|
To send a link to this document to a friend
|
|||||
|
Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed by Jeff Rense on his internet and radio talk show on August 26th. Rense: And a good evening to one and all. Hello, everybody, coast to coast, on all our radio stations around these United States. And on the worldwide side of things, on the internet, hello to all of you, as well. My guest for the first two hours tonight is Mr. Lyndon LaRouche. Lyndon is the first declared Democrat for President in the year 2023, and he insists, he could win. Lyndon LaRouche, as many of you know, founded the weekly Executive Intelligence Review, sometime ago, and it is a remarkable news publication. His economic forecasts have proven more accurate than anybody else's. Lyndon was also correct, to put it mildly, to warn that the New Economy in this country, was a bubble. A house of cards, whatever you want to call it. And that the whole globalist system is, in fact, bankrupt. Leaders of many nations have been asking Lyndon LaRouche how they could survive an ongoing blowout of the United States economy. They have, in fact, been fascinated with his analysis, of how the economic crisis is related to the drive for war with Iraq. This summer, Lyndon participated in major conferences in the United Arab Emirates, in Italy, in Mexico, and one with the Chinese, from the mainland, and, Taiwan, as well. In fact, the City Council of the world's third largest city, Sao Paulo, Brazil, made him an honorary citizen, in a unique ceremony, complete with the singing of the Star Spangled Banner. Lyndon LaRouche also leads a growing grass roots movement here at home. During the last few weeks, in fact, his presidential campaign, including many of you folks, distributed four million copies of a fascinating leaflet entitled "The Electable LaRouche." And another million copies are ready to go out this very week. Lyndon, by the way, will turn 80 in about two weeks, but from what we are hearing, his movement is getting younger, and younger all the time. Yet another paradox we shall explore in our first two hours tonight. Lyndon, welcome back to the program. You kept your last engagement with me over two years ago already, by coming on the air from Germany, at 4 AM. Let's hope you're in more comfortable surroundings now. Where are you? LaRouche: I'm in the Leesburg area, Leesburg, Virginia. Rense: That's Leesburg, Southern Germany, right? LaRouche: No, this is Leesburg in Virginia. Rense: Just kidding. A little joke. LaRouche: We haven't taken it over yet. Rense: Well, that was a difficult thing to do -- 4 AM. We do a lot of overseas broadcasts, but it's great to have you back on the program. There is so much going on, I hardly know where to begin. Let me begin, perhaps, with the freshest news item at the top of the heap today, leading off by mentioning to those of you who may not have heard it, President Bush has made it clear, through his legal counsel, that his legal counsel advises he needs no authority from Congress, or anybody else, to start a war with Iraq. Or should I say, a pre-emptive strike? Today, in fact, Vice-President Dick Cheney, or is he really the man pulling the strings here?, laid out the White House's case for a preemptive strike on Iraq, citing "mortal danger to the United States," and labelling critics of the Bush policy -- or is it the Cheney policy? -- as being guilty of "willful blindness," citing what he said was the danger that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of terrorists. Cheney said that America could not afford to sit by idly, and it would, if necessary, fight a war of liberation, not of conquest. Lyndon, as you travel around the world, and you are in some of the most unique places on the globe, month in and month out, it seems, who do most people, most world leaders, that you talk it, identify as the real terrorists on the planet. Do they have a problem identifying who's who anymore? LaRouche: Well, they do, in a sense. But their sense is, that Iraq is not the problem. That most countries will look at Saddam Hussein as a problematic figure, but not the kind of case in which you would consider a war necessary. In fact, what he did have, in terms of weapons of mass destruction, apart from maybe some residual poison gas left... Rense: And, by the way, a lot of those weapons of mass destruction, materiel, came from this country, Britain, and Germany, among other places. LaRouche: And from Vice-President George Bush, and his crowd, in the days of what was called, romantically, Iran-Contra, when the United States was backing Iraq to fight a war against Iran. Rense: Well, Saddam Hussein was our golden boy for years. We gave him billions of dollars to kill Iranians, and that's the truth of the matter. LaRouche: But he's not capable of producing an effective war machine, that would constitute a real threat to the region. His infrastructure has been destroyed. And you cannot simply whistle weapons out of your imagination from blueprints. You must have the industrial and related capabilities to do it, and he doesn't have it. So, there is no threat from Iraq. However, there is a perception in Washington -- two things. First of all, they believe they need a war, in order to do a number of things, but especially to control the fact that the economy is collapsing. Rense: They need to resuscitate what's left of it, and they think a war will do it. LaRouche: Well, if they believe that, they're crazy. Because we are at a point at which the attempt, as the generals, and many of the generals have warned Washington, it doesn't work. There's probably not a single nation abroad, in which there is support for Bush's apparent ego commitment to launching an attack on Iraq. No nation in Europe, no nation in Asia, no nation in the Americas, outside the United States, is willing to support an attack on Iraq. So, the United States is all by its lonesome, and most Americans don't want it either. Rense: Well, I'd rather say that the Bush Administration is all by its lonesome, but we are along for the ride, like it or not, folks. We have an electoral process here, and one way or the other, and one way or another, we're looking at the elected official, even if the Supreme Court did the electing. Dick Cheney. "Willful blindness." I think in private he'd probably use stronger terminology, but "willful blindness" is certainly first cousin to being a suspect terrorist. We have this alleged Patriot Act, which was passed by our Ladies and Gentlemen of the Congress, without so much as even having read it, an unprecedented shame in the history of this nation, in my opinion. I don't know where we're going with this issue, but the whole snitch culture is now being talked about with great vigor, and concern, on the internet, as you well know. How do you see the move against the Constitution, against the Bill of Rights? We seem to be making a lot of progress... LaRouche: When I gave a webcast shortly before the inauguration of George W. Bush, I warned against this. I warned against the economic crisis. I warned that we were headed -- and particularly with the case of Ashcroft -- that the designation of Ashcroft as the Attorney General, meant that the government was inclined to launch police state measures in the United States, against the American people. Rense: You were the first person that I remember being quoted saying that. You were right in the forefront, again. LaRouche: Well, it was not a matter of predicting. It was a matter of knowing the character of the creatures coming in there. It's like, you know, if you've got a man-eating tiger in your living room, it doesn't take a fortune-teller to tell you that what kind of problem you have to deal with. Rense: Isn't that mentality a rather closely akin to what the early colonists left England about? Lord Ashcroft's mentality? LaRouche: Some of that. Remember, England, under the monarchy, was always a Venetian model, imperial maritime power. It's come on bad straits now, but the character of the thing is still the same. Rense: Let me clarify that a little bit. I mean, the heavy-handedness of it all. It's not so much that England had a snitch