The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/l/larouche.lyndon/eir.051993

From oneb!!utcsri!utnut!torn!!wupost!uunet!ccs!covici Mon May 24 05:51:57 PDT 1993
Article: 21284 of alt.activism
Path: oneb!!utcsri!utnut!torn!!wupost!uunet!ccs!covici
From: (John Covici)
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: EIR Talks to Lyndon LaRouche 5/19/93
Message-ID: <>
Date: 24 May 93 4:41:14 GMT
Organization: Covici Computer Systems
Lines: 738


   The wider LaRouche's presence, the greater the pressure
to get him free. 
   Put LaRouche on radio, with a new interview each week. 
   The transcript below is from a weekly hour-long interview
formatted with news breaks and commercials. 
   To get LaRouche on radio, calls from people within 
stations' listening area can be most effective. Program
director and general managers are usually the ones to make
decisions about programming. 
   Get interested contacts with businesses or products to
advertise on the stations during the EIR Talks With LaRouche
hour. This provides greater incentive for the stations to carry
the program. 
   Any radio station on the planet can air the weekly
interviews with LaRouche. The EIR Press Staff can provide weekly
tapes for broadcast. Or stations can pull the program down from
satellite, using the coordinates below. The interviews are
broadcast Sundays on satellite from 6:06 PM to 7:00 PM Eastern.
For More Information: Frank Bell, Press Staff. 

   Galaxy 2, 74 Degrees W          
   Trans 3 74.9 mHz NB, SCPC                
   3:1 Companding, Flat           


   Satcom C-1, 137 Degrees W     
   Trans 2 7.5 mHz               
   Wide Band Video Subcarrier    

   Interviewer: Mel Klenetsky 
   May 19, 1993 

   Welcome to ``{Executive Intelligence Review'}s Talks
With Lyndon LaRouche.'' I'm Mel Klenetsky. We're on the line
with Mr. LaRouche from Rochester, Minnesota. 
   Mr. LaRouche, before we begin to talk about Bosnia,
there was an article last week in an Argentinian newspaper
called {Clarin} which mentioned you. The article discussed
Morton Rosenthal, the international director of the
Anti-Defamation League, and it involved certain allegations.
Are you familiar with the article? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Yes, I am. 

- ``The ADL Is Being Exposed As a Criminal Organization'' -

   Q: What is the significance of the ADL and Morton
Rosenthal running around Ibero-America and talking about
Lyndon LaRouche? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Well, it wasn't just done on the part of
the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. This was done in
conjunction with the U.S. Information Agency, and with the
Project Democracy, a faction inside the U.S. government. It
was done as an official U.S. government operation against me
and my influence in South America, with Argentina being up
front. But it's not just Argentina, it's all of South
   There is a restive mood throughout the continent against
the current policies of the United States, especially against
the policies of B'nai B'rith and its agents, who are
controlling agents inside Project Democracy and that section
of the so-called CIA. 
   Despite the fact of my imprisonment, intellectually I'm
still a major influence throughout the continent, at the
highest levels in these countries. And so {Clarin,} which is
controlled by interests which are close to B'nai B'rith's ADL
and therefore close to Project Democracy, published this as a
follow-on in a series of very paranoid attacks on me. 
   However, this attack was based on a press event
featuring Morton Rosenthal at a dinner sponsored by the U.S.
government there in Buenos Aires. So this had a highly
official ring from the U.S. government, not just from B'nai
B'rith by itself, and the fact that {Clarin,} of course, is
controlled by interests very close to B'nai B'rith. 
   It's a very significant strategic attack and has to do
also with the fact that the ADL of B'nai B'rith is under
heavy legal attack in the United States, because it has been
caught red-handed violating the law in stealing secrets which
it is not allowed to possess, and then being involved in
conduiting those secrets and selling those secrets not only
to Israel, but also selling information against black
activists to the Republic of South Africa; and that has
stirred up quite a fuss not only in San Francisco, but in
other parts of the country. It's a national case, the ADL is
being exposed for what it is, a rather criminal organization,

