's a "representation" of what's happening in the real world. It can't POSSIBLY "govern" that real world. LaRouche's ability to phrase it as he has represents a new low even for him in the incoherence of his presentation of his own ideas, leaving aside how wrong those ideas might be.] Forget all the forecasts by the Wall Street crowd, [And what forecasts might these be? He never even alludes to what he is referring to.] the statisticians: They're all incompetent, and they're always wrong. [It is probably gratuitous to point out that he is making incredibly sweeping general statements without a scintilla of a hint of any effort to justify, much less to prove, that these sweeping condemnations are true. Not to mention that LaRouche is not the only doomsday peddler in the country--there is a stable of others who have been predicting the collapse of the financial system every year for the past decade--not necessarily your Wall Street types, but they're out there] They have always been wrong, and will be wrong, because they use a wrong method. They use statistical forecasting based on accounting characteristics, [unintelligible gibberish. How is anyone to know what he means by "statistical forecasting," much less the even less cogent phrase "accounting characteristics." Again, this entire sentence is nothing but one huge ellipsis, where 90+% of what he would need to say to his point minimally clear (leaving aside the question of accurate or insightful) is omitted.] and that does not determine the way economies function. [True, and these forecasters, whoever they may be, make no claim that their forecasts "determine" how economies function, only that they predict short-term fluctuations in markets or the underlying economy. Again, amazingly, Lyn is now saying that forecasts (his, at least) "determine" what happens in the real economy. Think about it. His Triple Curve, which he has pulled out of his a*s, is now determining what happens in the economy?!! Well, if so, why doesn't he just make the bottom line of the graph start to go up, which would immediately revive real production and avert the crisis--since the Triple Curve "determines," "governs" the real economy--and save humanity in the process? Heck, he arbitrarily, suddenly, about 2 months ago, took the exponentially rising financial aggregates graph, and started showing it plummetting, never stating what factual basis he did this on. Why can't he do the same (reverse its direction) for the real economy line? This whole TC argument is so beyond absurd, it makes characterizations like lunacy, idiocy, moronic, etc., appear completely lame and unable to properly capture the degree to which Lyn's argument is bonkers.]

Economies—[stumble, starts saying “three …”] today, and in European civilization, off and on, largely, for several thousand years—have been determined by a threefold principle of economy. [In the paragraphs that follow, he elaborates three "characteristics," presumably of an economy, though he doesn't explicitly say characteristics of what? But here, he mistates it as "a three-fold principle of economy." He means "characteristics," not "principle." What an idiot! Also, again, you have these "principles" (and later, "characteristics") DETERMINING the economy. Funny, why have I always thought of "characteristics" as determined by the thing they are characteristics of, as simply the descriptions of something, not as independent "things" that "determine" the things they are characteristics of? What a complete fool!!] On the top, you have international monetary systems. Even before the fall of the Persian Empire, you had monetary systems [controlled] controlling Asia, especially East Asia [surely he means "West Asia" meaning Persia and the Near East] and South Asia. And the fall of monetary systems was usually the trick [???]which tipped off [set off??] the collapse of economies in those regions: physical collapses of those economies, as the result of the monetary processes, and the effects of monetary processes. [This game is getting tiresome. What? "monetary processes" set off the collapse of physical economies? How? What aspects of the "monetary processes" did this? What type of "monetary system" does he claim even existed? There were coins, aka money in those days. No banks. No financiers. Just taxes collected in coin, and spending, also in coin, by governments and people. What, exactly, about this arrangement, could be called a "monetary system," and what in its operation led it to cause the collapse of economies? But to ask such questions is to presume some scintilla of logic or history in this bilgewater, where clearly none is to be found.] With the collapse of the Persian Empire, and the Peloponnesian War, there was a change. [What? Was the collapse of the Persian Empire an example of an economc collapse caused by the monetary system, as he seemed to imply above, or did, as this sentence seems to imply, the deleterious effect of monetary systems only begin AFTER the collapse of Persia, in the aftermath of the Peloponesian War] And that change, [pray tell, WHAT change??] which occurred with the Peloponnesian War or its aftermath, has determined the history of economy [presumably, means "the history of economic crises" or something like this] in European and broader civilization ever since that time. [Just a parting thought. If all European societies since the ancient Greeks were governed by the "monetary" systems that caused economic crashes regularly, how did European civilization ever advance beyond the Greeks? I dare say that we have invented a few things here and there that the Greeks failed to invent, from telescopes to electrical appliances to airplane, not to mention computers, and probably a few other things. And the ability of the world to support people has increased by probably about 10-fold. If the economic system was doomed to disaster by the monetary system for the past 2000+ years, how was any progress even possible?]