culture, and a Patriot Act that was approved by the monarchy, but we have the same kind of heavy-handedness that is stifling freedom here. LaRouche: Well, we have this tendency in the United States, which has been called, since 1763, has been called the American Tory current. Remember, 1763, the British were about to attack us, as we had been their allies against the French in North America. Now they were about to attack us. And the population of North America, of the colonies, was divided between two groups: one of which became known as the patriots, led by Franklin, and the other, Franklin's opponents, who were known, and to the present day, as the American Tories. Now, this crowd -- the American Tories -- or a section of it, has found itself in a position where the United States, emerging from world War II, as the only world power at the time, and then after 1989, '91, with the collapse of the Soviet system, that many people in the English-speaking world, who are of the same disposition, thought of ending the nation state, globalizing the planet -- which is really a way of saying, setting up a New Roman Empire under one dictator, the English-speaking oligarchs, hmmm? So this thing... And you have a group within this American Tory tradition -- because you see the division in it. I mean, people like Scowcroft, and others, who are traditionally tied to the American Tory Establishment, the Wall Street establishment -- they are warning against this crazy war. But it is a group inside, a hard-core group, typified by a bunch of draft-dodgers, who now have turned themselves into what some people call "chicken-hawks," guys who ducked the draft, but want a war -- typified by Perle and his supporters, and this crowd, is geared toward war. They're crazy. It's the menace, and they seem to have George by the tail. Rense: Is this a war to make the world safe for ... Unocal? LaRouche: No, not quite. It's not going to make the world safe for anything. Rense: What is this war really about? We'll come back and discuss that with Democratic Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche, the electable LaRouche, in just a couple minutes. [commercial break] Rense: Okay, we're back, with Democratic Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. Do you prefer "Democrat," or "Democratic"? You know... LaRouche: Well, I'm really a Roosevelt-style Democrat. Rense: Okay, "Democrat." LaRouche: And in former times, you might call me an Abraham Lincoln Republican An Abraham Lincoln Republican and a Roosevelt Democrat, are pretty much the same thing. Rense: Well, it's true. Times change and boy, look back just a few decades at how labels have changed, even then. All right, the war is being fought. There are a lot of theories about this issue. One of them, of course, is that the New World Order, the globalist transnational cartel that seeks to run and dominate most of the planet, sees that it has to knock off non-compliant states, nation-states, in a hurry, or in a couple or three years, it'll be probably too late in that they will have weapons of mass destruction, to the extent that the price paid for knocking them off, will be too much. It'll be overly exorbitant. There's that theory. Then there's the theory that this is really a war for natural resources, and this is a war to make the world safe for Unocal, and other favored oil companies. It's a complex issue, Lyndon, but give us your view on it, please. LaRouche: Well, I think the essential motive for war is insanity. Rense: Oh, I'll vote for that. Here, here. LaRouche: It's ... you have a group of people who are desperate, who believe they should have world power, but they don't have a clear idea of what they're doing. Their conception is, Roman Empire, or Nazi international Waffen-SS. Remember, at the end of World War II, the Nazi military was changed into an international Waffen SS. That is, you had regiments and so forth from many countries, language groups, national groups... Rense: Oh, the western front, I think 8 our of 10 soldiers were non-German. LaRouche: Exactly. So, therefore, the idea is to have a bunch of stone-killers, people like, poor kids who did the shooting at Columbine, who are cranked up on point-and-shoot video-games and similar kinds of training. Rense: Utterly beyond brainwashed, yes. LaRouche: They go out, and they kill, as we see what's happening in Afghanistan. So, it's a kill operation. As opposed to what some people remember from World War II, in which the United States did not win war by killing. War is always a monster in terms of death. But the purpose was not to kill. As, take MacArthur's operation in the Pacific. The operation was essentially logistics, to control the territory, to control movement, and thus to bring the opponent to a point of willingness to consider peaceful surrender. And that's what real war is. Now, the idea is not to bring the world to a peaceful order of agreement among states, which was our objective, essentially, in World War II. But rather instead, to destroy states, that is, destroy entire peoples, and to reduce the planet to a number of managed areas, with particular emphasis on controlling natural resources. Rense: These will become vassal states, if they're still states at all, with puppet governments. In fact, I want to dump this in, while we're talking. Not only has the Bush Administration, of course, been trying to pump up the alleged Iraqi opposition, the expatriate opposition, but today the son of the former Shah of Iran is talking about returning home, and re-establishing the monarchy in Iran. Do we see chapter II, after chapter I, which is the war on Iraq? Do we see Iran, perhaps, being remade? LaRouche: They can't win the war. You see, winning a war means that you can bring about the acceptance of peace, or peaceful arrangement, with the nation you intend to defeat in war. Now, in this kind of war, with these kinds of missions, and orientations, as in Afghanistan, they will never win the war in Afghanistan! It could never be won. This kind of war cannot be won. Rense: You can't buy everybody off, can you? LaRouche: Look, the country has no real infrastructure for development. It has been reduced by a series of wars, to essentially a bandit state, various bandit groups, called warlord groups, combatting with each other. The existence of the state depends largely on a massive export of drugs produced in Afghanistan, under warlord supervision, which are coming... Rense: Now there's a record crop... LaRouche: ...into the West. So, you have a situation, where you could go into Iraq, and destroy a lot of things in sight. You could do the same thing in Iran, but you would never bring about peace. And the objective of war is peace. What destroyed the Roman Empire was exactly that kind of mistake. The legions were out there to control the world, by destruction, but they found themselves in a perpetual war. They ran out of Italians for fighting the war. They began to take other nationalities into these various legions, and the legions themselves decayed, and the war -- Rome and the West disintegrated. And a similar thing happened, in a somewhat different fashion, with Byzantium. So the idiots, who have not studied, and the interesting thing is that the people, in the United States, in the U.S. government, and in the Democratic Party, who are most influential in pushing this war, are people who, during time of military conflict, managed to avoid military service. So you have bunch of idiots, who in a sense would be regarded as draft dodgers by many people, and you've got the draft dodgers who are yelling "War!" Now, you can imagine that competence is not that good. And you find the generals, on the other side, saying that these former draft dodger-warmongers are not competent. And they're right! So, the danger is, is this kind of insanity, where a lunatic is holding a family hostage with a sawed-off shotgun, and that's the kind of situation you face. There's no conception of war as something that is done in order to preconditions for peace, but rather just killing. Rense: Well, as I said, all the labels, all the definitions, have changed. Black is white, now. Up is