Lyndon LaRouche Webcast
The Ides of March 2010
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
Lyndon LaRouche gave this webcast address on March 13, 2010, in Northern Virginia. It was hosted by LaRouche's national spokeswoman Debra Freeman. During the discussion period, LaRouche's Western States spokeman Harley Schlanger introduced Kesha Rogers, the LaRouche Democrat whose landslide victory March 2, in the Texas 22nd Congressional District, continues to resonate nationally and internationally. (The webcast is archived at www.larouchepac.com. A PDF version of this address, and the dialogue which followed, can be found here.)
Debra Freeman: Good afternoon.
As people know, today's event has been referred to with the title "The Ides of March." And I think that that is very apt, not only because we're a couple of days before the Ides of March, but because of what the Ides of March, in fact, represents. And I think that, as most people know, until the year 44 B.C., the Ides of March simply represented the 15th of the month of March on the Roman calendar. But when we talk about it, it represents something a little bit different, because it was the day that Julius Caesar was murdered.
Despite warnings that it would be dangerous for him to go to the Senate on the Ides of March, Julius Caesar brushed them aside, and met his fate that day. As with Caesar, time is running out for Barack Obama—and for the Anglo-Dutch imperial financial system. Shown: painting (detail), “The Death of Caesar,” by Vincenzo Camuccini (1798).
According to Plutarch's Parallel Lives, Caesar had been warned to be on guard against a "great peril" that was to strike him on the 15th of March. Now, Caesar, who obviously generally utilized soothsayers and seers, we can presume, believed in them. Yet, despite what he was told, he made a decision to ignore the warning. The fact is, that had he stayed home on that fateful day, he could have avoided what was his ultimate fate, in the Roman Senate. But he chose to go anyway. And according to Plutarch, and also according to popular legend, it's said that he encountered that soothsayer, for the last time, just before he entered the Theater of Pompeii, where he would ultimately be assassinated. And Caesar, who was an arrogant fellow, looked over to the soothsayer, and said, "Well! The Ides of March have come." And the seer looked at him, and replied, "Aye, they have come, Caesar, but they are not yet gone."
Obviously, this meeting is dramatized most famously in Shakespeare's play, when Caesar is once again warned, to "beware the Ides of March." It's also noted that there was another incident that occurred on the Ides of March, in 1917: When Nicholas II of Russia abdicated.
And here we are, again, coming up upon the Ides of March. And the question before us, is whether or not, this time around, the warning will be heeded.
Ladies and Gentlemen, without any further introduction, I'd like to introduce to you, Lyndon LaRouche.
Lyndon LaRouche: Thank you, young lady.
This is an unusual occasion. And I shall treat it as such. We're now on the verge of not the loss, but the replacement of an incumbent President. Some people are talking about "2012." "2012" is codeword for "2010." And 2010 does not mean December. Because the pace of developments is such, today, that it's doubtful that this President will still be President, in April.
These kinds of things are not precisely predictable. What is forecastable and what is predictable are two different things. You can forecast a crisis; you can forecast the approximate timing of a crisis, but you can not forecast precisely the reaction to the crisis, or the way it will come about. What you can forecast, and forecast precisely, as I have done many times—. But I warn people, you can not forecast a date, a given, fixed date for anything. Because human beings aren't like that. Human society is not like that. There's always the element of the unexpected, but the unexpected event will be absorbed, within the expected crisis. That is, you can try to change the date of a battle, but you may not be able to change the date of the losing of a war.
So, we can not predict the date that certain things will happen, as date certain, but we can predict that we're in a very narrow area, in which this President's candidacy and Presidency is doomed! Nothing will save this Presidency, in the present form: And the sooner he's gone, the better. Every day of delay of his departure, is a catastrophe in itself. The mere fact that he's still President on any given day, is a catastrophe, which will mean catastrophes that people suffer.
Now, I shall take an unusual procedure in these remarks, because of the nature of the subject matter, and the nature of the situation. I'll do three parts. I'll do, in the first part, a more or less prepared prologue, to situate the discussion. Then I shall discuss the crucial factors which we have to consider globally, strategically, to understand the situation. Then I shall come to the concrete situation.
I suggest to you, that you walk with me, in your imagination and mine, as I walk the streets of Manhattan, going to an appointment on Sunday morning, mid-morning, toward late morning, on the famous Dec. 7, 1941: The streets were quiet at that time, but the silence had an aura about it. And I walked to my appointment, which took place in a hotel toward Eighth Avenue in Manhattan, from across Broadway. I walked into the hotel room. There was an awesome kind of silence. I couldn't understand it. And then, I heard the voice: The Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor.
At that point, everything changed. There are few people still living today, from my generation, relative to then, of the people who went through that experience in 1941 and the two decades or so later. So most people living today, really have no understanding, or they don't have a reference block, a benchmark in history, to look at the events which led into Dec. 7, 1941, and to understand the events that followed, in light of that event. Because after that date, Dec. 7, 1941, there was no turning back: History had changed. And it was about to change radically, soon, within a few years, again, with the death of Franklin Roosevelt.
Kennedy came into the Presidency largely through the efforts of Eleanor Roosevelt. Under her influence, he adopted the intention of following the policies of Franklin Roosevelt. Shown: Eleanor Roosevelt with President Kennedy, at the White House, March 1, 1961, just weeks after he took office.
A few hours after that moment of silence over the streets, on that Sunday morning, suddenly by afternoon, there was tumult, rising tumult, throughout Manhattan: People were rushing to the recruiting offices, trying to find the military recruiting offices at which to volunteer. And that was the beginning of a new era.
We have such a day, as that, really, today's date: Why? Because I have announced something, or am about to announce something to date, in which I shall reveal things which are not actually secrets, but they are secrets which are not known to a number of leading people in Russia, who were then in power in the Soviet Union, not known to many people in the United States. What I will tell you, is, most politicians and most military leaders of the United States have no present knowledge of this, except maybe a handful of people, who were involved with me at that time.
So, that's the nature of the present situation. And what I'm going to tell you today, will shock the world: It's not unknown facts, but it's largely ignored or overlooked facts, but facts which have shaped the history in which you live! Facts without which you don't know, why you're in the situation you're in today! Events of the 1970s and 1980s, in which I was a leading figure, in which there was a fight against me on a global scale on this issue, have shaped history up to the present time. And most of you out there have no actual knowledge of these facts, which, from the top, were shaping world history in that period. But I'll get to that, in due course.