   Q: What types of secrets is the ADL stealing? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Well, the simplest one is the one they got
the ADL in California. There is Department of Motor Vehicles
information, part of which is confidential. The DMV has
personal information which people give to get their motor
licenses in California. This is confidential, and it is given
by citizens under a promise of confidentiality. Through the
San Francisco Police Department and also many other channels,
the ADL would pick up Motor Vehicle license information--not
the license number, but the secret and confidential
information given--and they had hundreds of these things, I
think Bullock had 1200 names in one place and this guy Gerard
had 600-800 names. All kinds of information. 
   The ADL has corrupted many of the police departments of
the country. It is a major corrupting factor inside the
Justice Department; it has planted its agents over the past
quarter century in there, a great number of them, such as
Mark Richard, for example, who is a very problematic creature
over there. 
   The ADL was also responsible, in part, together with the
American Family Foundation, for setting up that crisis in
Waco, Texas. They created the whole thing; it was not done by
poor, now-deceased Davidians. It was done by the ADL, the
American Family Foundation, CAN, and so forth. 
   So it is a very nasty operation. People are getting
tired of this outlaw, private organization, which was very
close to Gay Edgar Hoover for years, doing the kind of dirty
tricks it does, and they want to be rid of it. 
   Q: You mentioned that there are a number of other police
departments involved. Are there any other investigations into
the ADL? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: In Portland, Oregon, there is a major
investigation of the police department, which does involve,
of course, the ADL, though the criminal charges against the
ADL in Portland, Oregon, are not yet in sight. But the
irregularities by the ADL's friends in the Police Department
are now under official investigation up there as an unlawful
operation being run there, a highly irregular, if not
unlawful, but probably unlawful actions too. 
   Take the example of Chicago, which was a major center of
ADL corruption of law enforcement agencies, including the
police department. And all over the country. We have, of
course, Leesburg, Virginia; the ADL was very much in there,
and set up the whole operation. The ADL has assets in the
form of Mary Sue Terry, the former Attorney General, now
running for Governor. She is one of their assets. I don't
know whether they own her totally, but they own a very large
part of her. 
   The Democratic Party organization of the Commonwealth of
Virginia is owned, top down, by ADL and related interests. 
   [commercial break] 

             - ``I am a Major Rallying Point -
        - Against the ADL's Terrorist Operations'' -

   Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have been discussing an article in
the Argentinian daily {Clarin} concerning the activities of
Morton Rosenthal, the international director of the ADL. 
   You mentioned earlier, that the ADL is all over
Ibero-America, discussing your policy, attacking you for that
policy, because that policy is acceptable to many, and many
factions at this point are fed up with the kind of policies
that they are seeing in Ibero-America. 
   What are your policies and what are the policies in
Ibero-America at this point that are causing so much unrest? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Well, it's not just that. 
   Rosenthal's leak, which was done through {Clarin,}
essentially continues the charge, that I am the major
intellectual influence throughout most of the countries of
South America and possibly he means also Central America,
with major forces which are opposed to the policies being
imposed upon those countries by Project Democracy, this arm,
which is partly run by and is close to the B'nai B'rith and
the ADL. And that was the charge. 
   The second charge they made is quite interesting,
because it does show what the policy line-up is. 
   Rosenthal, who by the way was a supporter of the
organization that assassinated Mrs. Indira Gandhi back in
1984, (and he knew that they were out to assassinate her, so
he essentially is a terrorist, and the ADL are naturally
terrorists also); made the charge that I said, or my friends
said, that the Jewish community killed Lincoln. 
   Well of course, that was never said. What was reported,
was that the B'nai B'rith, which was, at that time, the
intelligence arm of the Confederacy--in other words, B'nai
B'rith represented the racist, treasonous, pro-Confederacy
elements among those Jews in the South who were either in or
supported the African slave trade; and they and their views
were rejected by most of the Jews in the United States who
supported freedom for the slaves. 
   But in point of fact, Judah Benjamin, the head of the
Confederate secret service, and Simon Wolf, the latter being
head of the B'nai B'rith Washington office at that time, were
close confederates and directors of the activity of John
Wilkes Booth, the assassin. In his autobiography, Simon Wolf,
who was a Washington, D.C. agent for the Confederate spy
service--which was the B'nai B'rith--said he had alcoholic
drinks with John Wilkes Booth as John Wilkes Booth was on his
way to assassinate the President, just a short time before
the assassination of President Lincoln. 
   They were against Lincoln; they were involved in the
assassination of Lincoln. Not the Jewish community; in fact,
the majority of the Jewish community was on the other side,
they were pro-Lincoln. But the B'nai B'rith is a treasonous,
racist organization. 
   This is a hot point, because B'nai B'rith today is the
same thing, at least the leadership. It is an agent of
certain factions close to Henry Kissinger or parallel to
Henry Kissinger in British Intelligence. It works often
against the interests of the United States, as it does in
South Africa, as it does in leaking secrets to Israel, some
of which used to go back to the Soviet Union, and that sort
of thing; in the assassination of Mrs. Gandhi, in its support
for that, or at least its spiritual support for that, and
that sort of thing. So it's a very dirty organization, and is
up front in many of the crimes which are committed in the
name of the United States in many places, including their
support for the Serbian fascists who are doing the killing in
the Balkans, and in their support of policies which are very
contrary to the interests of the people of the nations of
South America. 
   So because B'nai B'rith makes itself my enemy in these
areas, and because I'm one of the few prominent Americans who
stands up to this kind of stuff, many people in high places
throughout South American countries, in and outside of
government, regard me as a rallying point against these

