LaRouche Continued 4

Let's make room for the "onrushing" torrent of ill literasy ...

Greetings, folks.

After 2 or 3 weeks in registration limbo, the powers that be on factnet finally OK'd my logging on. Hoorah.

I've gotten a lot out of this board and the members posting here over the past month since I discovered this place. As someone whose tracked the non-linear logic(?) of LHL and the LC for over 30 years - though I was never tempted to join or send my brain to the laundromat - it has been a real revelation to get some of the inside perspectives posted by the veterans here.

Eaglebeak, your dissections of the briefings and LarouchePAC texts are literally LOL. I look forward to more! And my appreciation to all the other vets: XLCr4life, sancho, Larouchetruth, shadok, earnest_one, and anyone else I'm forgetting for the moment. Your work in trying to shine the light of truth on the LC is heartening. Keep up the good work.

I'll have more to say in the future, but for now, this will have to do.

Here and there:

A shameless bit of kissing up to the PRC:

http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2007...alai-lama.html

I wonder how much dough that will bring in, $50?

*
Intro to the latest pulp fiction:

http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2007...ur-laptop.html

November 27, 2007 (LPAC)--The cover 9-11 provided for the continuing world destabilization (um, that was a terrorist attck, Lyndon? on the shores of the United States, you shameless clod?), led by the FDR-hating British Empire (yeah, the Huns are still hurling their V-2s), has, by no accident (any psychopathologist will tell you) been exposed by Lyndon LaRouche and the continuing institution of the American Patriot (oh, is that the institution? is that the American Patriot Hospital in Nutsylvania?). It is no coincidence, either, that as erupting warfare threatens the potential (adverb, Lyndon) peaceful alliances (doesn't "erupting warfare" make peaceful alliances "potential"?) of the United States with Russia, China, and India, and, as the U.S. dollar collapses, taking along with it housing, banking, and the dollar-dependent countires of the entire world (so houses and banks will collapse with the dollar, Lyndon old boy? and what about the spelling? is that also the fault of the collapsing dollar?), many Americans are still sitting at their computers asking 'how' or 'why?' (as my house collapses about me - unlike Stalag Seven Teens).

Part 2 of 2

But the unleashing of Dick Cheney's Permanent War Permanent Revolution (shades of Lev Davidovich) was always missing something crucial--the quiet support of American youth (so he had the vocal support, the demonstrative support, the kinetic support?). Thus, Mrs. Beastman, Lynne Cheney, (Lyndon, you old misogynist, you - are you sure you wouldn't be happier in the arms of those Tibetan monks you disparage?) deployed (by whom, Phil Rubenstein? Krusty?) to ensure an effective political silence at home ("Beastman Lynne, your job, should you decide to accept it, is to ensure an effective political silence at home" - but I guess to also get the quiet support of the yutes at the same time), and private armies thrived (anacoluthon never stopped anybody, least of all the Greatest Mind Since Ed Norton) abroad and our own nation's military was shredded (my bologna has a first name, it's L-Y-N-D-Y, ...). The last pamphlet produced by the LaRouche Youth Movement, 'Is Goebbel's On Your Campus?' exposed this Lynne Cheney campus operation, that was in full force at the time trying to suppress the youth turnout for the crucial November 6 Congressional elections (B.L. (Beastman Lynne) was working the phones day and night to do so). The mighty (irony! we knew ye had it in ye!) Lynne Cheney failed at her mission ("This tape will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck, Lynne.), but the war is far from settled. And Lynne Cheney was forced to turn to others, to get the American people to accept Hitler (WHAT???? We didn't vote for you, Beastman Lyn, so we hardly support Schicklgruber). The way the British Empire would have it, the intended self-destruction of the United States could occur by a new form of terrorism, the 'suicide bombers of the West', mysteriously emerging from the otherwise promising institution, historically--the nation's youth generation (Yeah, the LaRouche yutes: fortunately they have a hard enough time with geometry and there's no money in the budget to allow them to purchase chemicals – cheap housing would be kabooming all over with their LaRouchian "science").

We invite you to study our introductory (there's more???) expose of this operation, with well-placed focus on Rupert Murdoch's MySpace, Microsoft's Facebook, and the latest generation of insanely popular (unlike LaRouche, who is insanely unpopular) violent video games (can’t you kids go back to Parcheesi, or Yahtzee?). The new pamphlet of the LaRouche Youth Movement, 'Is the Devil in your Laptop?', is not an attack on computers (just the post-1959 kind). This pamphlet continues to unravel the active operations of the British Empire to destroy the United States, and at the same time elicits the participation of the nation's youth in the (quiet or loud?) rediscovery of the principles fought for by Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln, and FDR.

