Lyndon LaRouche On The
Jeff Rense Program

Here is the transcript of Lyndon LaRouche's interview with Jeff Rense, on July 12, 2004. [unproofed]
RENSE: And, welcome back.... We are almost in the middle of July already, the year 2004. It is a Presidential campaign year. The campaign is in full swing, and it is a great honor to have back with us, for this first hour tonight, one of - in my humble estimation - one of the finest American politicians, and I mean that in the {human} sense. This man is a true American. And when he talks, you can hear him think. And when he thinks, you can hear wonderful things in his words. Agree or disagree, this man does not spew forth recorded messages.
He is an icon of many who think independently. He has been through an awful lot of duress in his life. He is an extremely strong individual, who is praised and held in extremely strong regard around the world by many foreign governments and officials, industrial and political leaders.
He is with us for the first hour tonight: He is, of course, Lyndon LaRouche.
Welcome back, Lyndon.
LAROUCHE: Thank you! Good to be with you.
RENSE: Well, it's nice to have you with us, too. You are extremely busy. And I guess we should start off by saying nothing has changed since the last time we talked...except that things are much worse.
LAROUCHE: That's a fair way of putting it. [Rense laughs]
RENSE: All right. First of all, America is bankrupt. The economy is finished - kaput, it's over. Most city, most county, most state governments are so far in the red now, they can no longer see daylight. It's a joke. And yet, this government of ours - well, excuse me - this government continues to print and spend money as if there is no end in sight to it. And, in fact, they can probably do it as long as they want to. But sooner or later, the chickens are coming home.
LAROUCHE: Yes, fair. Fair. It's worse than that.
We're in a state, where we have two batches of putative candidates, leading candidates, for the Presidency: George Bush and whatever becomes attached to him; and Kerry, with Edwards, now. That's not settled, but it's presumptive, shall we say.
The problem is, that, it's a race to the bottom. Bush is declining. He might get an uptick, by dumping Cheney, because Cheney is such a big drag on his reputation--
RENSE: Oh, huge!
LAROUCHE: That simply dumping him, would give him, maybe, some people say, 10% improvement, due to the fact of getting rid of a loss factor.
On the case of Kerry, Kerry seems to be racing to the bottom faster than Bush is.
RENSE: "A race to the bottom." Wow, that really is another brilliant way to sum it up. I agree.
By the way, a quick note, if I might, Lyn - an aside about the polls?
RENSE: Nobody over on this end of the microphone, and in the listening audience that I know, takes them very seriously. Are there any that you watch with any kind of credibility at all?
LAROUCHE: No. I look at them, but I don't follow them. Because I know they're faked. That is, there are polls that are more serious, but those are privileged polls which are run, not for advertising, but for the information of policy planners and campaign planners. But, what's published, today, is largely fakery, which is done to pull the suckers in, and try to convince them that they've got a winner in this guy or that guy. So, it's a panic mode. You know, it's like trying to say, "Our product is selling faster than the other product. Come buy it, therefore, whether it's any good or not."
RENSE: All right. So, here we are, sitting, as you say, on the sidelines, watching this "race to the bottom." We've got two Skull and Bonesmen, allegedly leading their parties--allegedly. In fact, Fox News reported last week (if you can believe anything Fox News says), that Kerry and Edwards, individually, have more money, individually, than, allegedly Bush and Cheney have together. This is not a joke! This is beyond super-elite. This is a closed issue. The American people no longer have a true voice when it comes to the leaders of the two major parties.
And, that brings us to many other issues, of course, but, what about this Skull and Bones things?
LAROUCHE: This is significant. It's not significant, in the way that some people might think it is. But, it is significant: Club relationships, intimate club relationships--
RENSE: They are intimate, I've heard.
LAROUCHE: And this is, of course, the Harriman firm operation. The Skull and Bones was set up by--it became a partnership of, or trusteeship, of the Harriman interests. And, it is a club, it does have special features; it does {influence} people who join it, as any closed freemasonic association will tend to influence its fellow members.