   Q: Before we get back to this Project Democracy policy
for Ibero-America, exactly what was the involvement of
Rosenthal and the ADL with the assassination of Indira
   MR. LAROUCHE: There was a Khalistan front, which was the
front which killed and claimed credit for killing Mrs.
Gandhi, which announced they were out to kill her and commit
such terrorist acts prior to the assassination of Mrs. Gandhi
in October of 1984. Rabbi Rosenthal was a campaigner on
behalf of Khalistan, a campaigner in conscious support of
this effort to rally assassinations against Mrs. Gandhi and
others in India. They were directly involved in this. There
was a book written, called {Derivative Assassination,} which
documents a good deal of the connection, how certain sections
of British Intelligence, the B'nai B'rith, was deployed in
the United States to assist that faction of British
Intelligence in rallying support or sympathy for the project
to assassinate Mrs. Gandhi. 

   Q: What is the Project Democracy policy for
Ibero-America, and how does it compare to yours? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Project Democracy partly is a thug
operation, but Project Democracy has been and is run by the
ADL-B'nai Brith. Look at Gershman, the president of the
National Endowment for Democracy, who has assisted `Project
Democracy' from the beginning. 
   Take this section of the U.S. Information Agency or
Information Service, which sponsored Rosenthal down there in
Argentina. This arm of the State Department--officially an
arm of the State Department, and sometimes called an arm of
the CIA--is officially ADL. It's B'nai B'rith; it's all over
the place. 
   [commercial break] 

            - ``Project Democracy Has Adopted -
             - the Policies of Adolf Hitler'' -