There is such an utter absence of coherent, much less cogent, thought here, it boggles the mind. LaRouche is a modern-day Berkeley, a total subjectivist, merely rattling around in his own head, and claiming that whatever random thoughts he happens to think automatically are real in the real world, because he thought them. This repeated formulation of the "triple curve" actually being determinant of what happens in the real world is such voodoo, so magical-and I think this is actually new. I think he actually used to use the Triple Curve as the representation of monetary, financial and real economic parameters that it inherently represents, and it is only very recently that he characterizes it as "determining" or "governing" the real economy.

Any how, the rest of this weepcast is left as an exercise for the reader. Just be forewarned that it is downhill from here.

[eaglebeak]

As happens from time to time, I have received an email from someone excerpting a declaration on "culture" from a LaRouche diatribe appearing in a Morning Briefing.

The one I attach here comes, I am told, from this past spring, which seems to have been a fairly fertile period for LaRouchean rantings on Shakespeare, Shelley, et al.

Please note that Lyn proposes the following as an organizing approach.

It has about the same organizing value as his recent LaRouchePAC release "BRAINWASHED!," posted and commented on above by XLCR, Laroucetruth, etc. (Perhaps the funniest line of that was his opening assertion that he has had "significant experience" with brainwashing.)

Anyhow, on culture. The funniest parts are in bold italic. My own remarks are in bold roman.

And what you have to do, is change the dynamic, because it’s the dynamic which controls the populations. It’s the dynamic which is the effective culture: and that’s what you have to change. That’s why art, great art – that what Moses Mendelssohn did, hmm? [Are we clear? ]That’s what he and Lessing did. They changed world history! By what? By attacking the stupidity of the culture! With the backing with our dear friend Kastner; who revived the cutler of Leibniz.

So you’re not talking about what the usual social work theory of history is, the Cartesian theory, or the ping-pong ball theory. But it’s by understanding that the rotten problem is the culture. [b]And what you have to do, is, as Shelley defines it, in the question of the imagination, in the {Defence of Poetry}, that’s what you must do. [You all clear about that?]

We do it with science! I mean, working in physical science is exactly what that is. You come in, and you are attacking the culture. [Have I made myself clear?] What happens in Classical art? You’re attacking the culture. You’re defending a culture, and attacking another one. And so therefore, it’s a cultural revolution, is always the secret of shaping history: it’s the only way you can address tragedy, which is what Shakespeare tried to do; what Shelley understood, and tried to do; what Schiller did, the same thing. And that’s the only way you do it: You have to get at the thing which permeates the minds of a population, produce this factor. [Got it?]

I’ve seen this, you know: I saw it in the wartime period. I lived through the 1920s, I was a young fellow, but I lived there. [I turned 7 in September 1929--I mean, I was young, but I saw it all. And I understood it all. Whatever it was.] The 1930s, the wartime period, and then I came back from military service overseas, in the late spring of ’46 -- and the United States had changed, for the worse. And it kept on going downhill, morally, ever since that time. The people were, earlier, had a higher morality during the war and going into the war. And then when they have a guy with a Hairy Ass, Truman, [--Poetry will supersede mathematics in science--that's why I use precisely the words I use and no other words (do I use)] and that shift in culture and that right-wing terror, the United States became a piece of crap -- step by step, by step, by step down to the present.

So therefore, you don’t do that by arguing with a guy on the street, on points. You go from the gut! You go for the culture, the cultural question! And the best way to have the cultural question … is {humor}. [b]Passion! Humor! The passion of humor! Classical humor! Classical irony! Ruthlessness about Classical irony! Passion about Classical ruthlessness! Ruthlessness about passionate humor! I could go on for hours. That’s how you change a culture. “You know, you’re a fine person, but don’t be a piece of ****, all your life.” That what you say, to your non-resilient person. [That'll work.]