But, the problem here is, it's worse--is the fact, that, we're in a depression now. And, what you have, is, you have Kerry, in particular, promising this and that, and this and that, and there's no money for it. He's promising this and that, and there's no possibility it will be delivered.
RENSE: Correct.
LAROUCHE: What you've got, is, you've got the American people, especially the lower 80% of the family-income brackets, who consider themselves as underdogs. Their voting behavior is, they don't consider themselves as actually citizens, who are determining what the selection of the candidates will be. They consider themselves as underdogs, who have to take what's put on the table. And therefore, they sit back and say, "We have to vote for one of these guys. They're the leaders. {We} can not choose a different choice, than {they} prefer."
So, what we have is, we're in a depression. The typical citizen feels he or she is absolutely impotent. They know there's a depression on, but they deny it. They pretend, "Oh, well, maybe it's not true. Maybe tomorrow things'll be better. Maybe there'll be an upturn." It hasn't reached the point, which will come soon, at which they realize that there {is} no upturn.
RENSE: There is no upturn. There is no historical economic precedent for an economy slipped this far down, and spiraling so far out of control, to ever come back. It doesn't happen.
LAROUCHE: What you've got, is, you've got a financial system, which is loaded with {hundreds of quadrillions} of financial derivatives, counting the regular and the irregular ones.
RENSE: Explain "derivatives" for our listeners, please, Lyn.
LAROUCHE: Well, it's a side-bet, a gambling side-bet. Remember, in 1987, when Volcker was on the way out, and Greenspan was coming in, and Greenspan said, "Don't do anything, anybody!" Here we were, in the October 1987 stock market crash. And Greenspan came up with this thing about derivatives: That you could have gambling side-bets, on financial markets and all kinds of financial markets. And you would treat these, not as side-bets, but as part of the game! That is, the profits or losses from financial derivatives, which are side-bets, like gambling side-bets, will now be considered as part of the proceeds of the main gambling table.
RENSE: Assets.
LAROUCHE: So, this is what's happened. The so-called hedge funds, you make a side-bet. You hedge a side-bet, against your actual operations.
Now, the financial markets, are largely based on counting in, one way or the other, the effect of these side-bets. We're talking about {hundreds of quadrillions of dollars} a year turnover of this, as against a world economy, which is estimated in the order of magnitude of {$40 trillion} a year. So therefore, we are in a hyperinflationary bubble. A collapsing economy, it's global, it's coming down.
We can get out of this. But, the way we come out of this, is the way it was done before, in similar cases, including the 1930s: Take the old system, which is bankrupt. You put it into bankruptcy reorganization, preferably by governments. Governments now freeze what has to be frozen, which is out of control. Make sure that what must be paid to keep the economy going, is paid. Make sure that we don't have a drop. Get some more cash in to projects which are fungible: That is, especially things, which will have value 10, 15, 20 years from now--so, that's your security. And, try to get employment going, and production going, again, largely with government stimulus {leading} a recovery.
RENSE: Not a chance!
LAROUCHE: We've done that before, we should do it again. But! If you say, the other way: The banking system, or the financial system, which is the creditor of this system, that is, the people who represent the large amounts of money, are going to collect, and the people are not, then, you've got a situation like Argentina, where the vulture funds are saying: The people have to die, in order to pay the debts, which are unpayable.
So, we're at a point, where, if we say: Yes, we made a mistake. The turn we made 40 years ago, toward a post-industrial society--away from being the most productive society in the world--that was a mistake. The mistake we made under Nixon, 1971-72, changing the monetary system to a floating-exchange-rate system--that was a {terrible} mistake. Deregulation under Carter, which was actually done by Brzezinski: A {terrible} mistake. You see it, in the collapse of the airlines industry. It can be traced precisely to that. The slavery of the trucking industry, is traced precisely to that. The collapse of agriculture, traced to that.
So, these were terrible mistakes. Greenspan was the biggest mistake of them all.
All we have to do is say, "This enterprise is bankrupt, the world economy. But, we are people, and governments exist to protect the people. If the system makes a mistake, the government must intervene, to protect the people against the mistakes made by the bankers, {and} by government itself."