down, many people say. Hence the term "chicken-hawks," that Mr. LaRouche mentioned earlier, and as I mentioned, the poppy-opium crop this year. A world record in Afghanistan! And how many of you are surprised about that. We'll be right back. [commercial break] Rense: Okay, welcome back. Jeff Rense with Lyndon LaRouche, talking about a whole number of things, many, many subjects to get into here, but let's try to move on with the Iraq issue. All right, so the Bush Administration, referred to by some, Lyndon, as an oil-soaked, drug-oriented, natural resource-devouring monster administration, continues to ship, apparently, vast amount of military hardware to the Middle East in preparation for the preemptive strike on Iraq. So, how does it shape it to you? We have a November election coming up. Is the window at hand? Are we looking toward the effort, at least, to go in unilaterally, with the token support of Tony Blair, Bush's pal, lap dog, some would say? Before the election? How do you see the time on that? LaRouche: Well, we've got a couple things, a couple factors, short-term factors. Obviously the Bush Administration is headed toward, somewhere late August, right now, into October, of launching of what would be called the war, the preventive action. There obviously are special forces operations, or similar kind of things, assassination operations, being deployed against Iraq, probably targetting Saddam Hussein and others. The thing we're looking at next is the likelihood, is bombers. Now, the U.S. presently has some logistic agreement with Germany, which is crucial for any logistical operations there, but nothing else to speak of. Therefore, we're talking about B-2 bombers, flying from the United States to Iraq, unloading and flying back to be retooled for the next flight. And then of course, you have this naval capability, which also can deliver some punch of that type. But as far as a ground war, a regular war, the capability of launching that, is down the line someplace, at the most. Rense: It is told to me that there are now, in the theatre, at least 100,000 American troops. Another 150,000 are ready to be shipped out on very short notice. Will that be enough to do it, in your estimation? LaRouche: No, I think -- I don't think it would do it anyway, because you've got a certain point that you become tangled in the feet of the guy next to you. This is not a good choice of war. But politically, it seems that the President has got himself, his ego, talked into that. Rense: Did he actually, Lyndon, do you think the guy actually did that out of just plain dumbness? Or is he being coached, pushed, and directed along these lines, that make him look to be as you're describing. LaRouche: You can see very clearly that there's certainly a lot of manipulation of him, in the media, by people around him, and so forth. There's no question of that. But he's got himself talked into it. Remember, we've watched this guy, when he was Governor of Texas. We've watched him as President now for a year and a half. He has certain psychological weakness. Now, what do you do when you get a President like this? Well, what you do is you count on the institutions of government, especially the Federal executive, to try to get the President to clear the fog from his mind, and rely upon some people to give him some advice. Rense: And yet, every time he strays away from his speechwriters' text, he seems to, if not stumble, he certainly does take rather teetery step from time to time. LaRouche: Oh, I've thought about this, clearly. Because 2023, the next presidential election, is a long way down the road, relative to the problems that are coming up fast now. Rense: That's right. LaRouche: So therefore, what do we do with this President, ... if he does nothing impeachable, and a declaration of war, without a declaration of war with the Congress, would be, I think, grounds of impeachment -- if the American people suddenly take a disliking to him, then if he goes ahead with a war, without going to the Congress, he can be easily impeached. Rense: Well, that's assuming a Congress who's willing to be compliant and fall all over. LaRouche: Congress is a bunch of hounds, wolves, that will turn on their own on a dime. Rense: So, how are we going to impeach him, with a Congress ... LaRouche: I don't particularly intend to impeach him. My view is to rally people in the Democratic Party, away from... Lieberman is just as bad, or worse, than Bush, and McCain is worse than Bush on these issues, in the Republican Party. You have people, even like Dick Armey, from Texas, he's even come to his senses on this thing. So, I would say that if you get group of leading circles, in politics, and in private life, of influence, and if they form a kind of coalition to say, look, let's save the President from his own folly, and use him as a President, as an instrument for those policies which he's told he should support. He's trying to make up his mind on things which are beyond his comprehension. Rense: It seems almost, militarily, as if he has extended himself to the point now, when to pull back, as someone was saying just yesterday -- I've forgotten who exactly -- that it would a grave humiliation to the ... not the honor, but the impression of strength that the United States is seeking to extend and project around the world. LaRouche: There's no point. We're.... Look, take the case of the real issue. Now, he had this Waco, so-called economic summit, which was a real farce. Everything that was coming out of there was nonsense, and poor Bush, who is not capable of understanding any of these issues, actually understanding them, for a working understanding, is popped in there for a few minutes on each of the four sessions, and popped out saying he had confidence in the fundamentals. He wouldn't know what a fundamental is! Rense: Well, that's why I raised the issue earlier, of who's pulling his strings, who's directing him? It seems to me that Cheney, quite clearly, is leading a... LaRouche: I don't think... I see that kind of thing. I'm watching Rumsfeld, and Cheney both. I'm watching other things. I'm watching Condoleezza Rice, who is a real H.G. Wells-geared person. Rense: She's a real strange duck. LaRouche: Oh boy, she is strange. Rense: Actually, judging by the e-mail I get, a lot of bright observers are afraid of that woman. She's somewhat scary. LaRouche: She's Madeleine Albright's sort-of adoptive step-sister. Rense: Very well said. All right, hold on right there. We have a cast of characters, folks, playing with your destiny right now, in our government, the likes of which I don't remember seeing. We'll see if Lyndon has any parallels in his life, but this is a dangerous group, that is seeking to stick your necks on the line. Remember Bush's statements after 9-11, the so-called War on Terror, that he unilaterally declared then and there, might not be over in our lifetimes, and, most importantly, that Americans could expect that more people would die here at home, than our men and women on foreign battlefields during this war on terror. Well, think about that, and we'll continue in just .... - [commercial break] Rense: My guest, I'm very proud to have him back tonight, it's been two years, is Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., the first officially announced presidential candidate for the next election, assuming we get there, let's hope. Lyndon, is that the most dangerous, treacherous bunch you have ever seen at the helm of government in America, and you've been watching it for a long time? LaRouche: Well, actually, there's been pretty bad rascals in our past, but the combination of the circumstances and the leadership is probably potentially the most disastrous that we have had. In former times the world was bigger in the sense that the U.S. was bigger, things were slower, but we got ourselves into a mess where we are a virtual empire. We have been surviving by sucking the blood of the world, especially since 1971. So things are now much more dangerous then ever before, and the penalties and the mistakes are now coming quicker, than they have in the past. Therefore this bunch of incompetents, and I will