[earnest_one]

Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr:


"I could go on for hours."


Indeed! I am convinced, although I wonder how many days in the weeks and months ahead this fundamental truth will continue to hold. At some point during Lyn's dialogue with the universe, the wave function will collapse and with it LAR will vanish from the scene. Here the triple curve's derivative will approach infinity, the aggregates will truly aggregate, and the resulting mass will produce a black hole SO strong that not even Lyn's next forecast will achieve escape velocity.

On the other hand, detailed plans are surely in place to lower his head into a beautiful bottle filled with wine and alcoholic "spirits". This will then be placed next to the LYN Memo Generator, Version #3 and a continuous webcast will promulgate from LPAC Head Quarters.

A supreme battle for Hegemony will then rage on for Centuries. In the weeks and months ahead, and a head and ahead, THE LYM will attempt to derive the appropriate geometry for "cubing this public spectacle".

LaRouche's words are part of the permanent record. For amusement, I now "tune into" some thoughts from an actual human being -- albeit a highly trained researcher in mathematical biology -- probably anonymous to most readers (the poetic duality here is that Lyn is anonymous to the general population).

Perhaps LTruth can decipher the following sentences (in quotes) for his (i.e., LTruth's) followers here on FACTNET:

"Science absolutely is a dialogue with the universe. One puts out an idea, and the universe replies with the result of a test of it. In that dialogue, I see something extremely rigorous but also spiritual."

"Aside from the radiation risk and inconvenience, per some ideas from modern physics it seems somehow better to give the universe time to change so that when the observation is made in two months, the wave function will collapse in a desirable fashion."

Obviously, I did not write the original words, above; I don't possess the requisite eloquence. But perhaps LTruth does and he/she can juxtapose the above with some of Lyn's deep thoughts on the nature of science, the universe, and the wave function.

But even in my deteriorated state I can envision one possible starting point -- radiation. I remember eating asparagus, with Lyn, at Jonathan Tennenbaum's wedding party in Wiesbaden in June 1996. I was told that this vegetable was purchased inexpensively because it was subjected to a large dose of radiation from Chernobyl and the public had been inundated with media hysteria.

The man explaining this was extremely happy, noting the wonderful health benefits of radiation exposure, something that hadn't yet been reflected in the "market price" of that batch of vegetables.

I can still see him, glowing with pride, recounting the fabulous deal he negotiated.

Peter Tennenbaum November 20, 2009

[chator]

Originally Posted by xlcr4life

Lyn must be furious to see that Robert Zubrin, a card table lifer if he stayed in has a PHD, patents, a real org involved with Mars, sells books from real publishers and has been a recognised leader in the field of space travel and highly influential in planned Mars expeditons.

BTW, Zubrin was the one who did a lot of research and writing on Kepler back then. He also wrote some junk about science fiction being evil, but what the hey, we were all nuts to a degree. Now he writes science fiction.

Lyn on the other hand is a convict who runs a cult circus who is a laughed at old man and has members who can find The Mars Society in seconds on a computer.

xlcr4life@hotmail.com

I just recently saw "The Mars Underground" documentary on Zubrin you frequently mention in your posts. It made no mention, nor did Zubrin, of his involvement with the LaRouche organization, or of LaRouche himself. Though i imagine it is from LaRouche that he got his idea that we should go to Mars now. Or was it LaRouche that got the idea from Zubrin? At any rate, I think Zubrin is a little nuts. He wants to launch astronauts to Mars on a six month journey using the same technology that took us to the Moon, leave them there to fend for themselves, then pick them up (if they are still alive) six months later. He calls it the "Lewis and Clark" approach, but Lewis and Clark were not on a totally alien planet. Though i cann't argue with the scientific aspects of his proposal, it offends common sense, as so many things can go wrong, which would leave the crew helpless to die on an alien world, assuming they survived the 6 month journey there. Even LYM's proposal, which Zubrin earlier argued for, for an Apollo-style crash science driver program to develop the technology that could get us to Mars more quickly makes more sense. But both Zubrin and LYM, don't make sense in suggesting we should colonize Mars before colonizing the Moon.