RENSE: Unfortunately, that's not happening. Be right back with Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, candidate for President of the United States.... [station break]
Hi, we're back talking to Lyndon LaRouche, candidate for President, this remarkable campaign season--remarkable in many ways. But not remarkable in terms of being inspiring. It's rather like watching an automobile accident: It's shocking.
Lyndon, the economy, again, as you've summed up brilliantly, is a mess. It's headed down the wrong road. The solutions being offered are no solutions at all, there is no money for it.
What has bothered me for a long time, are the lies, in terms of the employment. We keep seeing these rotten, bogus figures and projections about employment in the United States, which bear very little relationship to reality. How do you view employment and unemployment?
LAROUCHE: Well, we're in a vast unemployment sea. But, the problem is this: You see it--I'll speak frankly--say, the case of the two candidacies, the two presumptive, leading candidacy, Bush and Kerry. These candidacies are disasters, not only for themselves, but for the nation. What you have is, you have two candidacies, Democratic and Republican, candidacy (the rest of it doesn't count, as far as this is concerned), and the people are tolerating it! They're walking away from it, which is why the declining figures for both sets of candidacies. But, they're not doing anything about it. And, Nader, of course, he's a cure worse than disease.
So, therefore, you say, why? Why is it, that two parties--and I know a lot of the people in the Congress, and the Executive professional ranks, and formerly serving and presently serving. These are very intelligent people. They're as good, or better, than the leading of government, in any part of the world. Then, you get to the Democratic Party, in particular, and you say: We've got the {worst possible leadership imaginable}, in the leadership of the Democratic Party, when many of the Democrats, as members of Congress, or as traditional people in the Executive branch, or as outsiders who are just involved in this process--that these people are thinking; the party leadership is not thinking. The {candidates} are not thinking.
So, we're going into a period, which requires Franklin Roosevelt, or someone of that stature and intellect, to deal with a great depression. It can be dealt with. But, we have a bunch of {dummies} up there! Now, Kerry personally is not that bad, personally. He's not a dummy. But, as a candidate, he's a dummy. And the party demands that he be a dummy; he's not as bad as his party leadership is. People like Shrum, for example. Terry McAuliffe is a-- he's an intellectual disaster area.
But, what they're doing, they're acting like fools. And the population: Why does it support them? Because the population wishes to believe, that what Kerry is saying, is true. That he's a got a few lists of "fixit things," which might make things less bad. They are not paying attention to business. They {don't} want to believe in reality, because reality is awesomely frightening.
RENSE: Sure is!
LAROUCHE: So therefore, they believe in this illusion of this man. And the problem is, is this is how the German people got Adolf Hitler, by that kind of thinking: Of say, well, they have to go along with this stuff. They have to pick the man who's approved by the institutions. We have to believe what we're being told by our leadership. And it's all bunk! Whereas, the people in the Congress, as you see on the decision by many Congress on the Senate Select Intelligence Committee operation, you see, otherwise, they're very intelligent people. They know what's going on. But, there's no {reflection} of this among the candidates, as candidates; no reflection in the party leaderships. And, that's because the people themselves, have not been willing to give up the delusion, that "things aren't as bad as they seem."
RENSE: This is a delusional society. It's also, tragically, a "dumbed down" and ever more so, society. Were the Germans, in the early '30s dumbed down and delusional? I can see the delusional aspect of it, but were they really that dumb, Lyn?
LAROUCHE: They got, in a sense, dumb. What happened is, you had people in power--and it wasn't just Germans, remember, the whole system stunk.
And, I'll tell you, frankly, it may sound exaggerated to some people, but it's not exaggerated in fact: Except for Franklin Roosevelt, we'd be living under Hitler's successor today, worldwide. So, the problem was, that, in Europe, in general, where the other power was--and in the United States: For example, Herbert Hoover was not a potential Hitler. But, he was a potential Bruening. If Hoover had been reelected, we would have had fascism in the United States, by '34-'35. Roosevelt saved us, from a depression, not the full effects of it, but from the depression. He rescued us from the depression that had happened. He saved us, essentially, by providing a margin in world affairs, where Churchill, at a certain point--and his crowd--decided to break with the Hitler they'd helped to put into; break with the New York banking crowd, which had put Hitler into power; and join with Roosevelt, whom he {hated}. Because, from Churchill's standpoint, he was not going to give up the British Empire, which going with Hitler meant. Therefore, he came, in desperation, and said, "yes, I will work with Roosevelt, whom I hate." And, when Roosevelt died, Churchill, in a sense with Truman, took over.
