LAROUCHE PURGES GERMAN CADRE
Lyndon LaRouche expels former top aides in bitter
struggle over financial assets!
Will the truth about the death of Jeremiah
Duggan—terrorized and possibly murdered by LaRouchian thugs because he was a
Jew—finally be revealed?
I. E-mail to lyndonlarouchewatch.org from a former
high-level LaRouche follower (January 2007)
I received the attached documents a few days ago. The short and the long is that the Guru's outfit in Germany is disintegrating. The Guru himself has expelled the entire German leadership (except his dog-wife): Friesecke, Hellenbroich, Liebig and their consorts, and more. It seems that none of the original German founders remains. The two groups seem to be fighting for control of the assets, and accusations are flying, in traditional Stalino-Nazi style. LaRouche's long paper is pretty silly: he explains that he has not been in control of the outfit for the last 16 years, and charges Friesecke with being an anti-Semite. Quite rich.
At bottom, it seems that the Guru tried to overthrow his own boomer-generation leaders and replace them with greenhorn oafs (as he tried with the RYM from the ghetto in the early '70s), and the boomers resisted.
Reading the bastard's long babble, I find him a decaying old man. Same feeling?
Anyway, I find a grim satisfaction in this falling out. It may deliver quite a blow to the credibility of an outfit that always insisted on being transcontinental.
II. Leroy, bring me my shoes! LaRouche tirade charges his German aides with cowardice and financial misconduct
****************************************************
- EUROPEAN OPERATIONS BULLETIN FOR
JANUARY 4, 2007 -
****************************************************
I do
not wish to spoil your fun, but. . ."
- THE BABY'S SHOES -
- By Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. -
Preface:
There
are times when some things must be said, like it or
not.
The Baby must be changed, or negligence will have rash
consequences.
Our late Marianna Wertz once said of me:
"He never fired
anyone."
The year was 1997. She was referring to the
practices
of our U.S. political association. At the time she said
that,
her statement was essentially correct. From time to time,
we did
expel some red-handed agents of hostile agencies; but,
otherwise,
her comment was fair. We never expelled, or abused
anyone
because they expressed political or like differences of
opinion;
we preferred to let the logic of the political
discussion-processes
work their way. Nothing assumed a priori is
to be
taken as inevitable. Ideas, and related agreements and
disagreements
are not born; they develop. If the disagreement is
sufficiently
important in its effect on the continued existence
of our
association, or its essential commitment to work, a
rational,
"due process" approach to mutual agreement on "divorce"
were
always a preferred remedy, if no better remedy were
available.
That did not mean that I had absolutely no
intention of
actually
expelling anyone at the time Marianna made that
statement;
the fact was, I did not have the necessary authority
to do
so at that time. The subject of the controversy under
discussion
on that occasion, was a much needed, ongoing
investigation
I had directed, for the purpose of correcting our
association's
obviously defective financial and
economic-management
policies. Fernando Quijano was one of the
targets
of my investigation, to which she was referring. Quijano
had
staged a rage-fit over the fact that I was investigating the
financial
mismanagement; this was the incident to which she had
referred.
Shortly after Marianna had made her
remark, Uwe Friesecke
popped
in from Europe (he had actually been directing the U.S.
association's,
as much as European finances at that time,
steering
the flow of what would amount to $9 millions into
Wiesbaden
coffers, most of its as a U.S. delivered subsidy for
Uwe's
Wiesbaden office). Uwe walked, unannounced, into the dining
room
where I was seated, slapped a packet of the dubious
documents
I was investigating on to the dining room table,
declared
"this is what you get!" and stalked out, back to
Germany.
The investigation which I had launched was, thus,
suppressed
at that time (to be remedied when it could be
revived).
When the head of the Leesburg financial office, which
Uwe had
controlled, resigned, later, creating a relevant vacancy
in that
post, the evidence of the misfeasance which Uwe was
covering
over became clear to all who cared to face the facts
that it
were no longer possible to conceal.
Although it was only in September 1990,
that Quijano had
unveiled
the fact of his turn to alliance with the fascist
international,
he, out of a "macho" sort of cowardice, already
"cut
the proverbial deal," but secretly, years earlier. Since
September
1990, when he had first aired his fascist and related
death-squad
connections with shameless openness. He was open,
even to
the point of bragging, of his being at the disposal of
known
fascist networks inside the U.S. government and also
related
far-right-wing networks of the fascist international
abroad.