A couple of lingering questions that I've had for years... perhaps someone here can answer them:

Where did the vintage LHL notion of a dastardly "Black Guelph Aristocracy" come from? I seem to recall it arising out of nowhere, circa 74-75, and wondering "WTF"?? Originally it seemed like the LC's focus was all present or future tense, and then somewhat abruptly the odd nooks and crannies of history began to be threaded together into a Vast Conspiracy.

Similarly, why has LHL always insisted on calling Latin America "Ibero-America"? What's the point? Does anyone else in the world use that nomenclature?

Congrats scrimshaw on entering this pathway to help penetrate the LaRouche fog. To answer your last question first, the term "Ibero-America" was termed to encapsulate the Iberian peninsula which also includes Portugal, in recognition that South America in particular has both Spanish and Portuguese roots. Latin of course goes back to the evil Roman Empire so LaRouche didn't like Latinizing this continent. I remember LaRouche or one of the associates trying to make the case that Etruscan is the true roots of the "Latin" or Romance languages.
As to the Guelphs that came from studies done in Italy, probably involving people like Muriel and others involving most notably Dante (who was a "white Guelph" who were the good guys) vs. the black Guelph who were the bad guys.
There's more to it, but that's the best I can recollect at present.

LaRouche never ceases to amaze. The apologia for China vis a vis Tibet ranks in the same vein as his apologias for the genocidal regime in the Sudan. Of course he parrots the Chinese line on how they "modernized" Tibet, omitting any mention how the gov't is promoting ethnic cleansing by forcibly allowing mass migrations of ethnic Chinese into Tibet. And whatever might be thought of the pre-"liberation" Tibet, it's interesting that this brazen liar omits any mention of the involvement of the Nazis in Tibet, including the fact that the Nazis borrowed a good deal of the 'mystical' aspects of Tibet in the more occult aspects of Nazi ideology. Of course, LaRouche takes anything having to do with Nazis and converts the word Nazi to British.
The movie for instance, <u>Seven Years in Tibet</u> was written to glorify a Nazi ideologue, Heinrich Herrer, an Austrian who was an ardent supporter of the Nazis and the Anschluss. Of course, the Hollywood movie omitted to mention that Harrer was a Nazi.
Rather than reprint an informative site, I include the link for those who wish to learn more. LaRouche's revisionist history would make Stalin and his hagiographers cringe.
http://www.geocities.com/jacobzhu/harrnazi.htm

Thank you, boris, for a very interesting link. I suppose Billington was very careful not to offend Der Helga's "nationalist" German sponsors whose ancestors persecuted gays as well as Jews.

When I joked above that LaRouche had no problems with pre-1960 computers, I had not yet read the "Blogosphere" pamphlet. As it turns out, the history of the computer ends for LaRouche with Vannevar Bush (an admirable man about whom I had done much research while in the LC)!

There is so much hysterical network tracing in this pamphlet, that it is impossible to isolate a single line of argument - if there is one. The argument seems to be: BAD, BAD, BAD - LaRouche, GOOD. But the basic impulse behind this rant is that of a guy who has progressively isolated himself behind a wall of sclerotic paranoia for almost forty years and thus finds modernity and sunshine ever more frightful. Gone are the comforting old days of vacuum tubes and the Lone Ranger. Thanks to the internet and its various platforms people are getting together, learning from one another across cultural and geographical boundaries, and have limitless, almost instantaneous access to the spiritual and intellectual wealth of the centuries.

But, let us suppose for a moment that Facebook, H.G Wells, et al. all represent nodes in a vast web of evil concocted to enslave. Let us assume that everything in these pages is true: what is the alternative? Clearly, die LaRouchebewegung, the LaRouche movement. So if you are a young person, instead of whiling away your free time with video games or by chatting up friends from around the world, you should forsake all learning except that provided or approved by one uneducated man out of billions, an octogenarian, a convicted felon who cannot find a publisher apart from his own or another (D.C. Heath) vanity press, yet whose "writings" outweigh Euler's mathematical oeuvre by one order of magnitude, a man whose plan for you is to stand in public making a total fool of yourself with vulgar signs, singing hymns wrought from the pain of chattel slaves centuries ago with a monetary quota over your head like the sword of Damocles which defines your sole worth. That twenty-first century slavery is the alternative to laptops, friends, and lattes. Any rational person would have no trouble discerning which choice represents the path of irrationality and degredation.