The History That Has Shaped Today
So. Go back to 1971: At that point, a guy who shouldn't have been President of the United States, Richard Nixon, was President of the United States. And on that date, as a result of events which had happened since 1968, since the end of February 1968; in 1968, the beginning of the end, for the United States, had come. And it had come in the form of the decision imposed upon President Johnson, in February, and March 1 of 1968, to sink the dollar. The orders for sinking the dollar had been organized by Britain, by the present prime minister of Britain, who had run a Schumpeter kind of operation inside the British Empire itself, to sink the British pound.
The way this thing happened was, you had a President of the United States, beforehand, President John F. Kennedy. Kennedy had made two fateful decisions, which led foreign circles, including those of Britain, to have him assassinated. There was no such thing as a lone assassin—he wasn't making loans on that day.
So, you had two offenses: First of all, you have to remember that John F. Kennedy, despite the negative sides of his family background, had come into the Presidency largely through Eleanor Roosevelt, who was his keystone backer for his nomination and election. And under that influence, he adopted the policy of following the image of the policies of Franklin Roosevelt.
The first clear manifestation of this, in his career, was when he took on the steel bosses, which was really Wall Street. Already, at that time, the policy of London, and of Wall Street, was to sink the U.S. economy, by tearing down our heavy industry, high-technology capability. The first target of this was the Pittsburgh area, to shut down the steel industry in Pennsylvania, and its auxiliaries throughout Pennsylvania, as a part of tearing down the U.S. economy, as a part of the process of destroying the U.S. economy!
At that point, Kennedy stood up. He stood up to the steel bosses, for which they never forgave him. But that was not the reason they killed him.
The reason they killed him, on orders from London, were quite different: The reason they killed him, is because he was confronted with the prospect of going into a land war in Asia, in Indo-China. There was absolutely no need for that land war; there was no need for ever going into Indo-China with U.S. military forces! Never! Or you might have had a few special operations, running loose, but not military forces. And President Kennedy consulted on this matter, with former General of the Armies Douglas MacArthur, and with the support of other leading military figures, who in concert agreed, and told the President, that the United States must never be engaged in a protracted land-war in Asia. At that point, Kennedy stood up, against his own administration, his own defense secretary and others, and said, "No U.S. protracted land-war in Asia!" And he was going to stick to it.
So they shot him!
And they conducted, with the complicity of a Supreme Court Justice, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, a session, where they terrorized the country, that the same thing could happen to anyone who got in the way of this policy of going into a protracted land-war in Asia.
Now, the effect of that land-war in Asia was obvious: By going into that war, which was conducted for approximately ten years, before we got out of Indo-China—by going into that war, we enabled the British to destroy the United States. By 1967-68, the United States was in negative economic growth, and has been, actually, ever since that time. Because our industries were being destroyed; a demoralization, a brainwashing of college students, which turned them into raving idiots, like something out of a Dionysian cult, changed the character of the situation.
This destroyed the Democratic Party, and led to the inauguration of Nixon. And Nixon proceeded dutifully, to do what his masters told him to do, to destroy the United States: that is, to go along with orders from Britain, on destroying the U.S. economy. At the very time that Nixon was obliged to support the launching of the Moon landing, he was already destroying the capability on which the Moon landing was based.
Our Collapsing Economy
From 1967-68, there has been a net collapse of the basic economic infrastructure of the United States, and that has been deliberate. There has been a destruction of our ability to function as a nation. We've become more and more, a puppet of the British, from whose sources, from whose monarchy, came the policies, by which we have been destroyed. So the sinking of the dollar, orchestrated by the British, through the role of a British prime minister, was the beginning of the collapse of the U.S. economy and the dollar, as a net collapse.
And through a series of steps, that collapse has continued to the present day. Our net infrastructure, that is, our net investment in active infrastructure, since 1968, has been negative! All the way! That is, we have put up new things in infrastructure, but we've taken down more, either by depletion or taking them down, deliberately.
When Richard Nixon was taken aside by his advisors, and told, in no uncertain terms, that he would be impeached, if he didn’t resign, he made the right decision. Now, it’s Obama’s turn to wave goodbye.
For example, in the long term, the destruction of the national railway system was a key step in destroying the economy. By going to automobiles, presumably to build up Detroit, and by destroying the national transportation system, we lowered the productive powers of labor of the economy, and that was done deliberately. Because one of the greatest achievements of the United States in shaping history, was the development of the United States—from early in its existence, even before it became a sovereign nation—in the development of canals, and then, later, railways. And John Quincy Adams, who, as Secretary of State, as President, and later as a key figure in the Congress, orchestrated the policy, in a leading way, to build up, not a railway system, but a transcontinental railway system, to unite the territory of the United States, as a process, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and from the Canadian to the Mexican border.
That was achieved, shortly after the death of Lincoln, with the completion of the transcontinental railway system. That transcontinental railway system, as already implied in the intention of John Quincy Adams as Secretary of State, committed the United States to continuing to be a process, going away from Europe, to the eastern coastline of the United States, deeper and deeper beyond the Ohio Territory, beyond the Mississippi, and to the Pacific; to continue, that the destiny of the United States is located across the Pacific, in our relations to developing nations across the Pacific, in Asia, and on the Indian Ocean coast of Africa.
That has been, and should remain, the primary, international, economic orientation of the economic development of the United States: To engage the peoples of Asia, in their self-development, to reach into south Asia, and to Africa, and to take our tradition, of technological and other policy, as a way of creating a world composed of perfectly sovereign nation-states. No empires, no euros, none of these things, but sovereign nation-states, whose individual cultures, of individual peoples, in individual nations and cultures, are promoted.
Because people are not potato chips. You just don't batch them up. People are based on their culture, but not just the culture, but the development of their culture as their culture; to reach into the depths of the population, to develop the minds and ambitions of young people in the population, in terms of their own language, in terms of their own poetry! Or their powers of poetic composition, their powers of creativity! Down to the lowest state, of condition of the population. And to transform their language, into a language of a vehicle of a higher state of intellectual development and culture. And for that, we need sovereign nation-states, based on sovereign national cultures.
