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.

Herr Friesecke's barnyard bellowing in his audio

transmission of the morning of November 6, was an explosion of

rage, whose attention was confined to the matter of my mention of

him in that presentation. There was no attention given by him to

principal subject of the Berlin meeting, which treated the

subject of which would become, a day later, that November 7

Democratic victory, which would become famous in the U.S. for

the "new politics" which had contributed to the victory. He has

never publicly acknowledged the truth of either of those matters

treated by the Friday, November 3 Berlin address, to the present

date.

3. That meeting failed to fulfil that malicious intention

which Herr Hellenbroich had served. For that occasion, I had

presented the report of the suspension of Uwe Friesecke from the

international Caucus of Labor Committees, pending an appropriate

processing of specific charges of wrongs identified within that

letter.

The behavior of Herr Friesecke, which I had condemned during

the Berlin event of November 3rd, and the fact of Herr

Friesecke's bellowing indecencies in his broadcast of November

6th, were not in the content of my letter presented then; but,

his behavior of the preceding week, did compel the letter

previously in preparation to be delivered on that occasion.

4. In reaction to the receipt of my letter, on November 9th,

and within the course of the following days, representatives

speaking on behalf of Uwe Friesecke, Anno Hellenbroich, and

Helmut Boettiger, proposed a willingness to consider constructive

measures for cooperation in the interest of the relevant,

affected organizations. On Wednesday, November 15, 2006,

written, signed statements confirming such an agreement to

cooperate were presented to Frau Zepp-LaRouche on behalf of

Friesecke and Boettiger, but the promised letter from

Hellenbroich was not presented. Nonetheless, Frau Helga

Zepp-LaRouche agreed to cooperation with them for the stated

purpose. I endorsed that agreement as a show of good judgment.

5. On the basis of pleas and promises made to me on behalf of

these parties and Frau Zepp-LaRouche I supported, conditionally,

their proposal that I not present the general public with the

content of my letter detailing the reasons for Herr Friesecke's

suspension. This was not a withdrawal of the letter, but an

act intended to facilitate the process of negotiations free of

the irreparable effects of a general public clamor about the

matters under negotiation.

To date, Herr Friesecke has shown no inclination to present

evidence which might justify lifting of the suspension itself;

the suspension stands, accordingly. The actual suspension was,

therefore, not, in itself, a relevant point of negotiation in the

proposed agreement on cooperation, although the content of the

letter remains of the relatively highest importance and relevance

for the matters of proposed cooperation currently at hand.

6. There is a relevant history of Herr Friesecke's long-

standing record of acts of personal hatred against Helga

Zepp-LaRouche, and the pattern of continuing, and maliciously

intended lying gossip against her, from circles within the

association who were, de facto, steered by Herr Friesecke on this

account; also, in light of the evidence that this policy radiated

from Herr Friesecke had been the dominant feature of relations,

most emphatically, throughout the 2000-2006 interval, there was

no foreseeable possibility of reconciliation of them with Frau

Zepp-LaRouche, on the one side, or, on the side of the other

party, the latter composed of those relevant others of that

Friesecke- orchestrated claque who participated in perpetrating

the pattern of malicious conduct against her. They were already

too far gone in their burden of their own shared lies and

fomented hatreds for anything better than a reasonable outcome.

Therefore, the agreement to cooperation, which Herr Hellenbroich

endorsed orally, but not in written form, could not, and did not

envisage an eruption of warm personal feelings in the

situation.

Therefore, there was no conceivable, implied purpose for an

attempted agreement to cooperation including such parties,

unless, and except it were to protect the common interest of the

institutions involved, protecting them from the clearly

onrushing, early consequences of a declaration of personal hatred

and wild-eyed, bullish desire to destroy, as expressed, most

typically, by Herr Friescke in a broadcast statement by him on

the morning of November 6, 2006.