   Q: Mr. LaRouche, what is the Project Democracy policy
for Ibero-America, and how does it compare to yours? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: My policy, of course, is human. I'm for
the sovereignty of nation states, I'm for the right of
economic development of these states. I'm against the support
of terrorism, which certain sections of our State Department
and other (particularly under Bush) have begun to support
very openly, as in the case of Sendero Luminoso in Peru; and,
until Clinton gets the State Department cleaned up a bit with
a few appointments, still supports. The Inter-American
Dialogue, for example, are actually supporting the terrorist
Sendero Luminoso organization, and they're supporting
terrorists in other countries. They don't necessarily want to
go to bed with the terrorists, but they see the terrorists as
useful in bringing down governments and military institutions
and others, which are for the national sovereignty of those
   The objective of the Project Democracy crowd is to
destroy the sovereignties of the nations of South
America--all of them. That is their policy, the policy that
they serve. And they are also for the implementation of free
trade, which means nothing but turning every country in
Central and South America into a gigantic slave-labor
Auschwitz. These guys have essentially adopted the policies
of Adolf Hitler toward the people of eastern Europe. 
   Take the case of Lane Kirkland, who is head of the
AFL-CIO. Lane Kirkland is proud of the fact, that his
ancestor started the Civil War with the firing on Fort
Sumter. He may be exaggerating somewhat, but the ancestor was
there; and he {to this day} defends the Confederacy. {The
head of the AFL-CIO defends slavery, chattel slavery.} Now
many members of the AFL-CIO will say well, that's what their
experience has been lately with Lane Kirkland's leadership in
trade union matters. 
   But these people are on the wrong side. They do not
belong to the tradition of the United States. They belong to
the tradition of the Confederacy, who were not a bunch of
rebels but a bunch of {traitors} working under the direction
of Lord Palmerston to destroy the United States for the
greater glory of the British Empire by the act of splitting
the U.S. into two parts or more. And of course there are the
letters of August Belmont, the New York banker, who was one
of the supporters of the Confederacy, who was a traitor;
Belmont says that that was the policy behind the Confederacy.
Other letters say the same thing from the same period. 
   That is what B'nai B'rith was: B'nai B'rith was a
British agency dedicated to using the Confederacy to destroy
the United States for the greater glory of the British
Empire. That is what they did, that is what they are. And
that is the kind of policy and the kind of mentality, which
those who admire the Confederacy, such as B'nai B'rith, such
as Lane Kirkland, represent in South America today. 

- Bosnia: ``President Clinton Must Have the Will Power to -
      - Break the British-French Entente Cordiale'' -

   Q: Let's move on for a minute to another part of the
world: Bosnia. There have been a number of developments. We
have the French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe talking about
``sanctuaries,'' we have Clinton's policies put on hold
because of the French and British entente cordiale against
that policy. What is going to happen at this point in that
part of the world? What can Clinton do to get his policy
implemented? How would you approach these matters? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: First of all, one must always remember
that it was British Intelligence working partly through
Freemasonic lodges--the old story, the same way the first
Balkan war was started back at the beginning of the century
here--which unleashed the Serbian fascists who were British
assets in large part, or assets of the Frankfurt School
types, through the Praxis organization, in concert with
Mikhail Gorbachov in Russia and in concert with George Bush's
State Department, and with Brent Scowcroft and Lawrence
Eagleburger, who were big specialists in Yugoslavia, who were
backers and closely intimate with this fascist group of Serbs
who have committed these atrocities. 
   They, during 1991, unleashed this horror in the Balkans.
And they did it for what they said were geopolitical reasons.
The policy of this Anglo-American faction, of which Henry
Kissinger is merely a part, is to destroy all of the nations
of continental Europe, to destroy Germany, to destroy Italy,
which they are trying to do now; to destroy France, to
destroy all the countries of eastern Europe which have been
formerly part of the Warsaw Pact, which they're doing.
Poland, for example, is almost destroyed, as a result of
these economic shock therapy actions. Poland is down to 30
percent of its 1989 level of production. People are hungry.
Things are getting worse, no bottom is in sight. They are
trying to destroy the former Soviet Union, particularly
Russia, and this has produced a rage inside the Russian
population. We are in danger of getting a flashback not
toward a communist regime, but a Great Russian regime which
deems itself the adversary of the United States in fairly
short order. 
   [commercial break] 

   Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have been discussing a very
difficult crisis area of the world: Bosnia and the Balkans,
and U.S. and European policy toward it. You were just
developing the various aspects of that problem when we had
our break, so please continue. 
   MR. LAROUCHE: The policy which is coming through the
Clinton administration, which is supported by many in Europe,
contrary to what the U.S. press is saying; the policy
essentially is: All right. Recognize the sovereignty of the
various states of former Yugoslavia, essentially as of some
point in 1990, 1991, something of that sort, at the time that
the sovereignty [of the Balkan states] was recognized as
independent states. Put down the Serbs, in the sense of
taking every measure for reprisal against them, and
containment, because of their crimes against humanity. They
are just like Hitler in terms of crimes against humanity; if
you support the Serb offensive, you are supporting the Adolf
Hitler of this period. It's the same thing as supporting
Hitler back in 1938 to 1940. 
   Then give air support to assist the nations which are
the victims in turning back the Serbs, by neutralizing the
logistics and the heavy artillery which is used by the
Serbian fascist forces. Let the nations have weapons to
defend themselves; perhaps provide some military-technical
cooperation on the ground, particularly to coordinate the air
arm in its activities in the region. 
   That is the general military policy which I know of,
from both the United States side among the specialists, and
from the European side, such as NATO headquarters in Italy,
in Germany, in Austria, those in Britain who are encouraging
this kind of thing. That is the policy. 
   It is the only policy that will stop a spreading war in
the Balkans which could become a world war. 
   That is, if you do nothing--if you do what the British
and the ADL and others are demanding that the United States
government do--then you are going to have a spreading war in
the Balkans which can become World War III, not all at once,
but gradually. And that will come home to the United States.
So anyone who says that the United States does not have an
interest in stopping this war in the Balkans, is crazy, or is
just completely ignorant of the facts, and have learned
nothing from the lessons of two world wars in this century. 
   Why isn't this policy being implemented? 
   The problem is that the British have found some people
in France, in certain Freemasonic lodges, the same way the
Young Turk rebellion was organized back in 1908, the same way
the Balkan wars were organized before World War I; and they
have set up what the British call an entente cordiale. 
   Now the {Entente Cordiale} established between Lord Gray
of Britain and Theophile Delcasse of France, between 1898 and
1904, was the thing which actually caused World War I; and it
is the same crowd, the British crowd, which was behind the
Versailles Treaty, the part of the Versailles Treaty that the
United States refused to accept and has {never} accepted to
the present day. 
   That Versailles crowd, with its balance-of-power
management operations such as Kissinger talks about, is
determined to keep the United States from interfering with
the war which it sponsored in the Balkans. 
   Now the U.S. government, the Clinton administration,
must have the will power to break that opposition, for the
sake of the interests of not only the United States but of
every nation of Europe, really, and say, ``We are going to
lift the embargo on the Bosnians and Croats. We are going to
take, if necessary, air action against the Serbian fascist
forces with a limited, specific purpose; and we are going to
foresee peace as being a restoration of the borders of, say,
1991, before the Serbian fascist offensive against Croatia
and Slovenia.'' That has got to be the policy; and if that
policy is not established, I don't think the Clinton
administration will last. I think it will disintegrate.
Because if the United States, which calls itself the world's
number one superpower, demonstrates an inability to deal with
this problem, particularly after the unnecessary war we had
in the desert in 1991 for the sake of that crazy bunch of
Kuwaitis; if the United States lacks the will power to make
this decision and make it stick, despite the opposition from
the so-called entente cordiale and the ADL, then people are
going to laugh at the United States in effect and say the
United States is {incapable} of governing itself any more. 
   So Clinton's entire administration now hangs on his
ability to force through that decision and to say to the
British and French: ``We are going to have this policy and
you will stop this nonsense.'' 