But the cultures should have the same ultimate objective, and should be oriented to methods of cooperation among different cultures, to cooperate to a common end: for the common aims of mankind.
And that's what's been destroyed. That's what we in the United States, except for some of the bums we have among us, have always wanted: Is to have the United States be a lighthouse, from which the radiation of the common aims of mankind is broadcast, and the United States to be a keystone, of reference, for nations which are trying to develop, in order to create a better mankind. And that's been our mission.
The Nixon 'Impeachment'...
Nixon went the other way. He was the other way, already! And one day, when he thought that he was going to resist impeachment—he never was impeached. Wonderful! And that's a lesson for today: We're not going to eliminate Obama from the Presidency by impeachment. He's going to walk away from it, or be carried screaming, away from it.
What happened? Well, Nixon got the word, that the Senate vote was ready; there was a Senate vote to impeach him. He got the word from his advisors, and took this unpleasant news, not happily, but thought maybe his neck required him to take that into consideration. So, he volunteered to walk away.
And now, we've come to a point, where we have a President who's the worst President in American history, the most despised President in all American history, most despised by the people of the United States, except for the non-people who like him. And he's going to walk away, because if he does not, if he's allowed to retain the powers of the Presidency, even in residual form, he will bring about the destruction of the United States.
We're now at a crucial point in our history, where that destruction is pending: Every day he's in office is a tragedy for our United States. And for its people, who are in worsening conditions of life, as each day passes. For whom there's no remedy—there's fear, there's anger, there's rage. There's no hope of the future.
In the meantime, centered on Brazil, there's a looming danger of an explosion of the Brazil currency. That explosion, which is now pending, would mean, a general breakdown crisis, for the entire planet.
The power of the British system lies in this Nixon thing. What happened?
At the point, in August of 1971, that Nixon moved, under, of course, puppet strings which moved him, to sink the fixed-exchange-rate system agreement, which was a residue of Roosevelt's policy, the United States was going to Hell. At that point, the British organized a financial cabal, centered around a figure called Lord Jacob Rothschild. This cabal is called "the Inter-Alpha Group" (Figure 1). Now, the Inter-Alpha Group, today, which is based largely on speculation among Spanish people you wouldn't like to know, into Brazil, around the Banco Santander, but the Inter-Alpha Group as a whole, is the greatest swindle on this planet. And the British economy, entirely, financially, depends upon this swindle, whose base of operations is now, principally, in Brazil.
Brazil is bankrupt, totally bankrupt, but it's an oligarchical state, in which you have a small part of the population which is wealthy and powerful, and is able to control things; and the larger part of the population, which hates the smaller part of the population, living in other areas, in a state of constant conflict. It is not a stable nation—you wouldn't call it a democratic nation by any choice. It's a dictatorship. And it has certain wealth and certain power in it
But! It has a financial system which is a swindle, and the financial system is this Inter-Alpha Group, based operationally in London, and the chief vehicle of the British Empire. Among its other crimes, as I'll explain a little later, it controls much of the Russian government today.
Now, with Western Europe absolutely in a hopeless situation, under the present regime, and with Russia controlled, to a large degree, by the British, who control much of Russia's policy and destiny, for reasons I shall explain, we are almost isolated in the United States, isolated by having a President like this, and isolated by the fact that Europe, continental Europe, no longer functions; it can be brought back to function, as a collection of sovereign nation-states, but now it is not a collection of sovereign nation-states! It is a collection of non-sovereign nation-states! These nations do not have the power, to define their own system of credit! They are captives of the British Empire! Captives of the same empire that runs Brazil. And Brazil represents a gambling center, in world currencies, which is bankrupt, and ready to blow!
If any part of this system blows—and it can blow at any time—the entire, present world monetary-financial system will not collapse, it will disintegrate!—in a fashion much like the great dark age of Europe's 14th Century. So therefore, time is running out. The issue is not a difference of opinion on policy. The issue is a choice of policy, between one under which we can survive, and one under which we're doomed! And time is running out! Hence, the Ides of March.
... And, Obama's
The President of the United States, the current one, is nothing but a fly, a fly floating on somebody's soup. He's of no importance in himself. He's nasty, like a fly in the soup is nasty. But he is not the problem in and of himself. He's the problem in the fact that he's there; that he's not fit to be President. That he's controlled by foreign influences which are our enemy. He does not have the intellect, or morals, to stop doing what he's doing. Therefore, his presence in the White House is destroying the United States! Not because he has any clear intention—he doesn't have a clear intention! The man is a mental case. But if we don't get him out of office, soon, we're not going to have a United States!
And that, of course, is in my view, the greatest reason, not to have him in that office: His very presence, in the White House, is a threat to the existence of the United States! We can probably find some mental hospital, someplace in the world, where he can be kept safely, or something like that. Or maybe his mental illness is cured. But he must go! That's why he must be impeached!
We won't actually impeach him: We'll get to the point, where he has to be impeached. And then, one ominous day, some gentlemen, known or unknown to you, will be walking down a corridor, on their way to have a meeting with a certain figure of the United States. And when that meeting is ended, he's going to walk, like Richard Nixon. We're not going to wait for 2012. We're not going to wait for later in 2010. We're not going to wait beyond Spring. We're now in the time that he must go. Because, if he does not go, the United States will disintegrate, and that is the best of all reasons, for impeaching a President.
And the way you impeach a President, is not by a vote. You impeach a President by a mass action: a mood throughout the population, as the majority of our citizens today, "He must go!" And when the people, with just reason, think that this President "must go!", he must go! And the way that's done: People who take the role of Erinyes, the dark angels of ancient Greece, the dark women, who come swarming down from the skies, to take the reprobate away, will move. And that is exactly what is about to happen. It must happen.
“When the people, with just reason, think that this President ‘must go!’, he must go!” And the way that’s done: People who take the role of the Erinyes, the dark angels of ancient Greece, who come swarming down from the skies, will come to take the reprobate away. Shown: the Erinyes defeat a giant, in a frieze from the Altar of Zeus at Pergamon, Asia Minor, 2nd Century B.C.
And I'm calling upon the dark angels, to descend. I'm waiting for the moment, that they walk down that corridor, silent-faced, grim, determined, a group of people who could convince this President, that he must go!