In fact, he was soon to negotiate an attempted alliance
with
the Ibero-American circles associated with dictator
Pinochet,
and with the circles associated with the Operation
Condor
death-squad operations of the early 1970s.
Quijano's actual break with loyalty to the
association had
come
earlier, no later than somewhere between 1987-1989, but
this
became known to us only with his September 1990 explosion of
pro-fascist
rage against the policies of the pre-September, 1990
period.
He had also gone over, as fascists of his adopted
pedigree
are prone to do, to overt, frankly stated anti-Semitism,
a wrong
which I would never tolerate, earlier, then, or now,
within
our association. As evidence of Quijano's Rumpelstiltskin
imitation
drifted to me where I was, I was waiting for the moment
I had
the authority to clean out a nest associated with the fact
that
Quijano was an agent of fascist networks; but I was in no
position
to be able do so until 1999-2000. Quijano was the
subject
of the relevant 1997 discussion to which Marianna's
remark
referred.
Uwe has been of known, strong and
irrational,
pro-vertriebene-prejudice
leanings, as the issue of the proposed
move to
a Berlin office brought this, once again, prominently
into
the open. Whether this was a related consideration, or not,
he not
only maintained his collaboration with what he knew to be
the
avowed fascist and anti-Semite Quijano, but not only defended
Quijano,
but, even acted with violent outbursts, outbursts which
he also
incited, and even orchestrated among others, repeatedly,
to
hide, as much as possible, all of the incontestable facts
which
were released by me, and others on the ground, about
Quijano's
fascist connections, still, even up to the most
relevant
point in time, even since events of late December.
The essential, simple truth in Marianna's
description of my
manifest
intentions, is that I oppose any form of political
tyranny
within our association, including that which reigned
under
Quijano associate Uwe Friesecke's influence, in both the
U.S.A.
and, also, what I found, beginning 1999-2000, in the
European
association in Germany. I said this most emphatically
and
clearly.
Over the course of 1999-2000, leading into
a crucial
development
of Spring 2001, a bitter controversy erupted within
the
European leadership, beginning with an incident which
occurred
one Springtime evening in 2001. Since that 2001
incident,
there has been virtually no actual rule of collegiality
within
the functioning of the European Executive Committee (EEC).
Shouting
and screaming wild-eyed nonsense, by those acting as
Uwe's
agents in opposition to my exposure of Fernando, and lying
without
shame for as much as hours on end, became the
characteristic
trend of recurring events in what passed for both
regular
and special EEC and EC meetings.
Did this occur because the members of the
EEC supporting
Uwe,
shared Uwe's policy of "keeping together an association
including
Quijano"? I never believed that was the issue with
the
majority of those members of the EEC backing Uwe's policy on
Quijano.
The heat of the issue was essentially organizational,
Uwe's
hysterical effort to control the association there,
especially
all of the principal financial affairs of all members
of the
group, top down, was the determining factor in the rage
which
Uwe orchestrated among the relevant leaders. All of this
was
orchestrated, chiefly by him, through his control over the a
group
of persons who had abandoned their own powers of judgment
for the
sake of being part of his clique, a clique referred to,
even
among themselves, as "the group."
However, there was another nasty political
motive for all
this, a
motive supplied from adversaries influencing Uwe and
others,
from outside the bounds of our association. Coming into
the scene
of the political slaughter in our European hen-house, I
recognized
that the relevant badger, with important local
political
connections, had paid a visit to our premises.
- A Problem To Be Foreseen -
When we had built up a political association
in the U.S.A.
as in
Europe and Central and the Americas, over the 1966-1974
interval,
we crafted an association in which consent to
principle,
and to a broad and active process of discussion of
outlook
and policies, were the rule. Over two decades or so,
leading
bodies usually functioned as deliberative bodies in the
best
sense. Persons who understood the orientation and related
commitments
of the association, should be an active part of the
deliberative
process which governed the direction of the effort
of the
association as a whole. The intent was to have strong
leadership,
with active accountability to the lower echelons on
matters
of policy-shaping, as much as of implementation of
policies
rooted in broad-based consent to well-informed,
principled
perspectives, historic and otherwise.
The essence of competent politics is
participation. To share
experiences
with participants, you must be active politically in
society.