[borismaglev]

Originally Posted by chator

I just recently saw "The Mars Underground" documentary on Zubrin you frequently mention in your posts. It made no mention, nor did Zubrin, of his involvement with the LaRouche organization, or of LaRouche himself. Though i imagine it is from LaRouche that he got his idea that we should go to Mars now. Or was it LaRouche that got the idea from Zubrin? At any rate, I think Zubrin is a little nuts. He wants to launch astronauts to Mars on a six month journey using the same technology that took us to the Moon, leave them there to fend for themselves, then pick them up (if they are still alive) six months later. He calls it the "Lewis and Clark" approach, but Lewis and Clark were not on a totally alien planet. Though i cann't argue with the scientific aspects of his proposal, it offends common sense, as so many things can go wrong, which would leave the crew helpless to die on an alien world, assuming they survived the 6 month journey there. Even LYM's proposal, which Zubrin earlier argued for, for an Apollo-style crash science driver program to develop the technology that could get us to Mars more quickly makes more sense. But both Zubrin and LYM, don't make sense in suggesting we should colonize Mars before colonizing the Moon.

Zubrin is a true pioneer and an American original. LaRouche never got a single idea that he did not steal from someone else. Not one. Both his "good" and "bad" ideas come from someone else. OK, maybe just one of his ideas is his own, namely that LaRouche is a genius. Zubrin's Mars proposal is based on sound engineering and science -- an advanced human practice that more often than not makes mincemeat out of your "common sense."

[xlcr4life]

Chator What I liked about Zubrin's approach was sending a very lightly configured party of people who would be more nimble in searching the martian terrain . This is all debatable in how the final party is sent off. The living off of the land is brilliant because it is not based on hunting moose on Mars. The problem as he saw it was with the amount of rocket fuel and energy to stay there and then leave. His real groundbreaking work was with using what is available on the Martian surface and using that via chemical process to manufacture rocket fuel and energy. This by itself solves a real logisitic issue of carrying that fuel in the first place which consumes a tremendous amount of volume.

The rest of the supplies for food and water have been developed while making fuel while on the planet is a real ingenius idea.

Thanks for the review LTruth of the latest web cast. What I next dream for is someone who can edit these things into comedy bits where Lyn can be made to say all sorts of silly things for laughs for the general public.


It pays to reread Lyn's latest LPAC release on Brainwashing a few times. He really is a psycho in claiming victimhood and not having a clue as to why anyone would not wish to be associated with him. We find a myriad of "agents" and "Agencies" who all conspire against HIM in a never ending plot.

The Grad student who writes his or her thesis on cults will have a field day with this.

I received an email from a reader who points out something not yet discussed here.

The timing of this LPAC release before Thanksgiving

Between work and preparing for our families Thanksgiving, I really did not think about this, but it makes a lot of sense. Follow me here.

The LYM and LYMettes went through a disastrous October with the ranch being bet on Lyn's predictions of full court collpase and entire nations vanishing. There is a good chance that many of them went hog wild with this with their parents and friends in telling them that all of this will happen and the world will be asking Lyn to solve the crisis. In the fantasy world of the cult, everything I posted about how crazy they looked is viewed as the opposite in that "we must be correct and threatening the oligarchy since they are attacking us".

No LYMsters, being laughed at is not the same as being attacked because of your mysterious powers.

The cult I bet thought that they came out of August looking potent after our Larouche-Hitler hippie Chick AKA Rachel Brown was turned into a dining room table by Barney Frank. The cult is so delusional that several weeks of being told that they wil be leading "the mass strike" by Debbie and Nancy was really believed when they made a few bucks at a card table shrine or went to rallies organised by the Teabaggers.

The reality LTruth was not a "phase shift", but a "temperature shift" where everyone is now freezing at a card table shrine in November while water balloons were being lobbed by ex contacts instead of flowers.

This whole episode really explains why I often call this The Bizarro World The cult really sees the opposite of what is actually going on.