And a moment of silence, and he will go, as Nixon went. Not quietly, as Nixon went. Screaming, shrieking, so forth, like a banshee, but he will go. And that's the way the impeachment is done.
Now, people will talk about 2012, or they'll talk about a formal impeachment proceeding toward the end of this year, but that's not the reality! That's the "talk"! You see, people don't want to say, "I'm going to impeach this guy, next week"—they get frightened! I mean, terrified! But they say, "Well, he's going to be impeached, it'll take time, yes," but they're talking about impeachment! They're talking about getting him out of there! They're being cowardly about it, they're being sneaky about it, but that's their intention: And at a certain point, that intention, however weak, mild, disgusting, will crystallize. And they will find themselves having done the things that cause him to go, peacefully. Not on his part, but we'll have caretakers who medicate him, and make sure he doesn't do any damage to himself.
So that's exactly where we are at this point.
Because, as I said, what is about to descend on this planet now, is the greatest crisis in all known history of European civilization. It's coming on now! The fatal illness is in this nation! It has a disease called the President, who's only a symptom of the disease, and that disease will kill us if we don't get cured of it! And 60-70% of the American people agree with what I just said—in their own way. They want him out! And they especially, with a special vengefulness, want out, every member of the Congress who they think is covering for this operation! The American people do not hate Obama, as much as they have contempt for him. What they hate, is the members of the Congress, who have betrayed them, and betrayed this nation, on the basis of orders from this President. And therefore, he must go.
British Policy: The Inter-Alpha Group
Now, I referred to the Inter-Alpha Group (Figure 1), and now I'm going to get nasty. First of all, what led to the creation of the BRIC [Brazil, Russia, India, and China], was part of the same thing that caused the Kennedy assassination. Rothschild
Graphic by Chance McGee/LPAC
Remember, the way in which the British Empire has operated, is always by wars. And they take people's patriotism, and pervert it, into getting them to fight wars they shouldn't fight.
The best example of what policy should be, was Louis XI of France, back in the 15th Century. And Louis was faced with enemies all around him, in Burgundy, from London, the Norman influences in London, from Spain and so forth. And what he did, is, he avoided war, because they would try to get to war, by demanding this and so forth from him, concessions, bribes, and so forth. So he would bribe them. But the bribes didn't cost him much, certainly not as much as a war would cost.
And so, by the end of his term as King of France, he had more than doubled the national income of France, more than doubled the income level of the people of France, and made France the leading nation in Europe! The leading role for France since Charlemagne, for example.
And he not only did that, but his example inspired a prince of England, who became Henry VII, to get rid of Richard III, and to bring the lessons of the French experience under Louis XI into operation in England. And so the history of an English reform, leading toward what happened in the United States, came out of the France of Louis XI, through Henry VII.
So they took this sex pervert, Henry VIII, and used him to change the policy of England, and that led to a whole different kind of history. But that's the way things happen.
So, we went into, as a result of this process, this change, at the same time Columbus was coming to America, we went into a period of warfare, from 1492 to 1648. There were a very few short intervals, in which there was not general, genocide warfare. As it was once described by Friedrich Schiller, in describing the Netherlands War, "men killed men, not as men, but as beasts, beast against beast." This was the character of warfare. This destroyed Europe! The Peace of Westphalia, created a period of peace.
But then, the same forces came back, in the beginning of the 18th Century, under the influence of Gottfried Leibniz, who was then a key factor for the struggle for a reform in England. Leibniz was defeated, and England went to Hell, and became an empire of a certain kind.
So then, in 1763, at the time the British Empire was first established by a treaty in Paris, in February 1763, there was a split in what became the United States, into two groups: One group which was tied to the British East India Company, which we call today, Wall Street; and the other group was the group which created the United States. We didn't, as Benjamin Franklin intended, throw these guys out! They want to be Brits? They want to be part of an enemy force? Let them go there! Get on a boat—git, man! Skedaddle! But it wasn't done.
So, within us, we've had a sneaky, dirty thing, called Wall Street, and things like that. Which has been a powerful force, always an arm of the British influence, the British Empire inside the affairs of the United States.
Now, the British Empire is not a territorial empire as such. The British Empire is an empire of usury. It's a system of financial usury, which controls the nations of the world, and that's what it is today. The British Empire is running the world: The British Empire created this President we have! Through international, financial power; imperial, financial power, the control of the system, through the breaking of our system—and also through wars, as they did with the Kennedy case, with the 1968 events, and so forth.
We have been destroyed by these forces, partly because we were foolish, or simply because we were small-minded. And always, again and again, we have been deceived into going into needless wars! Nobody wanted to go into this war in Iraq. The British arranged it! And they've been out to kill me ever since, because I intervened into British affairs in saying, we must not have an Iraq war. But Tony Blair, my enemy, my personal enemy, by aid of the death of a British intelligence officer, succeeded in getting that war in Iraq going, a mess which has not yet been cleaned up, and will not be cleaned up for generations to come!
We're now going into an Afghanistan war! There's no reason for us to be in an Afghanistan war! There never was a reason for us to be in a war in Asia, a long war in Asia! No reason at all. But we, like fools, do it. We call ourselves "patriots," and we behave like fools! I don't think being disgusting is being patriotic, particularly if you're also being stupid at the same time. I don't think they should be leaders in government.
So, we had Carter, the same thing. First of all, we had Nixon, then we got Carter. Well, Carter was nothing but a puppet. He was owned by David Rockefeller and Co. He was part of the British faction. And Carter ruined the United States, not because he knew what he was doing, but because he knew how to do what he was told. He destroyed the United States. We never got back.
Then came along something in this period: And this is the point which I'll start to make some extended reference to, which is what I referred to: Some things which are considered secret, really are not secret to me. Not secret, because I was informed of these things, but because I was an active figure in causing some of these things.
The Genesis of the SDI
In 1975-76, in particular, while I was running a campaign for the Presidency, I had delivered into my hands a carbon copy of a letter written by a member of the Carter candidacy team, the Brzezinski crowd. And what this letter said, is, the plan for a threatened nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, to be carried out under the Carter Administration.