7. To the present day, although steps toward cooperation have

been proposed by some significant, relevant specific and implied

other parties to the joint effort, no willingness to cooperate in

a relevant way, has been shown, to date, in any form of

substance, by Herr Hellenbroich. In light of the existence of

interests, including some associated with Herr Friesecke,

interests external to the relevant association, interests which

are operating within the association from outside it, we must

view the continued refusal by Herr Hellenbroich, to date, in the

following terms of reference.

He has limited himself to asserting his personal interests,

as if he were one seeking a "golden parachute," even against the

vital interests of the particular organization which he,

ostensibly, represents. He is so visibly steeped in a rage born

of fears prompted by his own guilty role over recent years, that

he has great difficulty in even appearing to behave rationally.

Thus far, he has refused to discuss rationally any of the

relevant kinds of substantive, underlying issues which bear upon

an efficient form of cooperation in fulfilling the stated purpose

of the agreement. Although, the evidence is that his actions are

chiefly that of yet another talking puppet of Herr Friesecke, he

has, on his own account, stubbornly falsified the causes of the

temporary embarrassment, a financial embarrassment to which the

effect of his own reckless actions have contributed. He has

refused to accept any reasonable negotiation of measures which

would competently serve the mission of protecting the vital

interests of each and all of the members of cooperating groups.

If Herr Hellenbroich continues in his expressed intent to take

actions which would, in fact, quickly destroy the entities which

the cooperation was intended to assist, an early catastrophe,

not cooperation, would be the more or less irreversible outcome.

8. Thus, no intent for relevant types of cooperation has been

shown, thus far, by Herr Hellenbroich, who appears to be

determined to force general publication of the relevant letter

which was reported to the Wiesbaden (Erbenheim) office on

Thursday, November 9, 2006. Therefore, unless Herr Hellenbroich

is induced, by himself or others, to change his ways, to accept

serious steps which will effectively prompt the intention

underlying the agreement to cooperate, circumstances would tend

to prompt a popular demand for wide public circulation of the

letter suspending Herr Friesecke.

Herr Hellenbroich's fraudulently composed pretext for his

currently proposed action, and also alternative measures he

recommends, are each and all incompetent in fact as to content,

in the respect that what he falsely alleges could not conceivably

produce an outcome consistent with an avowed intent for actual

cooperation. He has, thus, proposed nothing better that proposed

agreement to cooperate in perpetrating non-cooperation.

9. Herr Hellenbroich's false representation of the causes of

his firm's problem of recent months (a problem which played a

leading, personal role in creating), points to the long-standing,

habituated incompetence in fnancial and economic management

under Herr Friesecke's role as the self-proclaimed "the boss."

Herr Friesecke's mismanagement thus becomes a crucial

consideration in assessing the implications of Herr Hellenbrich's

conduct at this juncture.

Personal experience which dates from no later than 1997, has

given me direct evidence of specific, important instances of Herr

Friesecke's economic incompetence, and his related reckless

disregard for elementary considerations of good business

practice, as is to be seen in what he was done under his combined

authorized personal authority and by his subterfuges of a

different quality.

This has been shown, persistently, by the manner of his

performance, simultaneously in both the U.S.A. and Germany during

1989-1998, and in the relevant executive functions he has

continued to assume, in Germany, since the time I resumed my role

of leadership within the U.S. association, in 2000.

Since that time, he has always functioned, essentially, in

the manner of what we in the U.S.A. describe, since recent times,

as a "kingpin," hiding behind what are sometimes referred to in

the U.S.A., as "patsies," bullying them into affording him

virtually total control over both the raising of income, and

payment of obligations, for every set of organizations within the

reach of his bullying, "I am the boss" style. His method is,

also, often expressed as "earmarking" income obtained on one

pretext, to supply means of payment in support of a different

business or comparable interest, and to do this in a manner

consistent with the image of a "kingpin." There are related

irregularities to similar effect.