say (there may be a few competent people) but overall this government is about as incompetent as you can get. And it's dangerous. It's got strong opinions and weak brains. Rense: It's almost cowboy mentality, isn't it? LaRouche: Oh boy, the Texas image, bowlegged, six shootin' guy. "I had to do it." [with Texan accent] Rense: That's right. We're going to kick their...and take their gas. LaRouche: Exactly. What are you going to say? There's no finesse. Rense: No "subtlety." What is that? A strange foreign word. I think your point about America paying penalties quicker than ever, is a very important one. I think we will see penalties from whatever action is taken over there. I think that those people in Washington, the president, or most of them all, in warning us that more Americans will die at home in fact, will die at home than American man and women on foreign battle fields, are more then prepared to sacrifice, I hate to say it, a good number of Americans, to achieve their ends. Most Americans may not agree with their ends. LaRouche: If they are in the above-fifty area of increasing health care risk, they see it. If you look at the young guys I'm looking at, eighteen to twenty-five, the so-called college age, university age youth. That those who are sensitive realize two things. That the price of tuition is in inverse proportion to the quality of education delivered. Rense: Ahuh! Brilliantly said. LaRouche: Secondly, that they have no future. So therefore what we have done is we have created a situation in which you have two large groups which do perceive that. You have baby-boomers, those under fifty-five, who may have illusions that bad things can't happen to them. Or that everything will turn out all right. Or like young Dracula's, that the recovery is inevitable at mid-night. But there is no recovery in this system right now. We can get one, but it would mean a change in our behavior. The young people realize in different degrees and different forms that they have no future as a youth generation, adolescents and young adults, then people who are over fifty-five or sixty, know that people got them on the skids for accelerated death and suffering. So this our national situation and the impression is that no one in Washington cares. That's the impression. There are a few people in Washington who do care, I know that. But the overall impression that is projected to the American people throughout the mass media, through government and so forth is that nobody cares, about other countries, or else. Rense: There is no feeling that this Administration is concerned. You're right. That it's non-responsive. There is no feeling that this Administration has much of a heart. It's a machine and it seems to be out to do the bidding of trans-national globalist elite. LaRouche: And the President says I own the ranch. The world is my ranch and I own it. Rense: And if you don't like it, we're going to come over and we're going to restructure you. Rehabilitate you. LaRouche: That's right. Regime change. Rense: Oh yes, just a little regime change. Never mind that probably in the last ten years, probably over a million Iraqis, mostly young people, have died because of the America-led boycott. Never mind that we went over and dosed Iraq, especially southern Iraq around Basra, with thousands of tons of dust called depleted uranium, and we are going to go back and give them a second helping? What is this! LaRouche: This is a system which is in the terminal phase of its existence. You might say that this is a poor imitation of Belshazzar's feast. And the "Mene, Mene, Tekel" is written on the wall. Rense: It's the Wal-Mart edition. LaRouche: Yeah, (laughs) it's the Wal-Mart version of Belshazzar. Rense: We should be more accurate and call it China-Mart but that's another story. LaRouche: (Laughs) I'm not a pessimist. I'm just a realist... Rense: This really just reflects the last gasp of Rome in so many ways. This is going to be the most ugly, the most blatant, if this war happens, act of imperialist aggression, that the world has seen for quite a long time. This is imperialism, there is no real other way to phrase it. LaRouche: It's worse. It's like the Fourteenth Century in Europe, where you had the collapse of the system. You had approximately a hundred years of religious warfare run in the name of the Holy League, against the threatened emergence of nation states. This whole operation was run by a group of bankers called Lombard bankers, controlled by Venice, but they were based on Florence, called Lombard bankers, such as the Bardi and Peruzzi. They piled on debts the way we pile on debts, say in South America, Mexico and other parts of the world. They piled these debts on, and it got to the point, that as now with, say, Citibank and JP Morgan Chase and other banks, American banks are on the verge of bankruptcy. This is the situation. We have reached this point where we have to decide as in the case of Brazil and Argentina. Are we going to insist on collecting these inflated debts which are manufactured fraudulently by a floating exchange rate system over the past period since 1971? Well if we are, we're going to kill the people in those nations. In Europe when the decision was made and the bankruptcy of that system in the Fourteenth Century, one third of the population of Europe was wiped out as a result of people insisting in collecting full nominal value from outstanding uncollectible debts. We are now in a situation, we have to decide to either put this thing through bankruptcy reorganization and start a new system or we are going to kill not only Argentina and Brazil but we're going to kill the United States too. I'll give you an example, just to give you an indication of how bad things are. The railway system of the United States is collapsing. If we allow the collapse of the railway system to continue, this nation will not be integrated economically. We will have no way of getting guaranteed delivery by rail from one part of the country to the other. We also have a crisis with the airlines. The airlines are in danger right now. Rense: Yes, they are all foundering. LaRouche: So therefore we have to have a reorganization of our transportation system. We have to have federal action to maintain and improve the railroads which are running on tracks which date from 1926 or something like that. Rense: It's true, Amtrak has been bathing in red ink since its inception. LaRouche: Well this is a swindle I have been involved in fighting a long time. We have a rationalization. In general to rationalize this system, we would say in the northeastern corridor for example, from Boston Mass. to Washingtonm DC, along the main track which used to be the old Pennsy track, that you would have a high-speed rail system and probably put in magnetic-levitation rail. We can deliver from central location and cities, the old so-called railroad terminal, we can deliver people, quicker, more comfortably and cheaper by rail, then we can by intercity air. Rense: Absolutely, we should have had this up and running years ago. The rights of way are all there and in many cities which have been allegedly abandoned. There is so much that can be done. It's ridiculous. Did you ever spend much time in Los Angeles, Lyndon? LaRouche: Yes, I spent a little time there. Rense: They had the world's most fabulous transportation system in the Thirties and Forties that any city has ever had, called the Redcar??? the old Pacific Electric. It went everywhere and it was electric-powered, non-polluting and on and on. And, of course, General Motors Coach, Firestone Tire and Rubber, Standard Oil of Ohio combined to form a dummy corporation -- you know the story. LaRouche: Yeah, they bought it up and looted it. Rense: They bought it up, looted it and let it go down. That was the end of that. But what your talking about here is the actual physical infrastructure of America being clearly on life support. The aviation industry, the rail transport industry, not to mention, the bridges, the highway system, the sewage systems, all the rest of it, the infrastructure of America is beginning to whither away. LaRouche: Take the ports, take Long