Welcome, scrimshaw.

I think Lyn's obsessions with the Black Guelph arose when someone told him about Dante....

Even before that, though, he had many curious notions about the past. The only thing that changes over the years is who he's borrowing them from....

His "position" on Tibet recalls previous positions he staked out in which the enslavement or obliteration of a people was a "Good Thing"--anyone remember the reprehensible line put forth by Dennis Small and "IALC" (sounds like a dog choking) on the Yanomami Indians?

The basic line was that these people were so primitive they didn't deserve to live, they really weren't a tribe, the Amazon wasn't theirs, so screw 'em. Hack down those trees! Plunder those rain forests! Anyone who tells Brazil different is ... Prince Philip!

Coupled with the mean-spirited touch of IALC's refusal to capitalize the word "Indian" in any of their writings for New Fed, EIR, etc.

Just extra work for the saner editors (no longer there) in those days, going through capitalizing it all.

Lyn himself did the same thing with "Jewish" and "Semite"--it was revealed to him by an evil genie that those should be lowercase too, but he could never make that stick. Not even deep in the heart of LaRoucheland.

What a guy!

In yet another shameless display, LaRouche comes to the defense of the mad tyrant Robert Mugabe:

http://www.larouchepac.com/news/2007...pport-him.html

Lest one forget, Mugabe has progressively impoverished his people over the last quarter century, among other crimes - much like LaRouche himself. At the same time, Museveni was supposed to have been a "British agent" when an Ugandan opposition leader cottoned up to Fearless Leader, so there no doubt is another $50 coming into the coffers from a despotic regime eager for friends of any stripe.

Of course the whole blasted history of the organization is riddled with craven <font color="ff0000">•</font><font color="ff0000">•</font><font color="ff0000">•</font>-kissing of that kind.

Did anyone else, while in the LC, ever receive the response from some bigwig upon raising questions or objections to that kind of thing in a briefing slug or published article, "You don't understand, we're not reporting on events or putting out balanced analyses, we're 'Running an Operation'"?

Pressuring members to kowtow to this prostitution is one of the ways the organization morally corrupted people, and letting these things slide by is one of the ways people let themselves get morally corrupted.

You have to wonder what the 30- and 40-year veterans say to themselves about this garbage. Could they be completely inured to it?

I don't recall that "running an operation" line, but I was dimly aware while in the organization how corrosive our ends-justify-any-means morality was to my character. When one follows someone who is "always right" then it is always wrong to contradict him or her. So trust-fund members had their pockets emptied and many elderly people died broke because the mobilization du jour was paramount. The young LaRouchites have to ask themselves at the end of each day how many lies did I tell, large or small, to manipulate passersby to squeeze a dollar out of them or to have them cough up their phone number?

Nothing is of greater importance than one's own soul: not stopping the crash, not huge infrastructure projects, none of it. What I carried away from this cult was a boatload of self-righteous anger, bitter sarcasm, and indignation which poisoned my life for a long time afterwards.

Thanks, Lyn, for having made me - for a time - in your own malevolent, mendacious image.

Probably the most hideous example of condoning mass murder and genocide was LaRouche's attack on the Tutsi for the Rwanda genocide. Yes, I'm sure some of you remember, the organization backed the Hutu butchers, and blamed everything on the Tutsi, and their backer, Musaveni of Uganda. Al Douglas did a bunch of "intelligence" calls at the time to a number of people to come up "evidence" on how the Tutsi-Museveni alliance shot down the president's plane that was the trigger for the genocidal rampage of the Hutu group that did the killing.

Why? Because Museveni was the perceived puppet of the British, particularly the Development Secretary, a woman whose name I don't recall.

And this led, by the fall of 1994, to possibly most insane "thesis" in LHL's long career--that the greatest danger to world civilization lay in the great national parks of the world. They devoded an entire EIR issue and part of the subsequent one, to "documenting" this utterly insane claim. It was based, so far as I could fathom at the time, off of the fact that the Tutsi army that invaded Rwuanda and finally put an end to the genocide by taking over, had been holed up in a large national park in southern Uganda, on the border of Rwanda, and that they launched their invasion from there. From this, the "intelligence" staff managerd to discovery upteeump other supposed terrorist, British-run groups camped out in national parks around the world, poised to invade unsuspecting countries.