Organizations are built around ideas which are expressed
in the
form of activity. Without relevant activity, who would
have
any reason to join the activity you fail to represent.
Friescke's
increasing abhorrence of actual mass-based political
activity,
resulted in policies tending more and more, as an
impulse
by his clique, in the direction of a fund-collecting
program
for the benefit of the un-dead.
The leading distinction of that
association was, in
principle,
what I had introduced as my emphasis warning against
the
existence, and the role of induced behavioral traits, such
as, in
the extreme, those treated by psychoanalyst Bruno
Bettelheim's
analysis of what is best termed "The Bettelheim
Syndrome."
I refer to the concept which Bettelheim identified,
most
emphatically, with the cases of victims of Nazi
concentration-camps.
My point was, that by being aware of this
and
related "mechanisms" of social control which infect
societies,
"democracy" becomes helpless as a means of defense of
a
population against its own conditioned proclivity for
submission
to the kind of conditioning which a combination of
post-1986
developments had induced within a significant part of
the
general and local leaderships of the organization in
post-1989
Germany. "Democracy" becomes as cruel a farce, in
such
instances, as the dive into the Peloponnesian War by
Pericles'
Sophist-permeated Athens. How can a people be free,
when
the beast which tyrannizes them, such as the Sophistry of
modern
Europe and the Americas, is embedded, as a conditioned
social
response, in themselves?
In the end, often, but not always, the
gates of the
concentration-camps,
and the like, have been opened; but, in the
meantime,
terrible damage, as in U.S. Vice-President Dick
Cheney's
torture-chambers, will have been done. A related
pattern
was developed on both sides of the Atlantic, after
1986-87;
the result exploded, even within the ranks of our
Sophistry-ridden
European leadership, over the relevant course of
time.
The related expression of such a recurring
problem had been,
more
broadly, within the history of the association as a whole,
that,
from time to time, some people, such as Uwe, wished to be
"the
boss," a frankly Orwellian sort of boss. Associated nominal
leaders
were expected to genuflect, as, for example, whenever
"Big
Brother" Uwe, or, sometimes, his wife, decreed. On the few
relevant
occasions this came up in the U.S. association, each
time
some among us moved to preempt leadership for "practical
purposes"
bearing on finances and budgets or the adult youth
movement,
we had troubles in our management affairs, as in some
parts of
Europe. These cases have been exceptional, but, like an
automobile
accident, sometimes have rather long-term effects even
as a
result of an isolated, unexpected incident.
As a precedent for this behavior in
Europe, we had had the
mafia-like
tyranny which had been attempted, 1978-1981, on behalf
of a
credit-scam operation run by Kalimtgis and Dalto (a scam run
partly
on behalf of a person who proved, subsequently, to be an
habitual
bankrupt), first at Computron, but which was continued
into a
later time, for different purposes, by the Dalto who has
become
known publicly as a professionally perenniel bankrupt, in
his
later political incarnations.
We have had a situation in Europe which
is, thus, broadly
similar
to "the boss" mentality shown in the case of Kalimtgis,
Computron,
and Dalto, as I have already referenced this, under
the
schemes co-directed by Uwe Friesecke and Fernando Quijano in
the
U.S.A., and a related operation in Europe, by Uwe, the latter
case
over the 1989-2006 interval. (The problem represented by
Uwe did
not reach, all at once, to those extremes seen recently,
but, in
the course of that time, it reached the point of
virtually
wrecking the association in Europe, leading into the
explosion
which destroyed virtually any honest discussion, of
almost
anything, from the time of the referenced EEC incident in
Spring
2001, on.) Qualifying considerations aside, the political
side of
the scamming was the reliance on gangster-like management
methods.
Usually, sooner or later, such tyrannies,
large and
powerful,
or petty and small, tend to blow up. The conflict
between
adopted custom and reality approaches a
boundary-condition,
like an economic depression, at which point
the
foolish habits of years explode in the face of all concerned.
This happened, recently, on this past
Monday, November 6th.
This
time the customary Wiesbaden, Monday morning briefing by Uwe
Friesecke,
was a brief, but highly enraged rant, which prefaced
Uwe's
attempt to launch an action which threatened to dissolve
the
entire Germany association during the coming days and weeks.