Beach. Now you have this trans Pacific root with this port facility. It's fine you can get the stuff off on these roll on, roll off things, but how do you get them to where you want them. You have a choke point (check?) going from the port to the point of delivery through Los Angeles. My point is that Bush, instead of being crazy at Waco should have said that there is a national emergency, we have to create more jobs, we have to build up the tax base so let's start here. Rense: We basically have to rebuild America. LaRouche: Exactly Rense: We'll pause and come back and talk with Lyndon LaRouche, Democratic Presidential candidate. Great to talk with him again, whether you agree or disagree, he is a master of his craft, which is understanding dollars, money and the economy. We going to talk about the US economy more, in our next hour. Hope you'll be along. I'll be back after this break. [commercial break] Rense: We are back. I'm Jeff Rense. If you are new to the program R-E-N-S-E as in Rense.com...Thanks to people like Lyndon LaRouche who has been speaking out for years, about the charade that is being perpetrated by the allegedly elected men and women in Washington. Lyndon, our number two, the American stock market of course, went into the tank. I don't know how many trillions of dollars of wealth that Mr. and Mrs. America owned, were erased from the books. The market didn't go all the way down; it has rallied according to some who continue to talk about a recovery. Frankly, I don't see it as a recovery at all, and I wanted to get your opinion. LaRouche: The month of September is going to be a horror show. The people of the so-called plunge protection committee and similar kinds of operations, just are not going to be able to cope with the raising tide of bankruptcy and collapse now in progress. You can see it most easily by looking at different figures. Look at the collapse of firms. Look at increase of unemployment, look at plant closures or business closures. Look at the vulnerability of high concentration of speculative real estate. For example, around Washington DC and Northern Virginia and Maryland you have a potentiality of one-third of the properties in these so-called Dot.com areas that are on the verge of foreclosures or collapse bankruptcy. So we going to have a collapse of the Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac syndrome which Greenspan was running. All of the other things like that. You look at these real factors as opposed to the manipulation of the stock prices and especially index prices. You have to look at more carefully at underlying values, rather then the superficial reported monetary or financial values. Rense: Which they don't want us to pay much attention to. LaRouche: Well, you can't avoid it. It's unavoidable. Then you have this run on corruption in corporate America. The point is, who made the system? The system was made by, for example, the present corrupt system was made partly by Nixon with his 1971 floating exchange-rate system. Then Paul Volker, who came in in October 1979, took over the Federal Reserve System, and Volker and Greenspan have run the US economy since. You see poor Al Gore and George Bush -- that is, number 43 -- were having these so-called debates on national television. So one guy asked them, "What are you going to do about the economy if you have a problem?" They're going to ask Alan Greenspan's advice! (laughing). He's the guy who made the mess. So what you've had is politicians have been writing laws under pressures of Wall Street financial interests. They've been writing laws on the basis of Greenspan and Volker before him. They created a system which is inherently corrupt. Now we find that Enron and a few other places go down and people scream, "It must have been the crooked leaders." Well the system was crooked, and the way they got to the top of that system is they knew how to play the game. But it was the game that was crooked. Rense: Still is, always was and unless we do something about it, it always will be. I've tried to make that point, Lyndon, many times on the program. That these examples of Enron, WorldCom and all the rest are just simply evidence that the whole system is that way. These are not exceptions. LaRouche: Look at the accounting rules. The idea that if you have shareholder value. For example, we have Renquist, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, he was the lawyer for the interests in Arizona who were tied into the Keating Five. Rense: They are all tied in to each other. LaRouche: Then you have Scalia. Mr. Shareholder Value. The idea that a piece of paper determines wealth, as opposed to what we used to think, that the ability to produce wealth, that the ability tom turn raw materials through labor into greater wealth than we consumed in producing it. That was the old idea. This was the American system. But since the middle of the 1960's we went away from that and over the course the 1971 to 1981 period we went into this new fangled system which is inherently corrupt. Garn-St. Germaine, looted the Savings and Loan Associations, Keating Five is an example of that, McCain is a beneficiary of that. Then you had Kemp Roth-- well, Jack is not the smartest guy in the world, but his Kemp Roth legislation is a disaster. Then you had the junk bonds, the derivatives. Rense: Lyndon, can we still legislate honesty and morality? We never could; do people think we still think you can? Do we just pass more laws? LaRouche: I don't think you can. The idea of passing laws, do's and don'ts, does not work. What you have to have, as in fighting a war, you have to have a mission. Rense: The mission would be, here, to save America. LaRouche: Save America and recognize that the system we used to have with all its faults, especially what we rebuilt with Roosevelt, up to about '64, that that system, with all its injustices and all its other faults, it worked. Rense: It worked. LaRouche: So, the system we had since '64 since '65, since the beginning of the Viet Nam war. Rense: Since the assassination of John Kennedy? LaRouche: Yeah about that time. It all came together. You had a whole series of developments. When Eisenhower left office, Eisenhower when he was President was holding check on these utopian fella's, which he called the "Military Industrial Complex." Rense: His greatest speech was warning to America about the military-industrial, and now Congressional complex. LaRouche: Yes, and what happened is that Jack Kennedy did not have the strength in the military and other institutions to do what Eisenhower could do in checking it. So that when Eisenhower left office, these guys, which Eisenhower had been holding in check, went wild. You had Bay of Pigs. You had the attempted assassination of DeGaulle. You had ousters, coup in England against MacMillan. Rense: This was when the CIA begins to become, rather obviously, the very potent arm of American corporate. LaRouche: Yes, but that in itself is a little bit of a swindle because it wasn't exactly the CIA. The functions of the Director if Intelligence are twofold. First of all he's not only the chief of the CIA, he is also the Director of Intelligence. Now, that system as undergone some modification, particularly since Brzezinski. It's really out of control now, since Brzezinski was national security adviser. He made a mess of everything that was sane and legal in terms of our intelligence community. But you had a division between the people who were CIA, who were largely State Department-related type of functions, and a group in the military which was the special warfare section of the military. Now, the special warfare section of the military under the quartermaster division, had a special unit which had everything in it, foreigners, civilians, ex-military, military and so forth. These were the guys who did the killing and did the dirty work. This is what happened, for example, in the Bay of Pigs, was that. That was Allen Dulles's playing around with that special warfare crowd. Most of the funny thing that have happened in the United States and what the United States has done abroad, the usually-called CIA, is done by this special