10. Since I am not a principal of the relevant organizations

within the bounds of the Federal Republic, I could only comment,

as I did frequently, in warning Herr Friesecke of the

incompetence and otherwise objectionable methods which I

identified, repeatedly, for Friesecke and Hellenbroich, as

Friesecke's "kingpin-like" conduct of business management.

However, I have put information bearing on my findings in both

matters presented to relevant leading parties within the relevant

association operating within the Federal Republic.

11. On the good side: chiefly, the product which the relevant

business-like associations proffer to its actual and prospective

clientele, is not only valid, but has been accepted as such,

often, over a very significant lapse of time, among relevant

circles in the public. It is the business management sitting,

like a "kingpin," atop these meritorious activities, which is the

problem which must be radically reformed, and cured.

12. To the same effect, I know that the intelligence-product

supplied by these entities, is of a very high quality, and is so

judged by some governments and leading specialists, representing,

variously, parts of its clientele, or fellow- professionals, in

the relevant fields otherwise. The economic forecasting

generated chiefly from my U.S. associates, which is part of the

product available to the relevant entities in Europe, is a

valuable product, which provides every reasonable basis for the

prospectively successful role of the entities represented in the

proposed cooperation. This irony, of an excellent business

victimized by "kingpin"-like "I am the boss," is also typical of

control exerted by "organized crime kingpins" over useful victims

among otherwise sound, even important business enterprises.

13. However, in all that must be said optimistically about

the inherent potentials of these organizations, we must not

overlook the danger to all present business and similar

associations, in Europe, the Americas, and beyond, from a

general, global monetary-financial and related economic cirsis

spreading its influence within Germany and other nations at this

time. Here, we are considering what could be accomplished, were

tolerable business conditions to continue to exist.

14. However, I also know what Herr Friesecke's "kingpin"-like

policies of practice have done, and, by aid of what objectionable

methods, in spoiling the prospects for these entities. The

removal of that problem represented by Herr Friesecke's

incompetence and other faults, and their effects over recent

times, would be most beneficial for all innocents concerned, and

would be in the public interest.

15. Unless agreements are crafted, struck, and implemented,

which re-invert the presently "inverted economic and financial

pyramid" which Herr Friesecke's numerous known acts of

mis-management has produced, practices which Herr Hellenbroich

continued to support at last report received, these meritorious

business organizations would soon all collapse, chain-reaction

faction, all as a result of the uncorrected financial and related

mismanagement exhibited by Herr Friesecke and his witting

accomplices.

On this account, the continued, and expanded function of the

keystone business entity among the group of entities in total,

the Executive Intelligence Review Gmbh, is the keystone of a

prospective early process of stabilization and general recovery

of the business and other entities on whose behalf cooperation

should be sought.

The income from a clientele which relies chiefly on the

economic and related security information supplied chiefly by me

and my associates from inside the U.S.A., is the chief flow of

revenues through all combined entities associated with EIR Gmbh.

Any break in the continuity of that set of functions and

connections to the intelligence product from the U.S. association

would lead to an irreparable collapse of all of the entities to

be considered in the proposed cooperation.

Herr Hellenbroich's incompetence on this account, is shown

by his attempt to deny that the chief cause of the failures of

performance under Herr Friesecke's "kingpin"- like reign is shown

by the stagnation in circulation of Neue Solidaritaet over many

recent years. It is the lack of effective outreach to a broader

base of custom, whch is a result of Herr Friesecke's

organizational fist; this has driven the level of overall

activity of the combined association below break-even levels even

more than half a decade, or longer, to date.

Otherwise, should Herr Hellenbroich proceed to liquidating

the firm, or attempt to put its assets and name into other hands,

while dissolving the present organization itself, the entire

"deck of cards" would collapse upon the heads of all who

permitted that foolish alternative to take over.

16. Therefore, unless the EIR Gmbh is permitted to grow out

of what we might wish to become the temporary crisis, which Herr

Friesecke's incompetent "kingpin"-like role has produced, since

the morning of November 6, 2006, I must estimate the agreement to

cooperation as being now at the verge of becoming irremediably

non-performing. Even in no one acts to tear up the agreement,

events themselves would produce such a result.

