Ah.  Finally I run into the new(ish) blog from the leader of the Larouchian Cryonics Movement…  Check it out and let us see what animates him, and his self-professed “movement of one member”.

Pearl harbour was staged?
Hippocratic Oath given Nazi interpretation by Obama’s man.

Hm.  Actually none of this is terribly interesting.  The one I’m wondering about is “Comedy That Actually Works“.  Having my fill of some rather low-brow comedy regarding David Carradine’s death, I’m wanting to set my mind on a higher, more Platonic plane.  Unfortunately, the leader of the Larouchian Cryonics Movement is setting aside his material behind passwords, so I’m stuck with his request to go to the EIR site.  Which, I will admit, is a bastion of comedy.

Though not quite as comedic as the commenters that float into the blogosphere:

wow, pretty accurate description of Larouche’s work! If I were’nt already associated with the movement, I’d ask, “where do I sign up to get involved with these people?” Thank you for spreading the word accurately. My only question is, did you investigate anything that you wrote above? is it all really that absurd to you that it doesn’t merit an investigation? Are you that immersed in popular opinion that you just simply cannot think, or are you afraid that Larouche may be right?

The canard of the “Popular Opinion” — a clever device, I’d say, on how the followers can explain away how nobody much thinks about their master, and those that do and pay him slight enough mind to do the cursory glance (and for the most part a cursory glance is what he deserves) come up with “the standard”.

… Very RoughlyDefined as what ends up dumped onto wikipedia.  And now it’s time to look at the concerted Boiler-room Effort at Wikipedia.  Firstly, the round-up for the keeping of an article for Stanislov Menshikov:

Keep. As long as we continue to pretend this is an encyclopedia, I support greater lenience in applying notability standards for articles about legitimate scholars/thinkers than those conerncing pop culture flashes-in-pans. I find the discussion as to whether the article was crated by a (gasp) banned user to be petty and somewhat surreal.–The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I imagine that wikipedia features articles for peoples that are arguably less notable than this Menshikov, and doesn’t have articles for peoples that are arguably more notable than Menshikov, and to a great extent I don’t much care — in the end I barely care about the odd dents that the Larouchians have affected in the Larouche articles, though am fascinated enough to observe and note this process.  But whatever it’s worth, the only reason that article was created was because the Larouche organization wants to use him to push forward the idea that Larouche is a somebody.  It is a curious skewing of wikipedia focuses — kind of similar to how the sweep of articles devoted to topics of concern to Larouche is equivalent to, say, Albert Einstein — in and of itself not too much of a problem, I’d say, except it gives a pretty bad impression.  (See the article devoted to Hegla Zepp… and I’ll get to that one in a second.)

Remind me to go to sign up to wikipedia, and get to the task of putting up the Floyd Paxton article.  Who’s he?  He invented the bread-clip and ran the “Qwik Lox Fastener” company.  That’s as notable as an old Soviet functionary, and has more of an impact on our day to day lives, right?

Is there any doubt that Helga Zepp has roughly zero affect on anything outside the cloistered confines of Das Cult?  Well, never mind, she gets a wikipedia article.  A point for her in the Helga Zepp — Jeffrey Steinberg Splinters of Sucession.  Some new arguments have ensued over her article — the travails of EIR as a source (and EIR will hype up any niggling mention of das Cult  — apparently she addressed the Duma, and apparently that is worth something grand).

Incidentally, the state of EIR looks to be rather poor these days:

The EIR is not shipped to the European organization any more. Apparently no (!) copies reach Europe any more. So the LC in Europe cant mail the EIR to the last subscribers here that still does not use the EIW. Apparently the European LC is making photocopies in black-and-white and are mailing it out instead!

Hm.  Nobody’s missing anything.  EIR is now just a compilation of images of Obama photo-shopped with Hitler’s mustache, anyways.
… Say, doesn’t that fall under the Larouche concern last December that Soros (or somebody like that, and also the British) was orchestrating, some heated rhetoric would be the cover for which this might be done, for the Assassination of Obama — which, I’d think the “Obama’s Nazi Health Care Plan” trope would suffice for this purpose, over in that alter-world.  (See my commentings of nazi  related rhetoric here, or look to this item regarding Nancy Pelosi:

“What is she doing about genocide? Doesn’t she know the Obama administration, her own party, is pushing genocide? She doesn’t have time to deal with that? What is wrong with the bitch? She is not paying attention. She wants to change the subject. She is not talking about reality. She wants to talk about schedules.”

Regretably I don’t have enough patience to pin down comments of how an Obama Assassination would come down — and the strange double-track that would preclude his current talk, but I can take us back to when the gang in the Boiler-room was rhapsodizing about Obama’s assassinating, and speculating that (from the “Get Larouche Conspiracy”) “Molly might do it” and “pin it down on us”.

Heh heh heh.  Right?
Oh, that one answers this question — echoing some thoughts expressed by Revenire – that Erik asks here:

One can wonder why so much time is spend on the morning briefing. While EIR cotains some useful articles, the briefing is a piece of paper that is not memorised, stored, re-read or quoted to the outside world.

I collect from all over, and arrange the pieces of the puzzle as best I can.  One item to be noted here — regarding an article on the overuse of the word “extreme” in political campaigns in the state of Virginia:

In 1996, Mark Warner — then challenging Republican Sen. John Warner — tried to paint the old lion as a wingnut, too. “Mark Warner is testing the risky strategy of trying to portray the senator as an extremist,” a news article reported. During a debate, Mark Warner admitted to having voted for John only because he was the lesser of two evils: “Between you and the LaRouche party, you were the clear choice . . . . [But] I don’t think the senator that I voted for in 1990 would have marched in lockstep with Newt Gingrich over the past year.”

Note that in denigrating his opponent as “extreme” he didn’t even bother with a labeling of the 1990 “greater of two evils” Nancy Spannaus candidacy as “extreme” or “loopy” or what have you.

The current line of Obama following the “Nazi Health Care” plot — I’m having a bit of trouble locating on an ideological line in terms of what passions the campaign is aimed to flow out from.  But maybe I’ll contemplate that one later.  I’m having some trouble locating the existence of the org itself at the moment — maybe they can flutter past and leave some debris to remind me that they do exist in the physical economy somewhere.

This entry was posted on Sunday, June 7th, 2009 at 2:30 pm and is filed under The LaRouche Challenge. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.