But, nonetheless, Roosevelt saved us. The problem is, in a crisis like this, if you don't have leadership, you don't get out. The problem is, worldwide, is, the only country that has a constitutional system, which is capable of dealing with a crisis like that, from a standpoint of leadership, is our own constitutional system. We have the best constitutional system of any nation. No other nation on this planet, has had a Constitution, which has lasted since 1789. Ours only.
RENSE: Even as tattered, and under attack, as it is, by the Patriot Act and others, who would see it consigned to a museum, sooner rather than later. We'll be right back, with Lyndon LaRouche, in just a couple of minutes. I'm Jeff Rense.... [station break]
Okay, we rejoin you. Lyndon LaRouche here, this first hour tonight. Lyn, there's a big story running, now. {Newsweek} reported on it, and some others. MSNBC ran it. What had been a rumor, for a long time, is now fact: The Bush Administration has asked for legislation, enabling it to postpone the November election, as a result of an expected terror attack. And it will allow the Department of Homeland Security to decide when, or if, postponed elections would be reinstituted. {This} is utterly unprecedented.
And, we know the expression "false-flag operations"; we know there are lots of different things that can happen to create an alleged terror event, which might result in - well, this would almost be martial law - it's very close to it. What are your thoughts?
LAROUCHE: Dangerous. This is not new, in history. This is called "emergency government." This is otherwise called "dictatorship."
RENSE: You're right.
LAROUCHE: And, the problem here, is, it came up with the 9/11 problem: Is, people would try to assume that there was someone who is a particularly known individual, who necessarily had conspired to cause that to happen, from among the spectrum of people they would talk about. They didn't realize that there are agencies, which are operating internationally, like those which put Hitler, and Mussolini, and Franco, and so forth, into power in Europe. But, these kinds of agencies, {do} have the capability, from outside government, through control over people who are {in} governmental, or other, similar positions, to orchestrate events, without the complete knowledge of what these events are, on the part of their accomplices in government.
Now, we have, now, a very live danger, which is a relic of what the Nazis were running, through Spain, in Mexico and South America--but especially Mexico--back in the 1930s and the very early 1940s. In 1941, we shut it down in Mexico. But, there was a plan with Japan and Germany, through Spain, through Francisco Franco, to actually run the kind of thing {against} the United States, across the borders in Mexico, that people like Huntington are talking about today.
So, we have a number of situations, which are being orchestrated by people who are the kinds of behind-the-scenes people that I know, and they control people in government. And what happens when you get something like 9/11, somebody looks for somebody {in} government, to have planned it. They don't look for what is typical in history--for example, look at the way Hitler became a dictator. Hitler was stuck into power in Jan. 30, 1933, by a group of bankers, headed by the head of the Bank of England, and backed by Averell Harriman.
RENSE: Very few people know this. Thank you for mentioning it.
LAROUCHE: All right. So. But, this was not done by politicians in the ordinary sense. It was done by a network of bankers, which was known as the Synarchist International. They ran it. The way they got a dictatorship in Germany, is, Hermann Goering, who was actually an insider--Hitler was just the dummy; not entirely just a dummy, but, he was the idiot, who was used to manipulate the population, as a theatrical figure. Hermann Goering represented the people behind the scenes. Goering organized the burning of the Reichstag, which then was used, as a pretext for establishing a dictatorship. And thus, by the end of February of 1933, before Roosevelt, who had been elected, was actually {inaugurated} President, we were on the road to World War II.
Now, the conspirophile, the typical guy, will try to say: This guy must have done it with this guy, and so forth. It doesn't work that way.