Now, some of you who are old enough, may remember, that I devoted the hot phase, the concluding phase, of my Presidential campaign in 1976, to this issue. I announced that this was the intention, of the people behind the incoming Carter Administration, Brzezinski and Co.: to pull an operation, modeled upon what had been done, by the British behind Bertrand Russell, in launching the original plan for a preventive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, of a plan which was launched, officially in 1976, in September 1976.
In 1975-76, LaRouche reported, he was informed of a plan by the Brzezinski crowd in the Carter Administration, for a threatened nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, and took immediate action to stop it, in a process that later led to his role in developing the SDI. Shown: President Carter with National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, in the White House, 1977; a rally in New York City, October 1976, with LaRouche’s campaign poster.
So, what I did, in this context, in 1976, is, I went to circles, and discussed, what can we do in a certain direction? Now, when you get into a posture of warfare, that is, you've declared who the enemy is, and you're arming to have a war with this enemy, whom you have declared to be your enemy, you can not, by simple diplomacy, get rid of that kind of a problem. You can not have just diplomats going in and talking with each other, and suddenly coming away, because you've got a whole military establishment. A whole military-strategic establishment has been mobilized on either side—in this case, major powers—which organized on the existential intent, of some time, sooner or later, going to war with each other! In this case, it was nuclear war.
So therefore, you have to find an intermediate approach, which takes into account the military factor. In other words, your negotiation of peace, if it's going to be effective, must be a negotiation of an intent to peace, among the factors which are the controllers of the military establishment, involved. So that's the approach I took.
I went to people who are in the U.S. military line of command, and to people whose views I shared, from my experience, during World War II overseas. And we, with our discussions, by 1979, had developed a plan, which I was preparing to have presented, both to leading circles in our own country, and in the Soviet Union. And by that time I knew the Soviet Union was about to disintegrate. Not in the short term, but the process was there. And the war posture, and war burden, the military burden on the Soviet system, was one of the impediments for the Soviet economy. So therefore, if we could define a military-based policy, which would be a policy of cooperation, or intent to have cooperation, rather than a conflict, we could, in that way, get out of that mess! That's what we did.
Now, at a somewhat later point, at the time that a new President, Reagan, had been elected, and was not yet President, I carried this further into actually where people were coming into what was to be the Reagan Administration, but in the intelligence community—not in the administration otherwise, but through the intelligence community—and they agreed with my efforts. I said, "I want to go to the Soviets, and propose that we do this." And there were all kinds of scientific considerations involved in what I proposed.
So, a leading section of this, including the head of the national security intelligence at that time, the head of the CIA at that time, after Reagan had been elected, agreed. Some of these were people who had shared the same opinions I had back in World War II. I didn't know them then, but while I was in World War II, and they were in World War II, we actually had converging views about the interests of the United States, and how to deal with these things.
Photo: EIRNS/Stuart Lewis
So this became known as a baby I designed. I was involved in organizing leading forces in the French and other military—in France, in Italy, in Germany, in Argentina, and so forth. So I organized what became known as the SDI. The Reagan Administration put on the name "SDI," but I was the center, the intellectual architect, of what became known as the SDI, and the pusher of the policy. And a lot of things that happened to me can be explained in terms of exactly that issue. So, we went for the program. Significant parts of the Soviet apparatus were engaged in discussions with representatives of the United States, and similar circles, during this period, including a famous conference, which occurred on the tip of Sicily, at Erice.
Now, everything seemed fine. Then, again, in 1983, President Reagan went on the horn, unexpectedly, to some people, but known to the intelligence community—and known to me!—went on the horn, and he gave a speech, which is this famous SDI speech. He proposed to the Soviet Union, nothing different than I had proposed, and had been the policy of the effort which I had been making, since 1975. I organized it.
The British School of Treason
Now, why didn't it work? Two factors: Principal factor—the British. The British killed it. But how did they kill it? Why did Andropov, Yuri Andropov, who had British antecedents in terms of influence, why did he, summarily, without discussion, publicly repudiate any discussion with President Reagan? Because he was controlled by British agents.
Now, the core of this, which became nastier and nastier, was associated with a successor to Andropov: Gorbachov. Who, from my standpoint, from my standpoint of objective knowledge, objective judgment, was a traitor to the Soviet Union. And his actions can not be explained in any other terms.
Here's the Soviet Union, on the road to destruction; the United States is committed, in terms of the President, to a program which I've designed, which has vast support in the military in France, in Germany, in other countries, to go to work, and work our way out of a nuclear adversarial condition, by a science-driver program, to go into new technologies which will eliminate the danger from such a military technology. And this guy, summarily, Andropov, summarily, rejects that? When large sections of the Soviet apparatus have understood it and agreed with it?! Yes.
In the middle of the 1980s, it became clearer: There were people who technically would be qualified as traitors to the Soviet Union and to Russia, who are, today, powerful figures inside Russia. They don't represent, necessarily, the top level in Russia. They represent a very important factor—which is allied to Britain. Most of the offices were trained in Britain. From the middle of the 1980s on, the leading forces in Russia, today, were trained and directed by British intelligence circles, largely inside London itself! Those people are, in a sense, controlling key positions in Russia, today, and are the key impediment to saving Russia, from the destruction which threatens to hit Russia, today, when the Brazil crisis explodes, as it will.
In other words, the way this crisis is going now, the general financial crisis in the world today, is on the way to a breakdown crisis, not a depression, a breakdown crisis: There never will be a recovery of the economy, in the world, anywhere, as long as this danger exists! If we don't eliminate Wall Street, today, or what is the equivalent of Wall Street today, the United States is not going to exist, and we're going to have a crisis, from which no nation will exist as a nation; we'll be in decay.
So, these characters—like Chubais, not only Gorbachov, but Chubais and others, who are part of the British school of treason, from a Russian patriotic standpoint, or Soviet patriotic standpoint, British school of treason—are behind the major problem we have today. And it's the alliance of that with the British Empire, through this group—you got this creature here, BRIC. Okay. This is the [Inter-Alpha] Group.
Remember, the United States economic system was crashed in August of 1971. In August of 1971, the British Empire, operating through a group headed by Jacob Rothschild, and others, created what is called this group, today. They are the controlling force, today; they are actually rotten, and they're about to crash. This is the center of the bubble, which is about to pop! And when this bubble pops, unless we have an alternative policy in place, the whole world's going to go down with it, like the new dark age. That's where the problem lies.