17. My curative recommendation is, that either Herr

Hellenbroich accept the alternative presented to him by Frau

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, or that he resign his position with EIR

Gmbh, to permit capable and willing others to proceed to the only

competent measures likely to rescue the set of relevant entities

from the crisis which Herr Friesecke's November 6th fit of

bellowing has detonated. If he does not, the guilt for the

outcome of his sly and foolish behavior, for all concerned, falls

immediately on his head, and his, and other person's future, upon

the guilty and many innocents alike.

Without the continued function of EIR Gmbh within the bounds

of the present entity, the entire "deck of cards" goes under."

If an improvement in management is introduced, the inherently

successful EIR Gmbh will benefit from the deep-going changes in

the U.S. political situation, and would be enabled to perform its

crucial role as the pivot on which the continued existence of the

sister entities currently depends absolutely.

18. The wave of orchestration resignations of some former

associates will have the net effect of the "Biblical Gideon's

Army," in providing a cadre which is fewer, but better; the

return, as unrepentants, of those who had lately represented the

principal font of a a chorus of lies, and the forces of entropic

decadence would be a catastrophe.

Affectionately Yours,

Lyndon.

30-30-30

IV. LaRouche: My most trusted aides are in league with Dick Cheney, Tony Blair and the Fabian Society!

January 9, 2007

This is the author's corrected text, to be referenced as for the record, as distinct from the draft rushed for timely publication in today's briefing.

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

A POLICY STATEMENT ON CURRENT STATUS

By Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

January 9, 2007

At the beginning of 1989, the administrative control over the organization associated with EIR was assumed by a transnational body of individual persons whose public and internal activities became dominated, increasingly, by Mr. Fernando Quijano in the U.S.A. and Herr Uwe Friesecke from Germany. This arrangement continued until, approximately, the beginning of 2000, thus defining a lapse of time during which I exerted no controlling influence over the internal management of affairs of relevant organizations on both sides of the Atlantic.

A crucial change occurred in September 1990, when said Quijano unveiled himself publicly as having been covertly an agent of both certain U.S.A. and international associations which fall, frankly, into the category of both fascist and anti-Semitic. Herr Friesecke remained a collaborator of said Quijano until no later than 2000, in Friesecke's role as a central figure in the control of the financial and related policies of the association on both sides of the Atlantic.

The less said about the financial effects of their relationship, on organizations on both sides of the Atlantic, the less un-friendly the conversations remain.

During this period, Quijano, Friesecke, et al., used their combined, adopted authority, as virtual "kingpins," over the policies and finances on both sides of the Atlantic, to conduct a rapid change in the policies of the association on both sides of the Atlantic, a change from an association with a base in organizing the active political life within the base of the electorate, to the role of a think-tank whose work was subsidized chiefly by telephone sales-teams.

This top-down change, and its implications for the other policy-shaping processes of the association, were largely under the direct, or implied control of governmental and related potencies hostile to the intentions of the victimized organizations on both sides of the Atlantic.

During that interval, 1989-2000, the other members of the associations on both sides of the Atlantic continued, chiefly, to pursue the policy-shaping parameters which had been defined during the 1970s and 1980s. The political corruption seeping down from the top, from the circles of Quijano and Friesecke, nonetheless had its demoralizing effects on the body of other leaders and members of the associations.

As a consequence of this radical change of orientation in both the activities and thinking of the relevant organizations, reckless actions were conducted, under the authority of each and both of the persons who represented the extended influence of the Quijano- Friesecke partnership: morally and otherwise corrosive changes, changes which gradually transformed relevant associations in the Americas and western and central Europe over the 1989-2000 interval. This produced certain political and moral changes, most notably, among the U.S.A. and Germany elements of the partnership. The virtually inevitable consequence of these combined changes from the pre-1989 outlook, to the condition of a relatively fixed administrative structure sitting upon a rapidly shrinking social-economic base, created the spectacle of what some Zionist leaders had earlier described as an "inverted pyramid."