warfare unit, this particular section of it. That is the "Military-Industrial-Complex"; that's the hard core of it, that's the dirty end of it. Rense: Do we throw (in there) their Military Industrial Congressional Complex? LaRouche: Not really. They get sucked in. Congress is a bunch of weaklings largely. There are good people in there, but as a phenomenon, they are weak. Rense: Okay, well, they say, to go along with that statement, that the level of, I hate to say it, but blackmail, bribery, intimidation, skeletons in closets, has never been more profound than it is right now. LaRouche: Of course. "Go along to get along." That's the slogan. "Go along to get along." So therefore you wink and look the other way. If your colleagues are going in a certain direction, you go with it. Rense: We've had some of the most profoundly vile scandals in this country, in the last 10 years, that I can't even count them all. They are so many, they're overwhelming, I think, to the average individual, who would even make at least a cursory effort to try to keep track of it all. We had 8 years of Clinton. Now, look where we are. LaRouche: (laughs) Clinton was not the worst of it. He was sort of good at bluffing, wasn't he? Rense: Well, the whole thing is just astonishing. Let me ask you about the economy, then. You're saying September is going to really take things home. Now, the way this country has been literally drowning in debt for years, is astonishing. The government now, of course, is printing money as fast as it possibly can, basically just writing computer checks for everything. No one seems to be concerned about balancing the budget -- what a joke that is anyhow. But it's utterly out of control. I see no restraint. I see no real effort to even address it, as you said, no subtlety any more; they're just right up front -- they're spending money as fast as they can. Doing what they want, and accountable to virtually no one. LaRouche: Well, first of all, this crazy budget law, or the Gingrich thing, which Gore pushed Clinton into supporting, or compromising with. Now you have a situation in which the legitimate government debt, which should be -- legitimate government debt is for emergency, or for capitalization. And emergency expenditures are really a form of capitalization. You have to do it. You can't afford it, but you have to do it. So ... Rense: Well, the music is up... So we'll come back and talk about debt, the size of debt, and all the rest of it, and then we'll work back into the Federal Reserve, which, according to many people, is the biggest greatest sell-out of America, of them all. See what Lyndon LaRouche has to say about that, as we continue with the electable LaRouche, in just a couple minutes. [commercial break] Rense: Glad you're with us tonight. Jeff Rense, along with my guest Lyndon LaRouche, the electable LaRouche, Democratic candidate for President of these United States. And I want to remind you that you can get, as usual, whenever we have someone on from the wonderful EIR publication on the program, a 72-page edition of the EIR, Lyndon Larouche's superb news magazine, free. All you have to do is call and ask for it: 888-347-3258. Debt, Lyndon! Talk to us about how much debt this country is in. By the way, if I might just toss one little item in, many European financial experts and economists are saying quietly, and some not so quietly, that they view the United States as already bankrupt. LaRouche: Yeah, sure. If you take the financial derivatives area, and the extremely vulnerable area which intersects insurance, called credit derivatives, you have... essentially the present world financial system is bankrupt. And most of the leading banks in it are bankrupt. That is, they could not meet their financial obligations. They have gambled on the assumption that there would be an appreciation in financial assets, and their assets are predicated upon the assumption of this so-called shareholder value ratio, price-earnings-ratio... Rense: ... not to mention fractional banking ... LaRouche: Exactly. So this sort of thing, you have overall, probably-- you take this credit derivatives, you're talking about over $400 billiion... Rense: ... Hah! It's a joke. LaRouche: ... Yeah, the United States GNP is estimated at less than $11 trillion. and... Rense: ...No, it's a joke. It's not, as they say, it's not doable ... LaRouche: So therefore, the point is what we've done, is we've built up a John Law-type bubble. You can call it the Paul Volcker Alan Greenspan bubble, which has been blowing bubbles. And you cannot, we just can't pay it, because we have been savaging the real economy to build up the bubble. And therefore, when you incur a debt, an obligation from the future, you have to say ‘how are we going to pay this debt?' And the assumption has been that the financial assets will grown on the basis of gambling-type speculation ... Rense: ... Gambling. that's exactly what the stock market is... LaRouche: Side bets, especially... Rense: Oh yeah. All right, so the bubble continues to get biggger and bigger, and folks out there--when you hear talk from politicians about balancing the budget: Har, Har! Forget it! ... LaRouche: Ummhummmm.... Rense: It makes no difference if they balance the budget for the next 30 years. It doesn't matter. What we're in is a situation, is one where we are in an inextricable amount of debt. We can't get out of it. It has to be torn down. We can't rehabilitate this system any longer. The financial system is finished. Is the original Fed sellout, in 1932-33, I guess, is that the biggest treasonous, traitorous act? LaRouche: No. The Fed, of course, was created by the British government, the British monarchy... Rense: They're not dumb... LaRouche: Ernst Cassell, who was the personal banker of Edward VII, had an agent in New York, at Kuhn Loeb, Jacob Schiff. And Schiff represented the British monarchy's interests in New York City. That is, King Edward the Seventh's and Prince of Wales earlier. So, they got through, through Teddy Roosevelt--they got through the beginning of launching what became the Federal Reserve System, which is totally against the Constitution. The Constitution is very specific, and it means what it says--it's not a trick phrase-- that the only insitution which can create debt in the form of currency or otherwise, against the United States government, is the U.S. government with the consent of Congress. Rense: And hold it right there. That's it. Unambiguous, straight to the point, folks. You get the idea, I think. Once again we'll tell you how to get a 72-page edition of the Executive Intelligence Review, as we continue. [commercial break] Rense: Okay, and welcome back to Jeff Rense with Lyndon LaRouche ... All right Lyndon, you eloquent explanation of the Fed and its origins is very interesting. The name Schiff pops up again and again. There are people who talk about bloodlines and all the rest of it of the global elite, staying together, playing together, marrying together. Al Gore's son, if memory serves, married Jacob Schiff's granddaughter, or vice versa, it was Jacob Schiff's grandson marrying Al Gore's daughter... LaRouche: (chuckles) ... Rense: About a year and-a-half, two years ago. Did you hear that? LaRouche: No, I didn't catch up on that. Al's not one of my favorite people, so I don't ... Rense: Yeah, I know that ... LaRouche: I don't, uh .... Rense: Just drawing a little connection there. Some interesting names of ... LaRouche: And I think he's sort of passé, too. I don't think he's .... Rense: Yeah, I think so. Unless he grows his beard back, and goes tree hugging, he's out of it ... LaRouche: (chuckles) I don't think the trees would vote for him. They'll say his bark is worse than his bite. Rense: Indeed. LaRouche: No, you get a real one. You get, for example, Cassell's daughter was Edwina, who married Louis Mountbatten, later Lord Louis Mountbatten ... Rense: An interesting character, if there ever was one in the last century... LaRouche: Yeah, and died in a mysterious way ... Rense: Well, he was assassinated ... LaRouche: But, as both he and she said: they spent their marriage sleeping in other people's beds. But