So, we are actually in danger: From the Synarchist International, which still exists today--same type of people, the grandchildren of those who ran Hitler. These guys {do} intend, to create a world dictatorship. And they're playing all kinds of games internationally.
RENSE: And they'll do anything they deem necessary.
LAROUCHE: Exactly. They treat us, as pieces on a chessboard. And, we often react--
RENSE: Piece *under* a chessboard, in some cases.
LAROUCHE: Yeah, yeah--well, a crooked chessboard.
RENSE: There you go.
LAROUCHE: But, so, there {is} a danger. But, the point is: Why would they do it? Well, the reason they would do it, is not to kill people (although they enjoy doing that, I think, sometimes). The reason they would do it, {is to orchestrate events}. When you hear these guys talking--like the people who came up with the idiotic idea about postponing the election. {We would, under no circumstances, postpone the election.} Not if we're sane. Because, there goes our system of government.
Now, there are people who are watching this operation, you talked about. It's real, what they're talking about. But, they're idiots. And they're overlooking something. They're overlooking the fact, which they themselves are ignoring: This system is coming down. And {they} don't know, that they will be in charge, on the day they expect to pull something like this off. Because events, that is, a collapse of the world financial system, which we're on the edge of happening right now, would change the whole order of events, immediately.
So, that there's a factor of incalculability, in this situation, which these guys are ignoring. So, it's not quite so simple as they think it might be.
RENSE: I agree.
Have you seen Michael Moore's film?
LAROUCHE: Pardon me?
RENSE: Michael Moore's film, "Fahrenheit 9/11."
LAROUCHE: No, I haven't.
HOST: Well, you need to go see that. It's a very powerful piece of filmmaking, and it'll give you, I think, a real interesting--
LAROUCHE: I know of it. I haven't seen it, but--
RENSE: It'll give you a real interesting pulse on what all this is doing to America. And the next time you see a poll, with Bush in the lead, I think you'll laugh--
LAROUCHE: That's one of the fun things! That part, I know about. That is a fun thing in a sense. It's a little bit crazy, but, I enjoy watching it.
RENSE: You need to go see that film.
Okay: Iraq. One of the biggest debacles, certainly in the last century, for America. It is not a question of American foreign policy, it's a question of American big business/oil policy. And it's killing Americans. It's slaughtering Iraqis. It has Palestinianized much of Iraq. It's an {absolute} disgrace on the books of history - I don't care who writes the story, it's going to come out that way.
Your thoughts on Iraq: What we should do? How we get out? What do we do to make amends to these people?
LAROUCHE: [laughing] Well, first of all, tell Kerry to shut up: He's not helping them one bit!
By the way, Bill Clinton was travelling, and was in Germany, now. He may have moved on from there. But, on this weekend, he was interviewed on a prime interview program, as the sole subject, on German TV. It was the "Christianson Show" [ph] on the featured program on Sunday. And, you know, Bill is doing quite a job: He is extremely popular. He's the most popular American politician, in the world! [laughs]
RENSE: I think you're right. I agree. And wherever he goes, he gets the red carpet by everybody.
LAROUCHE: Well, he's actually the most intelligent President we've had in a long time!
RENSE: That's what that one rundown on IQ said. Standby if you would please, Lyn, we'll come right back. Lyndon LaRouche, candidate for President. We would ask you think very carefully about who you vote for: This man is a very worthy American patriot. We will continue after this.... [station break]
Welcome back. We're talking with Lyndon LaRouche, this first hour tonight.
Lyn, if you were President, what would you do about Iraq, immediately?
LAROUCHE: Well, I have put out a proposal, called the LaRouche Doctrine. It has been endorsed by a number of people from various parts of the Arab world, in particular. I presented this to people in Europe, and in the United States, people who are in the diplomatic, and the intelligence, and so forth, field. And, they concur that this is probably the only solution for it.