Needless to say, no such attacks ever materialized. And after having devoted way more ink and paper to their charges than they did to the BAE scandal, this one died a quiet death really rapidly, never to be seen again.

If you want to punctuate your (understandable) moral outrage and utter amazement with a little humor, take a gander at the LPAC Web site's ditty on the hostage-taking incident at one of Hillary Clinton's campaign offices in N.H. the other day (in LHL's home town, by the way). The Great Mind himself calls it a security "set-up" of HRC -- unavoidably meaning that some larger, nefarious force put this troubled guy up to this business for some ulterior intergalactically-signficant strategic reason.

This unique and scathingly brilliant insight may quickly go by the wayside when nothing further is heard of this thing. Sometimes a cigar is just is a cigar . . .

I am extremely impressed with posts that provide personal, first-hand insight into LaRouchian psychological pathology -- the lasting, corrosive effects that the Org/Lyn has had on real people, decent people.

I salute everyone who musters the courage to talk about painful issues. Further, these testimonies are probably quite efficient at reaching Yutes.

Exposure and discussion of intellectual issues is interesting and, at times, extremely humorous; this is helpful, vital, essential. But honest introspection and frank talk about psychological experiences has a different "feel".

In any case, I simply wanted to express encouragement and say that I have deep respect and great admiration for anyone willing to bare their soul in an attempt to help others.

Thank you, earnest_one, I agree. On occasion I detect on this message board a certain self-righteousness, as if it were not only by the grace of God that we still are not doing the same things as those other benighted individuals who remain or are being newly impressed into slavery. There also seems to be the tacit assumption that if one is no longer a member of this cult, then that person suddenly becomes absolved of all sin and is transformed into some sort of angel. I suppose taking time here every day to read and contribute is a small attempt to make amends for all the harm I caused as a loyal soldier for Lyndon LaRouche.

By the way, does anyone recall LaRouche ever merely thanking his followers for all their hard work? I don't.

Sancho asked:

"By the way, does anyone recall LaRouche ever merely thanking his followers for all their hard work? I don't."

I have never seen anything even close to this. He thanks people for introducing him to an audience. That's it.

Graciousness -- acknowledgement of others -- is beneath him. All efforts are devoted to catapulting himself upwards. He acts like he has real disdain, if not disgust, for “the people”.

Sometimes I think that the best antidote to LHL is to actually witness him and entourage in person. I still recall the one time I saw him, when he came to town in (I think) 1980, as part of his presidential campaign. I knew a local guy who was a "supporter," but not directly an LC member, AFAIK. So we met up to go hear the "great man" (his words) speak in a rented room at a local hotel. Not only did this involve signing in (which took some quick thinking on my part - do I want these people to have my name and address?) and getting patted down by security, but once in the sparsely populated room, I was faced with security goons in the four corners of the room, apparently armed and dangerous. My acquaintance left me to my own devices, so I took a seat in an empty row and got to experience an LCer sliding down the row to the seat next to me, to pump me for why I was there and what I thought of LHL, etc.

Man, that place was rippling with paranoia and hyper-altertness. LHL's actual speech was nothing special that I can recall, just the usual LaRouchian rant, delivered with a swaggering self-confidence and snarky belligerence, but the whole crazed scene certainly exuded the strong message to steer clear of these people if I knew what was good for me.

I have to wonder how an LHL in-person speech would come off now, some 28 years later.

(Message edited by scrimscraw on December 02, 2007)

"I have to wonder how an LHL in-person speech would come off now, some 28 years later. "

Go to Northern Virginia for one of his "World Renowned WebCasts". If I recall correctly they used to be held in Reston, VA, about 30 miles east of Leesburg, closer to Washington. Perhaps they are even held in Washington itself. Power, Power, Power... this way, all those questions from "The Senate" can be hand delivered by special messengers -- carrier pigeons.

The archives of these events appear on LL's sites. They look pretty tame (lame) compared to your experience which, incidentally, sounds pretty accurate -- there was madness, truly, 28 years ago in terms of security and bodyguards.

As I've been reading through back postings on the board, I have yet to run into a clear explanation of the organizational set-up of the LC. Plus, it is not exactly clear what the initials NC and NEC stand for. For the benefit of those of us who aren't ex-members, can someone explain, please?