Yet Russia, China, and India have a vital common interest, in fact, with the United States, with nations in continental Europe, and others, in revising a new system of cooperation, to get the world economy out of this crisis—largely a nuclear-power driven, transportation-driven, infrastructure program. Which can be done, it can be financed, and it can work, and it can end this depression.
This is the impediment! And the influence of this element, like a pack of traitors, inside the Russian system, is the secret to the problem. That is the technical point; that's the point of attack: That's what you must destroy! That's the enemy. Don't pick on an enemy, everybody you don't like: Pick on an enemy to destroy. Pick on the right enemy, and don't attack anybody else. Destroy that enemy. That's the enemy!
And it's going to pop anyway. But if that enemy is in charge, politically, it will do what was done to the United States, under the late Bush Presidency, in 2007. At a point where we could have organized a recovery from the crisis that broke out, the so-called mortgage crisis, which broke out in the Summer of 2007—I had a program which would have stopped it, and started a reorganization process. They went in the opposite direction, to save Wall Street, at the expense of the people, the expense of the nation: This is the crowd behind it! This crowd is determined to destroy the United States, and to destroy civilization generally. It's a very nasty plan.
Defeating the Monster
But the point is—let's don't worry about all the details of the plan, let's look at the point: How do we defeat this monster? How do we get rid of this monster? How does Russia get rid of this monster? The succubus which is sucking the blood out of it, with this crazy swindle?
You have to go through the details, as I went through them, in Russia, back in the '90s, and later. Russia was systemically destroyed! The design for the destruction of Russia, which occurred after 1989, was already built up in Britain, under British supervision, by Russians, who worked under British direction in designing the problem, people like Chubais, Gorbachov, and so forth, who effectively were traitors to the Soviet Union, and implicitly traitors to their own country, today; who destroyed the Russian economy, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and did it systemically, for political reasons! The same group that's out to destroy us!
Therefore, we and the Russian people have a common adversary. And we have nations, such as China and India, who agree with what we should agree with, on a nuclear-power reorganization of the planet, for going into space, continuing and accelerating the space program, as part of a development of humanity, of science and technology, the exploration of nearby space, to take care of the needs of future humanity. And this is the enemy.
The point in this thing, is to understand this. This is the way history works! Not the way the New York Times or the crazy Washington Post says! Not this garbage. This is the way it really works! And has always worked in modern history, since the Peloponnesian War, in European history. And this is what we must destroy.
The evil of the Obama Administration is typified by its Haiti policy: The people of Haiti are being left to die, instead of the U.S. doing what LaRouche proposes—sending in the Corps of Engineers to rebuild the nation. Shown: Brazilian peacekeepers patrol in a Port-au- Prince slum, February 2010.
So, British agents inside the Russian system, are the same people who looted and bankrupted Russia, under British direction. And if you want to find the offices of the people who run the Russian economy, in terms of this financial operation, they all are located outside Russia, in British territory! The British Empire, it hopes, by controlling Brazil, controls the world. And it's coming down.
And that's the reality we have to understand.
Now, there are remedies.
First of all, presuming we get rid of this monster, get rid of this British monster, which has got the Russians under its control—not all Russians; many Russians are patriots. Many Russians would want to develop their own country in cooperation with China, and India, and other countries. With investments in high technology, improvements in infrastructure, which are of mutual interest to us and to the countries of Asia, and Europe.
We can revive Europe! With the right kind of cooperation. Yes, it's a junkheap; it's been destroyed. But, by using the techniques familiar to us as Americans, in our history, by building up a large infrastructure program, restoring international rail systems, high-powered systems, all these kinds of things, we can use the buildup of that infrastructure to re-create the industries we need to get a full-circuit, a full package of economy: We can do it!
It's going to take us two generations to do it, because we've lost skills. Our youth no longer have the skills the same age-group had one generation ago! Not even two generations ago! We have destroyed it! We don't have a railway system, we don't have a mass-transit system. We used to get clean water out of the faucet in the municipal water system: would you want to drink water out of the municipal water system in the United States, today? Would you want to even inhale the education you get in school today?
So, we have lost the skills.
Take the contrary case, the case of Haiti. And the evil of the Obama Administration is typified by its Haiti policy: Here we have a nation which has been destroyed repeatedly by foreign interventions. It's a half-island; it has suffered the effect of an earthquake, not largely because of the earthquake itself, but because there's no development. In the lowland area, about Port-au-Prince, it's practically below sea level. The conditions are horrible. So therefore, when an earthquake hits an area which has very poor infrastructure, where the population is ill-prepared, you know, where 2,000 people share a toilet—I mean, that kind of situation—then, you have a real disaster, a deadly disaster! Including the outbreak of disease, epidemic disease, pandemic disease, which is what's there now.
Use the Army Corps of Engineers
Now, if we take the Corps of Engineers—they're being destroyed by this crazy lunatic in the White House; if we restore the Corps of Engineers, which should be largely one of our greatest military establishment items, the military Corps of Engineers; if we take the military Corps of Engineers, if we take our youth on the streets, who are being killed by drugs and other things, and if we take them off the streets, as Roosevelt did with the CCCs.
The key thing, is when you have slum youth, people living under slum conditions, falling into all kinds of Hell—you don't try to organize a program on the streets. Because the streets control them; the street becomes a culture, the culture of the streets controls them. You can not make them employable people. You want to make them employable people? Move them to a camp, like a CCC camp. Give them a program of development, of work and development, and education. What we did is we used the U.S. military, the Corps of Engineers concept, to create the CCC function, which gave us the famous Michigan Division in World War II.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Human beings, unlike monkeys, have a sense of the future; they want a mission. Take the Army Corps of Engineers, who will employ youth, and others who’ve been thrown on the street, as an engineering force, as FDR did with the CCC, and give them a future. Shown: the Corps of Engineers at work on the Howard Hanson Dam in King County, Wash.
You take the people away from these streets, which are the streets of the culture of death, of drugs and death! Murder! Get them out of there! Give them a future! Give them a birthplace! A re-birthplace, in work, where their dignity and skills and identity is changed. You put them to work under what? Under the U.S. Corps of Engineers!