Now, since I put it out, there has been, admittedly, some adaptation to things I proposed, by the U.S. government in dealing with Iraq. What they're doing is not going to work, by itself. But, admittedly, by putting this kind of pressure on, from me, and from the number of people, who, in influential positions have endorsed what I've said, there has been some tendency to move in the direction of a sovereign Iraq, a {unified} Iraq, with no divisions among it, with the problems to be worked out by themselves.
My proposal, of course, would return to the 1957 Constitution. Let them take it from there; we cooperate with them, hopefully with the UN and others, to rebuild their country, and to make it, to put it on a self-standing basis again.
RENSE: Do we pull 150,000 troops out, as soon as possible?
LAROUCHE: I would pull them back. What I would do, is actually have an agreement, under which we would detach our military forces from occupation functions--which is what we're supposed to do, anyway, now. Then, I would have a--. But, it would be done by an agreement with the government.
RENSE: That's hardly a legitimate government, what's in place, now, Lyn.
LAROUCHE: No, what you try to do, is you try to get to a legitimate government. And, if you're flexible, and if you get the kind of cooperation which we should be having--that is, we should be giving--it can happen. The will to do that--. Remember, because Southwest Asia, which is this area, which includes Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, and the Arab states, this area is {vitally important} to us, as a security area. It's also vitally important to Israelis and Palestinians. Therefore, we have to have a security policy for this region of the world; which, among other things, prevents the prime oil supplies of the world from going up in flames! So therefore, we do have a common interest, in a peaceful order, and cooperation in the area.
We should adopt such a policy. We should use our muscle, to assure Palestinians and Israelis, that an agreement on two separate states, with sovereignty of each, with cooperative arrangements, {can} be accepted, {must} be accepted now. We must end this cycle of violence in this region, and start to build the region up as a secure area--.
RENSE: But, what we're seeing now, is the beginning of "ethnic cleansing," if you will, of Palestinians. I mean, there's no question about it.
LAROUCHE: Absolutely! Absolutely. But, see, this is the {idiocy} of the thing! And, this is largely coming from the British and the United States.
RENSE: Well, yes, it is.
LAROUCHE: And these guys have been playing the game--it's a British game primarily. You know: Bernard Lewis, for example. Bernard Lewis, who was the head of the British Arab Bureau, that is the actual head, under Glubb Pasha, has been in the United States since the early '70s. He was the advisor, and controller, effectively, on this policy, of Henry Kissinger, Brzezinski, Huntington, and so forth! And he's come up with this British policy!
We, as the United States, had the ability, if our government's "on the ball" (shall we say), we have the ability to straighten this mess out, in the sense of being a {factor}, that gets people, in the region, together, to make the kinds of decisions that'll bring this nonsense to an end.
Yes, we {do} have to have security for the Palestinians, security for the Israelis. {We can provide that}, with an agreement.
RENSE: How are the Israelis, the world's fifth-ranking thermonuclear power, going to allow us to step in and 'provide security' for them? I don't see it.
LAROUCHE: Well, you don't it. But, the point is, the danger is, you've got a policy among some idiots there, who believe in using an Israeli nuclear arsenal--and there are those in the United States and Britain, who sit back and laugh at the idea of having the world try to figure out, what to do about a nuclear war started from Israel.
RENSE: Well, if you have read, the U.S. Air Force white paper on the Zionist Israeli thermonuclear blackmail, used against the United States, for at least two decades now, you and everyone listening will understand some of the dynamic involved here. These people are ruthless, in search of their goals. And, they'll use anything.
LAROUCHE: See--. This involves some things, that people really--
RENSE: That's the Air Force talking!
LAROUCHE: That people really haven't paid attention to: After 1967, there was a generational shift--. I was involved in trying to get the peace negotiations going in the Middle East, in 1975-76. At that time, the people I was talking with--both Israelis and Palestinians--were saying to me, "You better succeed now, because, we're about to run out of steam." And they were right. With the passing of the Labor Zionist government, at that time, and the emergence of the Likud, there was a change. And the change occurred, also, in the United States: It occurred between 1967 and the early 1970s. With this kind of {fanaticism}, which was not characteristic of Jews or Palestinians, as such, {prior} to 1967, a new kind of fanaticism came in, where my generation sat back, and said, "This is unthinkable." And the unthinkable, of this generation that came in, is now running the area.