That outburst had been prompted as his
reaction to
presentation
in which I supplied as a detailed portrayal, to the
LYM in
Berlin, of the "new politics" operation already in
operation
by us within the U.S.A. Uwe chose to change the
subject
of my report as a whole, focusing on my brief statement
of my
personal apologies, to the LYM, for the capricious and
vicious
treatment it had just suffered at Uwe's hands, one more
time,
during the events of the week preceding my Friday, November
3rd
oral report to the LYM members assembled in Berlin. Uwe
tried
desperately to change the subhject; he chose to arrange to
perform
what might pass for a quasi-psychotic rage-fit over my
oral
report of November 3rd to the Berlin youth. He focused his
rage on
the brief, and absolutely appropriate reference to the
utter
lack of prudence, even lack of simple personal morality, in
Uwe's
behavior toward the LYM over the preceding week.
The actual issue prompting Uwe's rage-fit
of that Monday,
was the
relatively long-standing hostility, by Uwe and his group,
to both
the existence of the youth movement, and opposition to
the
quality of political action which was leading, at the very
moment
of Uwe's moment of madness, to a stunning Democratic Party
landslide
victory in elections to the U.S. House of
Representatives.
Uwe's rage at the references to Uwe's
immorality
in a very sneaky sabotage of the supply of subsistence
to the
youth, became for him the point to blow everything up: it
was
virtually Uwe's "Cheney Moment."
The immediate breakup of the association
intended by an
enraged
Uwe, was delayed by Uwe's recognition of certain
unexpected
implications of the warning I presented to an internal
body on
Thursday of the same week following Uwe's Monday morning
rage-fit.
Nonetheless, the damage which Uwe's wild-eyed charge
did
came as a shot through the hull of our European vessel as a
whole;
it caused permanent damage to a significant number among
what
had been, up to his Monday freak-show act, the membership of
the
association there.
Uwe's still-reverberating, wild-eyed fit
of rage, rightly
reminded
me of a similar experience, in late 1980, with a
credit-scam
which had been supported by a Costas Kalimtgis'
explosion
of rage. Uwe's behavior since the morning briefing
incident
of November 7th, was broadly identical to that of the
Costas
whom I had caught red-handed as an accomplice in a
Computron
credit-scam operation against our association. Uwe's
wild-eyed
sort of ego-driven fit, could be sign that he might be,
even
probably, was on the verge of committing financial
Hari-Kari,
but taking as many to doom with him as might be within
his
reach.
Since Uwe has been, in fact, a virtual
dictator over aspects
of all
parts of the set of respectively distinct organizations
having
to do with financial management and finances, bipolar
rage-ball
Uwe, like the Kalimtgis of late 1980, is not accustomed
to
being obliged to behave rationally. He has reigned over the
majority
of the European Committee (EC), especially most among
the EEC
itself, to the effect that the presently shell-shocked
members
of the EC are to be seen, during recent years, as either
bellowing
in dutifully echoing the piques expressed by Uwe's fits
of rage
themselves, or are now standing, as Bruno Bettelheim
described
this syndrome, like surviving inmates in a Nazi prison
camp,
whose guards had fled: standing, stunned, looking at the
opened
gateway through which they fear to walk.
Currently, there is a wont, among some
relevant circles in
in
Germany, to act to minimize the damage done by the vividly
anti-American
Uwe's lunatic outburst. The "morning after" sense
of
"What did I really do last night," settles in with the
relatively
more sane view seen the following day. For that
reason,
the most crucial facts known to me, are being held within
the
bounds of the privileged confidences among the negotiating
parties.
Let them clear their heads, and realize what damage
they
have done in their virtually drunken fit of rage.
However, my expertise in these kinds of
business matters,
tells
me, that the worst kind of misjudgments must be expected
from
the circles associated with some of Uwe's business circles
within
the ranks of the former association, and also from among
circles,
tied to Uwe, but from outside our own association in
Germany.
In this matter, I shall be as discreet as
ongoing efforts at
damage-control
warrant; but it would be far worse than indiscreet
to hide
the general fact of the situation from associates in
Europe
and the Americas.
However, that is not the limit of my
immediate
responsibility;
I must also answer the implied question in my
associates'
and our supporters' minds: "What does what has just
happened
mean?" The critic will ask: "Why did we permit this
degeneration
within the German association to go this far, for so
long?
What does that say about us? It is the latter subject which
I
address below.