Every major government infrastructure project we need today, will be largely run by the U.S. military Corps of Engineers: which is our tradition from the beginning! West Point was that! The way we built the railroads in the United States, was with the military! With the retired military officers. That was the way we began! That's what George Washington was, before he was President.
You take the people who are despised, who are culturally depraved, and you get them out of the streets of depravity. You give them a new environment, with a mission, with a dignity. Give them a sense of pride. And give them a mission of which they can be proud! Like rebuilding something that's destroyed.
So you take some people, our young people—no jobs, no future: Give them a future! Their problem is not their lack of jobs; it's the fact they have no future! And not having a job is part of not having a future. Give them a future, a meaningful future; give them a human identity!
We're not monkeys, we're human beings! Human beings, unlike monkeys, have a sense of a future, a sense of future generations, a sense of development. We treat human beings like human beings, not like monkeys, not the way Obama treats them, like monkeys. And you give them a mission, of which they can be proud, as human beings. And you put the Corps of Engineers in charge. Let the Corps of Engineers employ, as contract forces, people from our industry, defense industry, people who've been thrown on streets from jobs of pride they had. Employ them, as an engineering force.
Give them also a third element: American youth, who have no future, and give them a future. Achievement, as in a place like Haiti. You take the thing that's important, not the thing that's easy, but the thing that's hard. But it's necessary: You take it on as an assignment, as a mission-orientation, and you instill in people a sense of culture, real culture, a sense of pride in themselves! A morality which otherwise doesn't exist for them. Let them be proud that they helped to save humanity, when humanity was in dire distress!
And that's what we have to do.
We don't have industries any more; Wall Street and Washington have successfully destroyed our industrial capability! We don't have railways any more! We need a national railway system. We need a national water system. We never developed the river aqueduct system in the West; the whole system of water in the West is collapsing; our food supply is in jeopardy, because we didn't develop it.
What we need is large-scale infrastructure projects, government-funded infrastructure projects, at low interest rates, on government credit, for long-term projects, and then, use those long-term projects as the mothers of building up the industries which will assist the long-term projects, as subcontractors. Devote Federal credit, at between 1.5 and 2% per annum rates, without funny stuff, in a fixed-exchange-rate system, and supply the credit, which enables the entire structure of the U.S. economy, to rebuild itself on the basis of the very methods by which we were built up before. National infrastructure projects: water, power, health care, and so forth. Build these up!
Now! Take this national structure, funded by Federal long-term credit. Supply some of that same credit to private contractors, who are qualified, to use the opportunities created by the pathway of this infrastructure development. Because, when you've created, for example, a national railway system, think of the opportunities of employment you demand be fulfilled, in each of these areas. A large project, a national infrastructure project. A national power project, on nuclear power: Do you know how many jobs that will create? Not just the jobs in the nuclear industry, but all the things that are stimulated, by the process of building up this industry, this power industry.
We have to give ourselves a new moral purpose. And look at Haiti, what's the next thing you think about? Well, what about South America, what about Africa? What about the conditions in Asia? Isn't the world filled with problems of this same type, where the development of infrastructure is the key to the opening up, of not only the areas, but the people themselves? The powers of labor, the sense of humanity. And therefore, this is the problem.
We have to fight against those, who, like the de facto traitors to the Soviet Union, went to work for Britain, among the friends of Gorbachov, who looted the former Soviet Union, Russia and so forth—in the manner I saw! Witnessed! Willful destruction! Of an economy, from the inside, for the sake of the British Empire! And these people who did that in Russia, are doing it to Russia, still today! And as they did it to Russia, from abroad, then, they're doing it to Russia from abroad, now. Because the key control centers of these projects of finance, are all outside, largely outside, Russia.
So therefore, as long as this financial system has Russia imprisoned, then Russia's role in cooperation with China, and India, which is crucial, is in jeopardy; if Russia, China, and India are not in a state of cooperation with the United States, what happens to the future of Japan? What happens to the future of Korea? What happens to the future of Southeast Asia? What happens to the future of Africa?
So therefore, the interdependence of sovereign nation-states, with certain missions, which are in their common interest, or complementary interest, is the way to rebuild the planet.
Take the Enemy's Toys Away!
And this is an enemy! They're not merely traitors to the Soviet Union, which is a past era, but they're continuing the tradition of treason, in Russia today. And therefore, what do we do? We take their toys away.
What are the toys? Their financial system. What's the toy? Where is it? Where is it? The BRIC, the system which is a British system. Destroy it. How do we do that? Well, there's a very simple way: Glass-Steagall.
Glass-Steagall was the spirit of the U.S. Constitution. It was sabotaged, because Bill Clinton had been in trouble, because somebody set him up for it. And Gore and Co., and people like that, destroyed it.
But Glass-Steagall is the soul of the U.S. Constitution, an expression of the soul. Without a fixed-exchange-rate system internationally, you can not develop cheap credit, that you require internationally, for building up this planet, and rebuilding the United States. You can't do it. Therefore, we must do it.
But you can not have different, fluctuating values of currencies and do it, because when currencies' value fluctuates, then the interest rates go up to compensate for the fluctuations. Therefore, you need a fixed-exchange-rate system. Therefore, what do you do? You have to close down, as bankrupt, all the fake industries, the Wall Street industries. Take it all back, take the money back. Take the money back, not only from 2007; take it back from 1987.
And thus, by creating an international system, using the Glass-Steagall standard, which is the only standard that works, for this kind of situation, and for the future of nations; by using a Glass-Steagall standard internationally, and just wiping off the books all the fake money, all the speculative money! Wiping it off! Ha-ha, look! You invented a game called Monopoly; you played Monopoly games with the entire economy, with your crazy money system: The game is over! Now, we want real money. Real credit. And it will be a system, not a monetary system, but a credit system, under which the credit of governments, of national credit, under a fixed-exchange-rate system, cooperation with a mission-orientation, toward rebuilding the planet, and each rebuilding their own nation, is what we need. Without that, there is no possibility.
Culture: Science and Art; Not Mathematics
Now, another aspect of this thing, which is also very touchy, but necessary: Culture. People think, mistakenly, that discovery, science and discovery, comes from mathematics. That is not true. It is impossible to make a scientific discovery with mathematics. You can make an uncovering with mathematics, but not a discovery. You can uncover the dirt, you know, clean out the kitchen corner. But you can not create good, where dirt lives.