My role, especially during 2000, in ridding the U.S. association of the pro-fascist, and also pro-anti-Semitic elements associated with Quijano, coincided with a widening cleavage between me and Herr Friesecke, and a corresponding divergence of the association in the Americas, from that under Friesecke's tightened control over the association within Germany. The correlated factor was Herr Friesecke's reckless incompetence in management of the economics-related policies of that part of the association under his increasingly desperate, "Uriah Heep"-like, tyrannical, and intrinsically incompetent control over the association in Germany.

It is not only to be noticed, but emphasized, that this trend within these indicated associations, corresponds implicitly, and not accidentally, to the effects of a shift of economy, from a productive, to a post-industrial economy, on both sides of the Atlantic.

The present management difficulties within the Germany association, are almost entirely the consequence of the effects of Herr Friesecke's efforts to conceal his long-standing, witting 1990-199 collaboration with avowed pro-fascist and anti-Semitic Quijano, and with his illiterate's inability, and his unwillingness, like that of the legendary "Uriah Heep," to distinguish between mere bookkeeping and the most fundamental elements of competent economics of management. It is the blunders committed under the kingpin role of Herr Friesecke and his accomplices, which have created the, still curable, but ominous type of "inverted pyramid" crisis of management within the European association.

- - The USA In Contrast - -

In 2000, I resumed my leading role in repairing the management problems left in the wake of the Quijano- Friesecke arrangement. No so-called correction, but, rather, and accelerating worsening of the management practice, proceeded within Europe. As part of this, the legitimate political leadership of the organization in Germany, the European Labor Committees' central and regional excutive bodies, broke down, and became utterly non-functional at the top. Those who joined Frisecke's hysterical campaign of defamation against the principal political and cultural leader of the association, Helga Zepp- LaRouche, and who shared his determination to suffocate the party organization of Bueso, also joined with Friesecke in going toward the extreme in destroying the popular political base of what became more and more an inverted social-economic pyramid. The EIR publications in Germany, which continue to radiate the intellectual competence expressed from the U.S.A. branch of the association, continued to function as the chief financial asset of the association's supporting base within Europe; they, functioned, even under difficult conditions, but they could not support the burden of growing failure which kingpin Friesecke's obsessive and ruinous policies have produced as the spectacle of an "inverted socio-economic pyramid."

Without eliminating the kingpin policies and practices under Friesecke's virtual dictatorship, there would be no hope for the future existence of the association which he, Friesecke, with his most wittingly complicit confederates has mismanaged so cruelly.

Fortunately, remedies are available; unfortunately, among some, still, their devotion to their false pride outweighs their honesty.

On this and other accounts, I have recently, On November 9, 206, suspended Herr Friesecke from the active status of a member of the philosophical association known as the International Caucus of Labor Committees. This was specified to continue, pending a consideration of the factual basis for the identified charges against him. Since that time, he has, in effect, voluntarily confirmed his suspension, and has done as much to destroy the organization as it is within his reach, and those of relevant outside interests, to do.

For the association in Germany, a new reality presently exists.

- - The Present Prospect - -

This set of largely regrettable effects on the present leadership of the business-like aspects of the association, has created a situation in which, either the section of the leadership which has not resigned in support of Herr Friesecke, is permitted to make the reforms which would eliminate the policies which created Herr Friesecke's "inverted pyramid," or, otherwise, the insolvency of the relevant entities would be inevitable.

Either those policies, formerly imposed by Herr Friescke, which created the potentially fatal economic effect of an "inverted pyramid" within the Germany business-like associations, are reversed, as outlined in a proposal made at discussions among relevant representatives of those association, or the worst for all were early probabilities.