- - - - - - - -
- Why No Babies?! -
I am probably, presently, the world's most
accomplished,
still
living economist, and no slouch in principles of financial
and
related management. Therefore, I saw the threatened financial
ruin of
my U.S. association, as if from about a thousand miles
away
from Leesburg, during the 1991-1994 interval, and saw it
still
ongoing when I was under "look, but don't touch"
conditionalities
during 1994-2000.
What was being done was not only gross
business
mismanagement,
but a form of mismanagement driven by fear,
chiefly
a very specific fear. It has been the fear of doing
anything
a politically potent political association would do,
such as
going out to the people to discuss political realities
and
options for the nation as a whole, and also other nations.
The
fear was that relevant governments, and similarly potent
agencies,
would move to destroy us, should we do anything as
politically
potent as had been done under my leadership earlier.
This
fear was played upon by relevant forces within governments,
especially
as the Thatcher and Mitterrand governments moved to
force Germany
to destroy itself economically, as the price of
re-unification.
The mass-based orientation was largely, if not
entirely,
shut down, to an increasing degree, in Germany and the
U.S.A.;
a whole section of the Italian association was induced to
disgrace
itself by its own cowardice.
So, shortly after 1989, the mass-outreach
policy of the U.S,
association
was greatly minimized. Mass organizing as a base of
political
support for our association, was largely replaced by a
demoralizing
kind of "boiler room" operation. This was done in
the
U.S., largely under the combined direction of Friesecke and
Quijano.
This incompetent policy reigned in the U.S.A. until I
resumed
an actively leading position in 2000, when certain
restrictions
against my doing so were ended. As far as Uwe's
control
over the Germany association extended, mass-outreach, as
associated
with Uwe's customary hate-object, Helga Zepp
LaRouche,
must be ended, to be replaced by support through
building
up "businesses."
As far as Uwe could reach in Europe, and
even in the U.S.A.
itself,
the policy was "be as politically impotent as you can
be, and
let us loot our businesses for the support of our very,
very
modest, personal comfort-zone politics." That kind of
politics,
Uwe's kind of politics, is the politics of political
demoralization
of anyone caught up for long in such silly games.
But, seeing a management problem, as I saw
the problem
clearly,
even from the distant place I was sitting, during 1993,
is not
sufficient; recognizing the problem and having access to
the
right to fix it, are not always one and the same thing.
It was not until I was sufficiently
unshackled to dump
Fernando
Quijano, and to create an unpleasant setting for his
breeding
pro-fascist circles within and proximate to our
association,
that we were enabled to begin rebuilding a
half-ruined
association, by such included measures as launching
the
beginning of a political movement of young adults, as if all
over
again, during the course of the my Y-2000 U.S. Democratic
Presidential-nomination
campaign.
During the interval of the recounting of
2000 Presidential
election-votes,
and the inauguration of George W. Bush, Jr. as
President,
I had already launched my Y-2004 Presidential
nomination-campaign.
The combination of launching both that
youth
movement, and the influence I gained among some relevant
leading
political circles, through my new campaign, were on the
table
at the February 2001 ICLC conference in Virginia, the
conference
which preceded the campaign against me and Helga
launched
from within the EEC on my arrival in Germany following
that
conference.
This buildup of the U.S. association's
practice of a return
to real
politics, led into the July 2004 Boston Convention, since
which
our regained mass-based political influence has become an
increasingly
significant factor in U.S.A., and, therefore, world
politics.
As 2006 drew toward a close, especially with the
contribution
of our "new politics" operation -- the same method
of
operation featured in that Nov. 3rd briefing to youth which
enraged
Uwe Friesecke so much, our role in the fight to defend
civilization
against the onrushing financial blow-out, has become
of
greater, more crucial significance than at any time since
President
Ronald Reagan's March 23, 1983 proposal of a Strategic
Defense
Initiative to the Soviet government.
Just as our thus repaired, if still a bit
financially
leaking
ship, is sailing toward the prospect of a war with
possible
victory in sight, the celebrated Brandenburger lemming,
called
Uwe, in a fit of rage, decided to jump ship.
- How The Break Came -
The explosion in the EEC came over the
issue of the
formation
of the youth movement. The majority of the EEC wished
no
youth movement, then or now. Nonetheless, since the fact of
my campaigning
had a certain implied cash-value for the group of
businesses
in Germany, the EEC members who hated me (for Uwe's
sake)
continue to praise my role regularly, in public, up through
the
week preceding Uwe's public freak-outs of the week of this
past November
7th.
