SEARCH

THE BABY'S SHOES

TO:ALL POINTS BY: PAUL GALLAGHER/ssu
RE:MORNING BRIEFING FOR THRUSDAY JAN 4, 2007


I do not wish to spoil your fun, but. . .

- THE BABY'S SHOE'S -

- 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.

*** END OF BRIEFING ***

Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on July 14, 2012, at 10:51 PM