- Russian Patriots' Hatred for Western Gangsters and Thieves -

   Q: As we are thinking about the `why' of the British and
French policy at this point, I want to bring in another
factor. The vice president of Russia, Alexander Rutskoy,
wrote an article which was printed in the {Los Angeles Times}
and the London {Guardian,} a statement which indicated the
problems that he is seeing. He said, ``As a result of the
mishandling of political- economic reforms by the
pseudo-democrats, Russia today is in a state of absolutely
wild instability.... The bungled approach to reforms ... has
caused vast and rapidly widening discrepancies in wealth,
feeding corruption and crime. It is the catalyst of the
criminal underworld,'' and so on and so forth. 
   Rutskoy is talking about an instability in Russia at
this point, that threatens the entirety of Europe. Why are
the French and the British following policies at this point,
that can only contribute to that instability? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Well, it's not entirely all the British.
Fortunately, we have some contacts in high circles in Britain
who have greater sense than this. But unfortunately, around
the Major government--we call it the Major catastrophe
government--this entente cordiale/geopolitical idiocy is
dominant. These idiots don't know what they're doing. 
   Of course, as you know, we know the Russian situation
now very well. Not only did I call the shot on this rightly,
over a decade ago (everyone who opposed me a decade ago on
this, looks like an idiot today, in terms of the developments
which have occurred), but what we're getting to, is we are
actually forcing the Russians into a state of rage, where
they are likely to turn against the United States again. 
   Let me give you an example of this. There are three
names which stand out as {objects of hatred} among people who
consider themselves Russian patriots and others in eastern
Europe. One is George Soros, the king of the derivatives, who
is the king of the thieves. He is the old Fagan--remember
Charles Dickens' {Oliver Twist} and {David Copperfield}.
Remember old Fagan, the guy who organized crime, who
organized the Artful Dodger and so forth. 
   Well, George Soros is pretty much looked at as the old
Fagan of organized crime in the former communist areas of
Europe, where the gangsters, the thieves, the black
marketeers, are taking over in part. He is hated. The
Russians just kicked out of Kazakhstan (not just the Russians
but other parts of the Kazakhstan government) Shaul
Eisenberg, who is Israeli and therefore is not as well
   [commercial break] 

   Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have just been discussing the three
most hated people in Russia. You had mentioned George Soros,
and you were just beginning to discuss Shaul Eisenberg. 
   MR. LAROUCHE: Shaul Eisenberg is the big arms dealer,
who is all over the place. If you want to talk about Ollie
North and other arms dealers, they are pikers compared to
Shaul Eisenberg, who is one of the biggest arms dealers in
the world. And he is in the middle of Kazakhstan and
elsewhere. He has been kicked out of Kazakhstan as {persona
non grata.} 
   Now there is another fellow who is targeted by the
Russians, who should be familiar to most Americans. His name
is Ted Shackley. He was formerly close to Mondale as an
official of the Central Intelligence Agency. He was the
author of the dirty war in Laos. This is where a lot of the
POWs ``Missing in Action'' comes up, people who were
disappeared in Laos under Shackley's provision, where the
United States was conducting a privately funded war using
drugs--Chinese Communist drugs, for example--as a source of
revenue to fund a dirty war. 
   The characteristics of the operation under Secord and
Oliver North, which involved Shackley and so forth, was part
of that dirty war, using drugs and drug revenues, drugs sold
on the streets of the United States, for example, to fund a
war. Or drugs sold on the streets of the United States not
only for the Contra operation--that's minor--but the big
Hekmatyar-backed operation in Pakistan, into Afghanistan,
that sort of thing. 
   Now what is happening, is that the same Ted Shackley is
now in the middle of Kazakhstan, of Central Asia; and to the
Russians, that means this kind of crap, that is, of starting
a drug-trafficking-funded military destabilization of Central
Asia, is in progress. 
   {That is deadly stuff;} and I think they may be about to
kick Ted Shackley out, and if they don't, if the Russian
(Moscow) government doesn't kick Ted Shackley out of Central
Asia, the government is not going to last very long. 
   That is the kind of situation we have, and we're getting
real hatred against the shock therapy. 
   Nobody in Russia believes this myth about the ``great
success'' of shock therapy in Poland; everyone in Russia
knows that Poland is in absolute crisis, an absolute
disaster, caused by shock therapy. Everyone in Russia hates
Jeffrey Sachs, except the few people in Russia who are trying
to live off the table of the United States and Britain. But
for the Russian people and Russian institutions, this is
coming to the breaking point. It is extremely dangerous. 