Thus, in sum, I had no control over the
business practices
of
either the U.S. or European associations, from January 1989
through
2000. During 2001, I did begin to exert some influence
on
cleaning up the 1989-2000 management mess in the U.S.A., but
had
virtually no success on this account in Germany; Uwe was
increasingly
fanatical on this point. Meanwhile, from Spring
2001,
the leadership of the EEC and some of the EC made clear
that
they were determined to shut down the youth organization, an
association
of young adults of the same generation, in their
time,
who had been the body of the 1776-1783 U.S. Independence
movement
and of the crafting of a U.S. Federal Constitution which
is
vastly superior to anything concocted in Europe (although
President
de Gaulle did try) up to the present day.
The developments I have listed thus far
were not exactly an
internal
affair of our association. Within weeks of U.S.
President
Ronald Reagan's March 23, 1983 presentation of his
proposal
of "A Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI)," the first
major
steps toward my elimination, debated as to be by death or
other
means, were already under way. The statement by one
official
close to President George H.W. Bush, was that I had
"made
policy" of the U.S.A., "without paying my dues" to the
club.
They considered me exceptionally capable, but therefore
all too
capable for their tastes, and better eliminated in one
fashion
or another.
The most crucial issue for "those who
came to get rid of
me,"
after March 1983, had been my role in developing and then
assisting
the U.S. in crafting what President Reagan was to
identify
as an "SDI"; that was the principal motive for what
would
become a vast, international campaign to destroy, or,
least,
corrupt the ICLC into a state of managed influence,
influence
managed by forces within governments of both the U.S.A.
and
Europe in particular.
By 1987, this international operation
against me and my
associates
had begun to wreck the association within France,
Germany,
and Italy. By 1991-1992, the European associations were
decimated
in part, and, also, a number of leading members had
struck
a pact with "interesting" official and quasi-official
circles in Europe. The Italy association was virtually taken
over,
top down, by right-wing circles. The same pattern was
typified
by the repeated utterances of Michael Liebig, virtually
to the
most recent date of encounter, who warned of the risk of
letting
the European Labor Committees, especially in Germany, do
anything
which was not a naked display of being under effective
management
of those (actual or imaginary) watching agencies which
might
move to destroy an association which did not "behave
itself"
as the now avowed anti-Americans Liebig and Friesecke
prescribed.
Military-service avoider and self-esteemed
"master
strategist"
Liebig, is not exactly a miracle of willingness to
put
himself actually on the line for a cause, at least, not
recently.
The moral question, which Michael Liebig
and other EEC and
EC
members in Uwe's camp refused to accept, was the moral issue
of the
fact that mankind's interest demands a certain willingness
to
challenge a deadly foe of humanity itself, a foe such as a
policy
which could ruin civilization for generations to come. If
you
flee the battlefield while the war goes on, what does your
behavior
say of you, in places such as "Heaven"? It was
cowardice
shown in this fashion, on this specific point
repeatedly,
which was shown, and recommended, by Michael, but
also
adopted by others, which was the moral failure which led to
the
moral rottenness which has come to dominate them today.
Michael
expressed, thus, the trend in fear-shaped, sometimes even
panic-shaped
outlook which has led those lured into the cowardly
outlook
he affirms as being prudence today.
He typifies the lack of that sense of
immortality which
underlies
true morality in mortal behavior.
In the meantime, the present situation in
and around
Wiesbaden,
is not without the continuous role of outside agents
of one
sort or another, in the actual management of internal
financial
and related affairs. Relevant, nameable channels, some
with
what would be termed "extremely interesting" aspects, are
already
known to us. The cock crowed more than thrice, and
crowed
again, and again, until it died.
Thus, the moral and related weaknesses
shown by relevant
German
associates, recent past and present, are not to be
mistaken
for the crucial factor in shaping the situation thus
produced
for today; the outside interests are.
Sometimes, such outside management of the
internal affairs,
is
presented as among the charms of what is called democratic
forms
of government, especially in the superior oligarchical
traditions,
such as the merry countesses of the Congress of
Vienna,
which still reign, as from the pedestals of Bildzeitung,
over
modern so-called democratic Europe today.
Actual human morality has much to do with
babies. A family's
own
babies are only exemplary of the larger and deeper issue. It
is the
coming generations which are the babies of all mortal and
moral people.