In the past, some ex LYM members emailed me that the cult did not discourage members from seeing their family around Thanksgiving or Xmas. In a perverse way, the cult actually wanted people to go home and get money , clothes, gas cards and cell phones from their parents so that the cult did not have to spend the money on them!

My guess , based on this veteran of the LC is that Lyn wrote this so that members are discouraged from going home and if they do, to resist their families and be closer to him. What will be the fist gut feeling when a LYMster returns home for Thanksgiving and someone reminds them of Lyn's "October Surprise"?

With my self, this took place in 1976 or so when I also made a fool of myself when we had the same build up over a March 30th end of the economy blow out and everything would collapse on that day. I stumbled away from friends, family and school mates and spent more time with the LC to avoid that situation. By this time I basically burnt out all of my firends with this lunacy and in this crazy world, the LC was my only friend who understood me.

Yeah, I was a fool. But at the time, I had no clue on how cults work or group dynamics or how insular the LC was. The LC did seem where I saw my peers, not home. The world depended on me being in the LC at Thanksgiving, not home.

When I think of the past and what I did , Lyn's LPAC release is the warning about the boogeyman a member will meet who has incredible powers to stop them from changing the world. Lyn even mentions the internet being behind this with oodles of exotic agencies who have rewarded ex members with a great benefit package to stop his destiny and mission.

The idea that a few ex members , with no money and a computer who just post material about him weekly is more powerfull then the 350 million dollars and hundreds of tons of printed material and national TV broadcasts along with a cult is a real b1tch Lyn.

Nothing new to report except the usual and daily posting of how one is so crazy that they are "Larouche Crazy".

Did you seriously just mention LaRouche as a point in your arguement?
That's kooky even for you. .......................

Ralph Nader may be the most hated man in American politics, more so than even establishment types Sarah Palin and George W. Bush, or fellow outsiders Lyndon LaRouche and Louis Farrakhan.

http://washingtonindependent.com/683...ffman-thinking
Maybe he's "going rogue" and ignoring the advice of his advisers. Maybe he believed Ryan's campaign spiel about ACORN and now he can't be convinced otherwise.

It seems the conspiracy angle repeatedly backfires as a campaign tactic, because it creates a pack of radicalized true believers who make your political party look like Lyndon LaRouche's 30 million illegitimate children. If Hoffman totally believes the propaganda and wrecks his party's credibility, it wouldn't be the first time we've seen that outcome.

That is how your life will be ending Lyn.


xlcr4life@hotmail.com

[chator]

Originally Posted by xlcr4life

The rest of the supplies for food and water have been developed while making fuel while on the planet is a real ingenius idea.

xlcr4life@hotmail.com

I have no doubt that some of his ideas will actually be utilized when humans finally do make it to Mars, but i just don't see manned exploration and colonization of Mars as an imperative that needs to happen now, though Zubrin has some good arguments. LYM is pretty much saying the same thing in their Mars classes, expect without the good arguments. Instead, they just say, this needs to happen because Lyn said so.

[earnest_one]

Date Error ALERT, above:

"But even in my deteriorated state I can envision one possible starting point -- radiation. I remember eating asparagus, with Lyn, at Jonathan Tennenbaum's wedding party in Wiesbaden in June 1996. I was told that this vegetable was purchased inexpensively because it was subjected to a large dose of radiation from Chernobyl and the public had been inundated with media hysteria.

The man explaining this was extremely happy, noting the wonderful health benefits of radiation exposure, something that hadn't yet been reflected in the "market price" of that batch of vegetables.

I can still see him, glowing with pride, recounting the fabulous deal he negotiated.

Peter Tennenbaum November 20, 2009"

Erratum ERASURE:

The Jonathan Tennenbaum wedding "party" was in June 1986, NOT June 1996. For scientific confirmation, simply test the half-life of the remaining boomer vegetables in Wiesbaden.

This ten-year-Tennenbaum-time-transportation-theme been sponsored, in part, by

TABLE-TENNIS-TULLY, circa 1966 -- a man who has been "disappeared" from numerous world-historical, neuron-based, technical-type, J.Tennenbaum archives. Truly.