she was the granddaughter of Cassell, Cassell the founder of the Fed. But this was an oligarchical operation, and it was pushed through by -- the Income tax and World War I (or, the United States involvement in it) were all arranged by Teddy Roosevelt through a Bull Moose operation that put the Ku Klux Klan's favorite President into office. And Wilson was the guy who actually brought it in. That destroyed our sovereignty as a nation, because we'd lost the sovereignty over our own national credit. Rense: Well, Wilson is one of the biggest, you mention, scoundrels, easily in our history. LaRouche: Well Coolidge, Coolidge was pretty good at it, too. He just didn't talk so much about it, publicly. Rense: Silent count. LaRouche: He wasn't that silent. He was a loquacious character, but he knew he should keep his mouth shut when he was speaking in front of the White House. Rense: Smarter than W.W. LaRouche: Yes, (chuckles) exactly. Rense: Okay, so we got the Fed, World War I, and the Income Tax rammed down America's throat, almost simultaneously... LaRouche: Well this was a change. But, Roosevelt reversed it, not completely, but in large degree. He did it with, of course, the gold holiday. The British gold standard, which was the curse of the world up to that point, collapsed in '31. But Roosevelt responded with the Bank Holiday and the nationalization of the gold reserve, which became the basis, later, for the post-war Bretton Woods system, where the gold-exchange reserve rate became the margin to control of current account deficits. And that worked. That enabled us to have a fixed parity. We're going to have to go back to that again. But my calculations are, we're talking about $800 to $1,000 a troy ounce for reserve gold--or maybe more, today, in order to have a price which corresponds to the requirements of having a fixed exchange-rate system. Rense: Okay, a couple of things. One, just as an aside, it amazes me how the mainstream media is so adept at referring to Greenspan (or, as some call him ‘Redspan') and the Fed as being a legitimate government agency... LaRouche: Hahhh! ... Rense: They continue to talk about it with that same sanctity that they use for government. And the people buy it. They think it's a federal government... and for me, that just amazes me when I hear that. But beyond that, what I want to ask you about is, how long can the outrageous manipulations, suppression of the price of gold, continue. How long can they play that game, because it ought to be up around 800 or 1,000 dollars, if all things were equal? LaRouche: Well, what will happen is that you will have a collapse of the system, which could occur-- in the near future; one can't exactly say when, because there's a certain amount of free will and timing, certain maneuvers. But, in the near future, the system is .... Rense: So this prediction of next Thursday is wrong. Is that what you're telling me? LaRouche: Well, I don't know. Any date is a good one. But I wouldn't make a prediction. I would say that, in the immediate interval ahead, we're going into a tough time in September, more tough than what has been faced previously. Rense: Really, all right. Well okay, how long can they keep playing with gold is the big question? LaRouche: Well, the way they're able to play with gold is a by-product of their ability to control the system politically. When the system goes, then you will have two things. You will have a tendency to run into gold. You've got this thing, what is happening in Malaysia, for example, under Prime Minister Mahathir bin Muhammed, where they're using a gold-denominated currency as a unit of account for trading. That's happening. So you're going to have-- a gold rush will explode as people run away from paper. In other words, actually owning old--owning it, not having a certificate that says you have a right to buy it (an option), but actually owning it, effectively possessing it, if you can hold it. And, probably government bonds, U.S. government bonds ... Rense: No one here--excuse me Lyndon--no one here has been talking about that gold standard currency you just mentioned. I haven't heard that mentioned once. LaRouche: Oh, this is very much talked about in all kinds of circles. Rense: No, not -- It hasn't been on my desk... LaRouche: You can imagine what's going on in the Arab world right now. Rense: Oh yeah, well it goes back to, as you remember, it must be close to three, two years ago, now, when the Russians minted that gold coin and told their citizens to divest themselves: dump dollars and buy this gold coin. Now when that happened, I said ‘something's moving, something's changing.' LaRouche: Well (chuckles), there are different currents running in Russia. But, a lot of these things, as I say on the question you asked, the basic issue is that the gold, the ability to control, artificially keep the gold price down, will collapse at the point that it is perceived that the system is collapsing. Because people have no other place to run to, except the most secure kind of Treasury, that is, with government accountability, and gold. Rense: Very well said. Be right back in just a couple of minutes. What a pleasure it is to hear someone speaking the truth as he sees it. Agree or disagree, this is a man who does not fit the mold of ‘American politician.' This is a man running for President, a man who is, indeed, electable. It's up to you--and we shall continue. [commercial break] Rense: And, we are back with Lyndon LaRouche. So, gold as an investment right now, for anybody with any intelligence: a lot of the gold dealers, Lyndon, say --and just by way of some pragmatic advice for people, that folks ought to be putting around ten to twenty percent of their portfolio assets into gold, or silver perhaps ... LaRouche: It depends ... Rense: Go ahead. LaRouche: That would depend on how much they have. I mean, people have to think about their life requirements. Rense: Yeah, there's always that, isn't there? So what would you say for someone who had, let's say, my name's Joe, and I'm in New Jersey, and I've got ten thousand dollars in the bank. That's my play money, my investment money. What would you tell Joe to do? LaRouche: Well I would say, divide it between -- if you can get a hold of actually -- remember, as you probably know, the ownership of gold is not that simple. To actually have possession of it, now you've got something in your possession which somebody might steal. So the way you're going to secure your possession of that stuff is something you have to worry about. Rense: Well, you can take it down and put in your bank, do you? LaRouche: Well, I would hesitate, you know, but I would make sure that I had a secure way of holding it. Most people in America could not afford it. They couldn't handle it. But, those who are in upper brackets, will tend to go with Treasuries and gold, plus keeping enough cash to handle what they think are medium to short-term contingencies. Rense: How about paying off home mortgages? Good idea? Bad idea? LaRouche: It depends where you're living. For example, you get rid of them if you can. Sell the thing. Get rid of it. That's the only you can really get rid of it in some areas. Like, around Washington, D.C., the Maryland Northern Virginia area, the prices are absolutely insane. You have glorified, plastic exterior, tar paper shacks--some supported by leaning against each other--which are going up from $400,000, to $700,000, up to a million in some areas, which are not very sound buildings. And the Federal Reserve has been pumping through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac these bundled mortgages, putting money back in the banks. The real estate dealers are upping the price, the estimated price of properties. The banks are lending more money to refinance the mortgages, giving people cash to spend. Now, when they lose their jobs, as they're losing jobs in the dot.com area in Northern Virginia, in droves, then you're looking at mass bankruptcy, mass foreclosures down the line, because they're are no replacement incomes that can carry those mortgages. Usually, there's two or three members in the family to finance one of these