  - ``President Clinton Must Take On the Federal Reserve -
         - and the International Monetary Fund'' -

   Q: Denmark just recently passed a referendum on the
Maastricht Treaty. Europe, as well as Clinton and the United
States, are also looking for some kind of policy to bail
themselves out in this current economic crisis period. Will
Maastricht give us any relief? Is Clinton's approach going to
give us any relief? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: No, neither one is going to work.
Clinton's tax policy cannot work. It is a policy of
   Remember, Clinton tried to get a toe-in-the-water kind
of stimulus package through. There really wasn't much to it,
but it was a testing of the waters; and Clinton backed down
to blackmail by a Republican faction which was rallied around
that duckbilled platypus from Texas, Sen. Phil Gramm--I call
him ``Landfill'' Gramm because he's all rubbish in terms of
his ideas, a man who pretends to be a mammal, but lays eggs. 
   When Clinton capitulated to this disaster, we then got
this tax business, which cannot work. The health package as
designed cannot work; there's no saving involved, in the way
the thing is shaping up now. And there can't be. 
   We have to get 6-8 million people off the unemployed
rolls into useful production. That can be done with credit. 
   A similar situation exists in Europe. Europe is going
into a deep depression now. Britain is already in a
depression, and various parts of continental Europe are going
into a depression. The United States is in a depression. Stop
this hokey pokey about ``recovery''; there never was a
recovery. We have 18 million people or more unemployed
{officially,} according to Labor Department figures. We've
got the homeless, we have the whole can of worms. We have
infrastructure collapsing. 
   All we have, is this funny paper on Wall Street, and
similar cases. But in terms of the real economy, we are
collapsing. We are shipping abroad what few jobs we have
left, to things like these Chinese enterprise zones, the
{maquiladoras} in Mexico and so forth. We're tearing our
economy apart, we're tearing our country apart. And none of
this stuff is going to work. 
   But the problem is, when Clinton capitulates on the
Balkan crisis--or he hasn't capitulated, but at least he's
backed down, temporarily, to this British, French, etc., ADL
entente--and he doesn't have the guts to back up his own
policies against Phil Gramm and company, if he backs down on
that; if he continues to do that, he is not going to
accomplish anything in his entire administration. He's going
to become a laughing stock, if he doesn't reverse his policy
on these things. 
   President Clinton cannot run Washington the way he ran
the governor's office in Arkansas. He's got to get tougher on
these issues where they are important. Otherwise, nobody is
going to respect him, which is what's happening in Washington
now, to a large degree. The tax policy won't work, Maastricht
is a bad joke, it's an ugly joke, it will make no
   We have to take on the people behind George Soros; and
the people behind George Soros are the people in the New York
Federal Reserve System, the big banks, who are putting out up
to a part of a trillion dollars a day a derivatives
speculative market which is ruining the world economy. 
   You have to take on the central bankers and say, ``You
guys can no longer control our money. We're going to have the
credit to go out to get the economies moving again. We're
going to have job-crediting credit in useful categories such
as infrastructure, of getting the economy moving again.'' 
   Until that decision is made--and the signal is taking on
the Fed in the United States, taking on the IMF; saying that
the United States will have no part of shock therapy--when
that kind of decision is made, you then know that the
government in Washington is beginning to do something which
will turn the situation around. 
   But I see that the turning point for Clinton, is that he
has to break the will of the British and French governments,
of the entente cordiale, on this issue of the Balkans, and
get going with this Balkan operation--now, the next week or
so. If he doesn't do that, I don't think he's going to have
the political combination, the capability, of doing anything
   And I don't see anybody around the world right now, in
terms of the so-called transatlantic alliance powers; I don't
see anybody who, if Clinton doesn't do it, is going to do it.
There is no government, whether in western Europe in the
former NATO countries, which will act if Clinton will not act
now. And I think the breaking point is that Clinton goes
ahead and busts the chops of Major and the
Mitterrand-Balladur combination in France on this Balkan
issue, and says, ``We're going to lift the embargo, we're
going to have the air strikes. Now get at it.'' If he says
that, then it is possible we can expect some attack on other
problems such as the economic problem. 