The attachment to what should become the relevant
adult
youth movement of one's time, as Benjamin Franklin's youth
movement
made the U.S. Federal Constitution, and became the
beacon
of hope for all mankind, is the hallmark of morality of
any
generation. It is necessary to supply the babies with shoes,
so that
they might move about.
The rejection of the youth movement, by
the relevant faction
within
and around the EEC, was an expression of a deep,
existential
quality of personal Boomer demoralization: the moral
rot
which led to such outcomes as Friesecke's lunatic rant of
November
6th.
- Thus, In Closing . . . -
This brings us, again, to Chapter I of
"The Lost Art ...":
on the
subject of "... Our Heathen Nation."
Human morality, as I stress there, is
located in the notion
of an
immortal and specifically creative human personality,
occupying,
rather briefly, a mortal living body. What is durably
significant
about our having lived, is no more than we have spent
our
brief lives to purchase as the future for humanity. Like
Jeanne
d'Arc, what she accomplished was what her very specific
devotion
to a mission of courage, gave to the future generations
of all
mankind, as a gift, resonating, still, today.
This commitment to immortality is expressed
in our devotion
to the
outcome experienced by our children. It does not matter
that
much, whether we give birth to them, or not; what matters is
what we
bequeath to the generations which shall reign in our
stead,
when we have died.
The greatest evil is the most likely evil.
That most likely
evil
today, is a reflection of the possibility established by the
enemies
of the deceased President Franklin Roosevelt, in
launching
what became known in Europe as "The Congress for
Cultural
Freedom." This body, and comparable conspiratorial
associations
inside the U.S.A. itself, were focused upon using
the
pseudo-philosophy called the existentialism of Nazi Martin
Heidegger
and his so-called "Frankfurt School" associates, as a
destructive
force in the tradition of the Sophistry which led
Pericles'
Athens to its ruin in the Peloponnesian War. Martin
Heidegger's
bestial concept of "thrownness" and the radical
neo-Kantianism
of his one-time love, Hannah Arendt, along with
Horkheimer
et al., typify the misconception of the individual
and
society, which became the characteristic moral corruption of
the
generation, as represented essentially by the upper twenty
percentile
of its income-brackets, from among those born between
approximately
1945 and 1956.
This is a lost generation, in the sense of
destiny
associated
with the maddened philologist Friedrich Nietzsche, and
also of
Carl Jung. This is the generation, in Germany, which
carried
that ugly disease which is the existentialist program of
destroying
Germany from within, by uprooting the Humboldt
humanist
educational reforms.
People, who fit the category of the
"Baby Boomer" I have
just
identified afresh, here, and who submit, culturally, to the
notion
of cohabiting with the ideas of those existentialists,
especially
those of the so-called "68er" generation, have
become
the accomplices of the intended destruction of
civilization,
perhaps for generations to come.
The profession of being religious is not
exculpatory. If you
are not
committed to support for the development of the coming
generations
of mankind, especially the generations of your own
nation,
you, in the sense of Paul's I Corinthians 13, are as
nothing.
It is the power you assist in delivering to the coming
generations,
especially the young-adult generation into whose
hands
the coming half-century must pass, you personally have
made of
yourself an existentialist waste of history's time. If
you
oppose the idea of a youth movement, saying you are a
Catholic,
for example, does not absolve you of your crime of
negligence,
respecting the future of mankind.
It is the seemingly osmotic tendency among
Baby Boomers to
resist
support of the development and role of potential leaders
of the
future represented, most immediately, from among the ranks
of the
young adults, which expresses, most clearly, the great
betrayal
of civilization of those who will not break with what
conditioning
had made instinctive in their generation, as by the
frankly
pro-satanic existentialism promoted by such institutions
as the
Congress for Cultural Freedom.
This sociological fact of current history,
is the key to
what
underlay Uwe Friesecke's explosion of corruption exhibited
on the
morning of this past November 6th. Whether or not Uwe and
his
most devout followers in his recent folly could be rescued
from
their disgrace, I will not venture to guess. What I can say
with
certainty, is that we must reflect on the lesson which the
relevant
events relay. Let us resolve that we will grip our
immortality,
as this would be expressed most efficiently in
generations
still to come.
-----------------------------
OPS
REPORT BERLIN 4TH OF JANUARY 2007!