Recently reelected Bueso leader, and founder of the international network of Schiller Institutes, Helga Zepp- LaRouche, has presented a plan of reorganization which would be likely to reverse those mismanagement practices of Herr Friesecke et al., which created the present difficulties. This proposal by Frau Zepp-LaRouche, addresses the crucial problem which any not-incompetent proposal must address as axiomatic: without the shifting to a mass-base, as the adult of young-adult activities in Germany and also the U.S.A. indicate, there would be no possible solution, by the leaders of these associated entities, for the presently menacing situation which has been created by Herr Friesecke's crafting of the spectacle of an "inverted pyramid."

Otherwise, there were no available alternative to be seen as within the reach of the relevant participants in the negotiation.

In all of this, no competent analysis of the facts of the situation would permit indulging oneself in the delusion that the problems referenced have been generated internally.

Quijano himself bragged repeatedly that his pro- fascist policies, including his echoing CIA agent Nestor Sanchez in backing "death squad"operations, reflected his joining ranks with anti-Semitic networks operating, together with Augusto Pincohet, and the network behind the Southern Cone death-squad apparatus of the early 1970s, in the Americas.

"Macho" Quijano was essentially a "scared bunny" who went over the enemies of civilized mankind out of trembling fear. Developments in Italy during the early 1990s, and in France, as much by a rash of "defectives," including the always wild-eyed personal coward, and now avowedly fascist Larent Murawiec, and others, in Germany, lead presently, to a nest built up in the Rheingau "schicky-micky" domain of Herr Friesecke's personal special interests. The latter typifies a present plot, in which Friesecke is operating, against the associations of which he was formerly a leader.

These latter operations are to be viewed as congruent with what were, otherwise, the inexplicably stupid role of operations of U.S. Vice-President Cheney's circles around the Blair government, such as Baroness Symons, which have permitted themselves to be exposed as conducting against Helga-Zepp LaRouche et al. in the Rheingau and beyond.

Those operations of the British Fabian Society's circles of Prime Minister Blair, Baroness Symons, and Mathew Arnold follower Mrs. Liz Cheney, et al., have coincided with the portent of Herr Friesecke's Vertriebene- driven right-wing political inclinations. These operations from London and far-right Washington, D.C., have been a repeatedly demonstrated factor in the role Herr Friesecke has played, in defining his susceptibility for playing the role of pawn. This is the role of a pawn which he has exhibited in the more recent schemes and hoaxes exhibited within the circles radiating from around the Wiesbaden offices of P&F and Dinges&Frick, and in complicity in a relevant take-over of the Dicherpflaenzen cultural association which has been initially founded by the sponsorshop of Frau Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

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

NOTE: There should be no misintepretation of the attributable significance of Herr Friesecke's repeated expression of right-wing Vertriebene impulses. The point is, the few among the former residents within the DDR were actually prodigals, but were, rather, simply ordinary folk reacting to the way the relevant world powers of the post-war time has cast them, like jetsam, upon the places such as those where they had been born and raised, There, they were abandoned to make the best of the situation in which, like most in the world of today, have found themselves.

There is no morally tolerable excuse for enmity by any of the honest Vertriebene who behaved as Herr Friesecke has done. There is no reason for the "Ossies" to be despised categorically by anyone dwelling in the western part; most in the western part of the divided nation did no better, and passion against the "Ossies," categorically, exhibited a quality of defect which is otherwise called "racism," or, is euphemistically termed "chauvinism."

At the worst, those who had committed no great crimes, were to be received with rejoicing as "prodigals," who had committed, in fact, no offense as serious morally as what Herr Friesecke himself, or Friesecke's relevant accomplice, Frau Renate di Paoli, has done on occasion. In my view, the hostility which Herr Friesecke and Frau di Paoli exhibited on this matter is inconsistent with the acceptable moral standpoint of an associate of the International Caucus of Labor Committees, a person whose moral faculty is not to be trusted.

30-30-30