mortgages. The ratio of house ownership to total income is insane. So, this is a very vulnerable process. So I would say that we have to anticipate that, and there is no final solution--there are short term ways of trying to minimize your losses, but there is no short-term solution, unless we can get the government to take the action which will freeze this process, and prevent a catastrophic of all values. Rense: Okay, tough question for you now. Is the government in its current state still viable? Is it able to respond? Let's say there was a national demand--I don't see Americans being that much activist-oriented anymore, frankly, but is the government still a viable tool, or, Lyndon do we really have to take it down and rebuilt it with something that we used to have, but better? LaRouche: No, we can handle this government. The problem is the control over both the Democratic and Republican parties. For example, the Democratic Party is controlled by people, without going into the details, who would be considered, uh ‘wise guys,' or descendants of ‘wise guys' ... Rense: uhmmm hummm.... LaRouche: ... like Michael Steinhardt, for example, whose father was a famous fence for Lansky... Rense: Uhmmmm... LaRouche: ... So, you find the influence of these types of people in control over the source of the money which McCain married into, and that sort of thing. So, you've got ... the parties are corrupted, at the top. The parties are actually no longer functioning as parties, because people don't pay much attention to them. They vote for them out of negation, not because it's a party they have an interest in. So, what we'd have to have is essentially a kind of a revolutionary overturn, very rapidly, in the control of the political parties. That could happen, in my estimation, in the coming months as this financial crisis comes down. You have, all over the country, that is, how many states?-- half the states are bankrupt. The federal government, if it were not the federal government, would be bankrupt. Rense: Sure. LaRouche: That it has no chance of paying its current obligations under the present policies. Therefore, if you have a sense of crisis, a sufficient crisis, you have a situation that Roosevelt had in 32-22. Under those conditions, you have a sudent change in the population. Now, I'm picking that up as happening right now... Rense: Lyndon, but what happens if we go to war, and let's just say there is another terror attack on America, which everyone is expecting ... LaRouche: Ahhhhh... Rense: We'll never know for sure, who launched or perpetrated that terror attack, as we don't know, for sure, who killed John Kennedy, and on, and on, and on... LaRouche: Yeah right, exactly. Rense: Now, America responds, and it needs your vision. Americans are at a rather low level of intellectual competence, overall, compared to what maybe we used to be. The public is easily stampeded. But I don't see it happening. I really like what your saying. I, I fear the worst, however. LaRouche: Yeah sure, I fear the worst, too. That's why we've been doing some things, and some of it's working. I looked at this process, and saw what was happening with the Bush administration, and I reached out, to a lot of people, directly and indirectly, and said we have to do something. And I was talking in bipartisan terms. I'm trying to rebuild the Democratic Party, take it over, in a sense, not for me, but take it over for the people. And that means that you have to reach out to some healthier types among Republicans and others... Rense: Sure ... LaRouche: ... and try to build a combination which says, ‘stop this trolley; it's going over the cliff.' So, you've seen effects of this. You saw this Scowcroft led a group of people who said ‘No Iraq war.' Rense: We sure hope that he was legitimate and serious about that, that it wasn't some kind of disinformation... LaRouche: Oh, he was -- I think, from everything I know that you can say in that degree, he's serious. Just like a lot of the military, who would say the same thing. This is from sanity. My point was "You guys know I'm right. You know this is insane. Now, I can't swing it myself, but you guys have to think about what I'm saying--you know I'm right--and you've got to come out publicly in increasing numbers, and people are going to look to you as an alternative leadership, and they're going to say, ‘Let's free the President from the grip of what Carl Rowen's been backing up. Let's free him from the Richard Perle's and the Wolfowitz's and the Bolton's in the State Department, and people like that, and let's have a sensible government.'" Rense: Interesting construct, Lyndon, that he is literally in the grip of hawks and people who do not necessarily have the best interests of you and I at heart. LaRouche: Chickenhawks (chuckles), that's even worse! You see, if you're under a hawk, whose a competent military force, you've got one kind of problem. But what if you've got a guy whose a wild-eyed killer, who wants to start World War Four and-a-half ... Rense: Yep ... LaRouche: ... and he's an incompetent, as Richard Perle is, or Wolfowitz is, and so forth, and all these Chickenhawk freaks. I mean, look at, take the list, which Wayne Madsen put together--and I've checked this with some other people, to make sure it's right, that the interpretation is right. This list shows, that a great number of the people who are running this pro-Iraq War policy, in government, or formerly in government, when it came time for military service, whether in the draft or later, they dodged it! For example, look at Cheney's military record. Look at President Bush's military record--technically he served, but the records are very obscure as to whether he actually served or not. And then, now, go down the list: Wolfowitz! Richard Perle! Go down the list. All these hawks who want to get into war, were the guys who ducked the wars when they were available to fight. Now, you want those bunch of crumb buns, those idiots and incompetents, whose policies are warned against by our leading military--you want to go into that kind of war? It's something to think about. And I think that those very simple aspects of the thing are important. And also, the American public, despite the news media, as the past two months in particular. You take people who are in the lower half of the upper twenty percent of family income brackets, and ask them how much they lost in the stock market recently ... Rense: Ucch, yeah ... LaRouche: Right? So, therefore the economic issue--ask how many people in trade unions, trade union leaders, who see no prospect for their membership? How many people have lost their 401-k holdings? So, the economic issue is the big issue in the mind of most people in the United States. They're afraid of the war, but the economic issue is what frightens them. The government is trying to distract their attention from those issues. If the American people begin to rally, to say "We don't want the war," if they say "We do want somebody to do something about the economic problem," I think we still have a chance to stop it. Rense: That would have to happen ... LaRouche: ... fast... Rense: ... very quickly friends. LaRouche: I know. I've got to have a lot of fun with the youth movement I've started. And it's growing fast. You find young people, in the 18 to 25 bracket, that is the college age, graduate school bracket, who are cheated in what's called education. They are aware that they have no future in the present system. And when they move, as we've seen repeatedly in history--when that age group, or the intellectual leadership in that age group, begins to move, the older generation pays attention, and will follow them. I think that younger generation is the only hope of rebuilding the Democratic Party and moving the population as a whole. Rense: Wow, what an amazing two hours. Lyndon, it's a real honor to speak with you on the program. I wish you the very best, and I will be here to help you, if I can, in any way, in the future of course. And my sincere thanks, on behalf of a lot of people for being here tonight. LaRouche: Well thank you, it's good to be with you. Rense: Okay, take care. |
|||||