The big news is that we had Roberto to
join the LYM today,
and
Mette, who just joined on New Year's Eve, had a 50-euro
contribution
on the street today. 14 LYMers set up a booktable at
Rathaus
Steglitz today. People there had no awareness whatsoever
of the
Congress coming back into session in the U.S. today. They
generally
knew that the Democrats won the mid-term elections, but
had not
thought about the effects of that. Rhys had a very easy
time
getting out lots of literature, every time the chorus was
singing.
A car just rolled over where Peter was standing and
wanted
lit through the car window -- then it left again. He
probably
knew us from the intersections. Another guy whom Peter
attempted
to talk to, didn't want to talk, just said that he
didn't
like the Schiller Institute. Andreas Weber said to people
that we
are putting GWB in prison and Merkel back to school,
because
she doesn't know what to do. Also, many youth came up to
the
table, and while they had to wait for an organizer to talk
to,
they started organizing each other. People came up to Rhys
and
asked, "Are you BüSo? I´ve got stuff from you guys half year
ago --
Can I get some new lit?" Portia also noticed that people
are not
at all aware that the U.S the economy could be in bad
condition,
since they believe the U.S. is responsible for all the
bad
things in the world today.
There were 3 school kids deployed against
us, to just keep
organizers
busy. They just came to tell us a lot of rude comments
about
Helga and said sarcastically that Helga "knows what to do",
which
was a slogan in one of the election campaigns. They also
did not
deny that they were paid to stand around there, they
would
ask "do you like FDR?" and if an organizer would say "yes",
they'd
always have stuff to say. They said they liked Guido
Westerwelle
from the FDP, and Portia made a lot of jokes about
Schwesterwelle,
which was enough to take control of the
conversation.
So they could perhaps be from the "young liberals".
One
guy, who always comes over to Helene when we are at this
spot,
also came over today. One young guy who was passing by
kicked
our picket, and walked away with a girl. Then Petra and
Sergej,
ran after them to see if they could get a picture of him.
And in
the supermarket they said to him: "Excuse us, but we need
to take
another picture, the other was not good enough" -- then
he
said, "I don't allow you..." while they took some very good
pictures
of him. (MM)
*** END OF BRIEFING ***
III. Confidential LaRouche memo: They’re all plotting against me
_
FROM:LAR
" Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. "
CC:HZL
SUBJ: FRIENDLY CONFIDENTIAL ADVICE
January 11, 2007
[For only internal circulation at this time. Not to be reproducd
in the AM Briefing at this time.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ADVISORY
1. On November 9,
2006 Anno Hellenbroich, had called an
emergency meeting for that day, a meeting intended by him
to take
a putative act of revenge, on behalf of his master's, Herr Uwe
Friescke's, publicly unwrapped, long- standing, personal
hatred
against not only me, but against the foremost among the
original
leader, and a present political leader of the relevant
Germany
association, Helga
Zepp-LaRouche.
2. The pretext
for Herr Friesecke's relevant outburst, which
occurred on the morning of Monday, November 6, 2006, was
an audio
transcript of a report which I have delivered, orally, to
an
adult youth-movement organization in Berlin, on, Friday
November
3, 2006. The
principal subject of that Berlin presentation, was
the highly successful methods, which I described as
expressing
the principle of a political "mass effect,"
methods being used in
promoting U.S. Democratic Party's Congressional victories
in the
then coming, Tuesday, November 7, 2006 general mid-term
elections.
On the same
November 3, Berlin, occasion, in the course of
the presentation on "mass effect," I took the
occasion for a
mandatory courtesy, offering my admittedly sharp, and, on
reflection, fully justified expression of condolences for the
miserable treatment which Herr Friesecke had just given
those in
the audience, at the beginning of that same week of
October
29-November 3, to date.
He had scampered into hiding, leaving no
working forwarding address, leaving no funds to support
the
feeding of youth who were scheduled to perform a crucially
important, assigned function for that week. I described Herr
Friesecke's willful negligence of responsibilities he had
demanded that he control, exclusively; I described them
succinctly and as fairly as they deserved.
Notably, it
was to be precisely the methods I outlined for
the audience at that Berlin meeting of November 3, which
were to
have contributed a significant margin of the
world-history-making
victory of the November 7 Democratic Party in the Senate,
and as
a "landslide" margin of victory in the House of
Representatives.