   - The World Cannot Be Explained by Lockean Ideology -

   Q: We come to the question of {cui bono?} on a number of
the areas that you have raised. The British and French
factions that are pushing for this geopolitical
destabilization of the Balkans, the central bankers, who seem
to have a policy which is leading down the road to financial
and economic crisis; what do they think they are
accomplishing by these policies? 
   MR. LAROUCHE: You have two factors here. When the
average American is taught about human nature, he is taught
this Lockean ideology, this Lockean mythology, that everybody
is motivated by greed and sex and a few other things,
individual motives. And they try to explain history in these
terms, and I'm sorry, that doesn't work; it never worked
anyway. But you can't explain anything important in terms of
this so-called factor of greed as such or individual sexual
desires or whatnot as such. 
   What you are dealing with, is ideologies. If you look at
the heads of many of our corporations, heads of large
institutions in Europe and the United States, particularly in
the United States, you know, some of the people who are heads
of corporations, 20 years ago, would not have been let any
closer to the plant than sweeping out the parking lot. And
today, the same kinds of mentalities, are heads of
corporations. They don't know anything about industry. 
   And the same thing is true in our universities. Look in
our universities. Stanford University: formerly a prestigious
university, which has this deconstruction policy, where they
are turning people out who are {less} educated, {less} sane,
{less} rational, than when they went in. And people are
paying $10-20,000 a year for tuition, to send their child out
of a high school where he's somewhat ignorant, and send him
to Stanford, and they're going to turn him into an idiot. 
   Or the University of Pennsylvania: look at the case
which was certified in the pages of the {Wall Street Journal}
recently, about this squabble there. Somebody referred to a
bunch of rampaging sorority girls as a bunch of water
buffalo, which is a perfectly acceptable thing, and somebody
decide that that was racist or anti-feminist or something,
and they are going to kick the kid off the campus. {That's
idiocy!} That kind of thing going on, on campuses. And look
at the people on the campuses--the university presidents and
the department heads, the Modern Language Association groups
on various campuses, which are running this deconstruction. 
   {These idiots}--these dangerous idiots who are running
the university--are typical of the stratum which has moved
into power in many of our corporations and other institutions
of public life, including government. 
   Then you look at Europe and you find a phenomenon which,
in the content, is not quite as bad as in the United States,
but it's similar. 
   Take one concrete example of this. Take the so-called
ozone hole. There never was one piece of scientific evidence
ever presented, to show that the chlorfluorocarbons had any
effect at all on the concentrations of ozone in the upper
stratosphere. {None.} As a matter of fact, all the scientific
evidence goes the other way. 
   What was presented, was a computer model which was based
on ``if this,'' ``if that,'' ``if this,'' none of which was
   The evidence now is in to show that the ozone hole hoax
is nothing but a hoax; there was no ozone hole. Yet the ozone
hole hoax is the policy of the United States, which means
that most Americans are going to lose their refrigerators,
and will not be able to buy the high-priced replacement which
is now allowed. It means that the food chain, which depends
upon refrigeration's buildup over the past 30-40 years, is
not going to be there any more. People are going to start
eating more rotten food and getting sick and some dying as a
result of it. All totally unnecessarily, all totally insane.
But you have the kind of people in power, who, not for
reasons of motive of profit or anything else, but ideology
and in some cases outright lunatic stupidity, are dictating
   In Britain, you have the same thing, the Entente
Cordiale. That is like a lunatic religious belief which is
motivating the politicians in London and Paris who believe in
the myth of the Entente Cordiale which is the revival of a
corpse from the beginning of this century. People are
starting to be motivated by lunacy of that sort, a real cult
lunacy; and that kind of cult lunacy seems to be running a
lot of high places of power, including major campuses, such
as the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford University, and
many others in the United States. Many corporations are being
run by similar kinds of lunatics from that generation. And
that is our problem. 
   The way we have to look at this, is don't worry about
counting the varieties of lunacy. They're there, there are
lots of them. It's like counting sheep; that could go on
until you fall asleep. 
   What we have to do, is to recognize what sane policies
are, as in the case of the Balkans, as Clinton must do, and I
think he does recognize what a sane policy is. 

   MEL KLENETSKY: Mr. LaRouche, we have to conclude at this
point. We will see you next week. Thank you very much. For
those who want to write to Mr. LaRouche, you can write us at
``{EIR} Talks With LaRouche,'' P.O. Box 17390, Washington,
D.C., 20041-0390. 

                           - 30 -

         John Covici

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.