PT 11/20/09

[poe]

There is an LPAC release up quoting Rep. John Conyers' interview on the Bill Press show from Air America: http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12453. The release quotes Conyers attacking the President for turning away from his own principles and compromising with the Republicans on Health Care:

Conyers accused the President of doing a "disservice" to what he'd once stood for. "Holding hands out and beer on Friday nights in the White House, and bowing down to every nutty, right-wing proposal about healthcare, and saying on occasion the public option isn't all that important, is doing a disservice to the Barack Obama that I first met, who was an ardent single-payer enthusiast himself."

In the above quote Conyers is saying that Barack Obama started out with the right idea, but caved in too much to Republican pressure, and yet, the LYM post the quote as if it is some sort of validation of their policy of helping the Tea-Baggers destabilize the Obama Administration. But really it is just the opposite.

If certain people had spent less time attacking the President and more time attacking his enemies, then maybe he would be more like the Barack Obama that John Conyers first met.

[borisbad]

Originally Posted by larouchetruth

From Chator: "If you want to have fun, like ltruth typically does, there's larouche's webcast to pick to pieces."

From XLCr: "I agree Chator . his/her reviews are a great read and provide a "twofer" for us. You get both the technical analysis as well as the goofy analysis. I hope Ltruth has something coming our way soon."

Both were from a few days ago, a propos of Lyn's latest webcast. Or is the clinically precise term "weepcast?" As in "listen and weep."

I have neither the time, nor the energy, to do a proper analysis of the latest weepcast. It's another doozy, but not because of a lot of quotable absurdities. More because of the sheer illogicality of so much of what he says, plus the now-trademark irrelevancy of what he chooses to spend his time on, compared with what he should be talking about if his putative message had any reality to it.

Let's look at the first two paragraphs, and you'll get the picture. They are as follows. I have put in square brackets things he said that were edited out of the original--amazing, for once, there was at least a modicum of editing--but the editings-out represents verbal false starts, where he starts to say it one way, then backtracks and says it some other way, like Porky Pig avoiding words he stutters on. So, here are the paragraphs, first, as uttered, then, with my comments.

"Well, as you know, since July, the 25th-27th of July of 2007, I had warned that we were headed into a general breakdown crisis of the world financial-monetary system, and the economic system. Three days later, after that announcement, the beginning of the breakup of the world monetary-financial system occurred. It occurred in the form of the dropping out of the mortgage market in the United States, that is, the home mortgage market. And this spread quickly internationally. Now, another thing happened at the same time: There was a fundamental shift in the world economy, because, as you know by now, having seen the Triple Curve, you know that the world economy is governed presently, by a global, Triple Curve function. Forget all the forecasts by the Wall Street crowd, the statisticians: They're all incompetent, and they're always wrong. They have always been wrong, and will be wrong, because they use a wrong method. They use statistical forecasting based on accounting characteristics, and that does not determine the way economies function.

What's funny about reading the gobbledy-gook (which I have to praise LaRoucheTruth for his ability to wade through) I read a column today by that evil epitome of Jewish finance Capitalism in today's NY Daily News. His description of the current world economic situation is so terse but able to describe issues with a few clear words instead of the vaporous meanderings that LaRouche loves to post. I would certainly take Rohatyn's appraisal of economics a lot more seriously than the turgid nonsense of LaRouche's demented mind. Of course, LaRouche will find it as confirmation of his conspiratorial mindset that Rohatyn ends his column with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt rather than his relation, FDR.

[borismaglev]

Originally Posted by chator

I have no doubt that some of his ideas will actually be utilized when humans finally do make it to Mars, but i just don't see manned exploration and colonization of Mars as an imperative that needs to happen now, though Zubrin has some good arguments. LYM is pretty much saying the same thing in their Mars classes, expect without the good arguments. Instead, they just say, this needs to happen because Lyn said so.

This is what I hate about LaRouche the most. I was a fanatic about colonizing Mars since my teenage years, before the original Star Trek series. LaRouche's pro-Mars posture gave Mars a bad name. I loved Plato since high school. LaRouche's Plato promo killed Plato for me. The same with classical music, FDR, Shakespeare (hat tip to eaglebeak),and everything else good and decent that this parasite tries to leech off of. What a creepy, life-sucking vampire!