For Leonardo da Vinci, as for Albert Einstein and other Classical artists and scientists, there is no distinction between art and science. Shown: Leonardo’s sketch of a Star of Bethlehem and other plants (1505-07).
Therefore, you require a productive economy. We're always wearing down the old system of assets we have. We use up the richest concentrations of ore, and so forth; so therefore, we have to replenish that. How do we replenish the lost concentrations? By going to a higher level of technology: science-driver technology. Well, how do you get science? By mathematics? No. You count the results by mathematics, but you don't get it by mathematics. You get it by the imagination.
The imagination is typified by the great Classical poetry, great Classical art: as in the case of Einstein, whose creativity was associated with his violin. He would take his violin, and he was really a qualified violinist; not the greatest, but he would work with the violin until the moment of inspiration came over him. At that point, he would put the violin down, and go back in the other room, and get to work on the real scientific project. All creativity, including Classical artistic creativity, musical creativity, Classical art, all comes—that's the area of creativity. The problem in our culture today, is we make a distinction between so-called "science" and "art"! There is no difference between science and art!
So now, instead of having the idea that it's a natural thing, as it was in former times, for anybody who was an accomplished scientist to also be an accomplished musician or something of that sort—normal!—because it's in art, in Classical forms of art, that the actual creativity of the human mind is expressed! The mathematics is what sweeps the things up under the rug, afterward.
And so, we need a Classical cultural orientation. Which in a sense is an orientation toward the human soul; it's where it's located. A human soul, which makes man different than an animal, is the place where creativity lives. And creativity, in what we call Classical creativity, always has been the basis for the achievements of mankind. And it's in this kind of thing; it's in this mood, in this dimension, through Classical artistic composition and what it represents, where the love of mankind for mankind, is expressed. It's expressed by the passion of creativity: Because man is inherently creative. And when man is not being creative, man is not really becoming human, not morally. And therefore, the unity of science, and creativity, and production, and progress, is what's needed. And it's been taken away from us.
But we have to understand the truth: Where did we go wrong? And this case—it should be shocking to anyone who thinks about it. Here we are, all this time, all this talk about "Soviet" this, and so forth, which is what we were sort of raised in, since about the time I was born! I was born in 1922! Guess what the Soviet issue has been since 1922?
We lived in a world in which that was the big issue. And now we turn around, and we find that the key powers inside the Soviet Union itself, working for the British Empire, as traitors to Russia, were actually running many of these operations which we thought were the Soviet operations: The British were running them! We were allied with the British, who were running the Soviets!? As today? Our old enemy, the British? That's our problem.
That's why we got Obama.
America's Unique Responsibility
We have to understand, we as a nation, were created as a unique phenomenon on this planet, at a time when Europe had failed to realize what had been made possible, by the great accomplishments of the 15th century, the discovery of science, the launching of science in the 15th Century, the launching of Classical art in the 15th Century; and then, again, the progress which was made by the Peace of Westphalia, again, betrayed.
We, in the United States, from Europe, came to this territory, to build up a nation, based on the objectives of these great reforms in Europe, but which Europeans have been incapable to defend and maintain. So what we brought here, was the contribution of the best of European civilization. It started effectively in Massachusetts and activated seedlings of this in other parts of the country, as in Virginia and Pennsylvania and so forth. We created the United States, as a unique expression of a distillation of what had been good, in European civilization! And adapted it to other parts of the world, with the same view, of a cultural revolution of that type.
We destroyed that, then, largely through Wall Street and British influence. And today, we're about to lose everything, to lose civilization, to lose the human race. And the problem of the Obama Administration, is that it is the embodiment of the corruption by which we are destroying ourselves. Let Obama go where he wishes to. Let him live in peace.
But don't have him in the White House. Get him outta there.
And also, get out of there, that kind of lack of consideration for the meaning of mankind, which allowed him to be elected, and maintained in office; which allowed the corruption, the vast sea of corruption, which is called our Congress. They're not all bad people, they're just corrupt people! They go along to get along. "My brother has a disease, I got to get the disease. I got to go along, you know. He's got syphilis, I get syphilis—well, you know, we're equal! We're like, we have the same program. We meet regularly, to discuss it, and we share the same diseases, and we spread them." That's been the Congress, recently. It's not that they're bad people, it's just that they have some very, very bad habits in politics!
So, our job, now, is, by attacking this issue, which 63-70% of the U.S. population is ready to demand—and are demanding in their own way! "Get this thing outta there! Return the United States to its people!" Control it by its people, by their conscience. End it, now! Because the world is waiting for us to do that!
Because, if you look at what is going on, the problems that Russia has, which is practically a colony of the British financial empire right now; the situation of Western and Central Europe, which is virtually a colony of the British Empire; the problems we have in our own country. If we don't solve this problem in the United States, where we have the potential power and the tradition to do it, humanity hasn't got much of a chance. This is our mission! This is the reason for the existence for our nation.
Let Obama quietly go away! Take the whole bunch of behaviorist bums, throw them out! Like disposing of the garbage. And we have, even with all their imperfections, we have a residue of people in the Federal institutions, in the population, which are perfectly capable of running this thing, with a little bit of encouragement—but under the right leadership and encouragement; with what we have now, the residue of government, after getting rid of this garbage, out of the Congress, out of the administration, we can rebuild this nation! Simply by recognizing that we have a crisis, that we have to make reforms, that we have to fulfill the intention on which the creation of this Republic was premised: Stick to that!
The American people have gone through an evolution of hatred against the members of Congress, and their President, since this President was inaugurated. It was a conversion to hatred, against their own President, but against their Congressmen, who betrayed them. The President didn't betray them—he was an enemy; you respected him, as an enemy. He came in from afar, from the outside; we don't know where he came from. But the guy whom we elected, the guy we thought was our friend, we thought, our representative, betrayed us! That's the guy the people hate! Not the guy who came in like an enemy from the outside, but the guy in our own ranks who betrayed the family, who betrayed the nation: and the hatred's against them.
Obama: Smart thing, you get out of this mess. They hate them! You go safely someplace else. Keep away from the White House: Bad for you!
Have fun. Thank you.