But, my view is, that, if we, in the United States, with the support of people in Europe, and the cooperation of people in Southwest Asia, say, "This thing is coming to an end. And we say, we're going to insist, absolutely--and we have the power to do it--that this nonsense in the Middle East {stops}": It will stop. And, there are people, in Israel, there are people among the Palestinians, who will make that work.
But, we have to do what {we} have not had the guts to do, since 1957: We have to have the guts to intervene, and say, "We are not going to let you set fire to the world."
RENSE: How's it going to happen? Look at the neo-cons in the administration; look at the control, in this country, of Zionist influence...
LAROUCHE: I think we are successfully scattering them. I started, as you know, a campaign to get these guys out of there.
RENSE: You were the first!
LAROUCHE: Yeah, but we succeeded! We're about to get Cheney out! And what he represents.
RENSE: [You put more] pressure on those people than anyone else - I agree.
LAROUCHE: We're close to doing it. But for the Democratic Party leadership; but for people like Shrum, and people like poor, silly Terry McAuliffe, {we'd have Cheney out, already}! We'd have the neo-cons essentially cleaned up, already! And, we'd have Republicans, good Republicans, helping us do it.
RENSE: Uh-huh. Hmm!
LAROUCHE: But, the problem is, that right now, {my} big problem, is the Democratic Party leadership--the party leadership. Not the politicians in the Congress, but the party leadership, are the ones who are keeping these neo- conservatives in power, for reasons which make no sense to anyone who understands the situation.
RENSE: Well, something's going on somewhere, Lyn.
How many states where you appeared on the ballot, this time round?
LAROUCHE: Well, I was on, in primary ballots, I was on 34-35 states, it depends on your count.
So, we did fairly well. Of course, I was, up until late spring, I had the greatest number of contributing supporters, of any Presidential candidate, Democratic Presidential candidate. For a time. Dean was ahead for a while; but, then I came back ahead. Then, later on, toward the end of the spring, then of course Kerry, with his special campaign, zoomed ahead.
RENSE: With the big money. What's he got? He had $160 million the last time I heard, officially; and Bush was up past the $200 million range.
LAROUCHE: I don't know what it is. It was promised money. I don't know if it was all paid in.
RENSE: That's true!
LAROUCHE: It's a lot of it, whatever it is!
RENSE: Yeah it is. Well, we'll take 10%, right?
LAROUCHE: Well, with 10%, I could become President!
RENSE: That's enough to run 'em out?
LAROUCHE: I wouldn't--I don't have to spend money on this nonsense. I need money for organizing people. I believe in the people, not in the moneybags.
RENSE: You're out of step with the times, Lyn, but - whatever! We support you.
You've got a webcast tomorrow - Thursday, July 15, 1 p.m. Eastern. You can see it at And I would urge all of you to take that in. Click on both links that are with Lyndon LaRouche's name there.
I've got about two minutes left, Lyn. You want to give us a final summation?
LAROUCHE: Yeah. We're in a national insanity, the country's in danger, but there are a lot of good people in powerful positions in government. They're just not quite in charge, yet. You find them in Congress, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, did a fairly good job. It was a sloppy job, in many respects, but it's a step forward. You've got people in the Democratic side in the House of Representatives: leaders there, they're excellent people.
We just don't have, at the top, yet, the control from this kind of leadership, that we need to save the country. These people are sensible. They- -if we turned them loose, under good leadership--they are capable of leading this nation upward, out of [overtalk], as Roosevelt did in his time.
RENSE: Do they have the guts to do it?
LAROUCHE: They're showing really good guts. You take, like Waxman, and others like that on the House side; you've got people--you know, Senator Rockefeller, who doesn't know what fear is, in a sense, politically, at least. And, they're doing a fairly good job!
RENSE: So, you like Jay Rockefeller.
LAROUCHE: Well, I think he's doing a good job, and I'm pleased with it! I'm always pleased when somebody does a good job for the country. I don't care where he comes from. If you're doing your job for the country, that's enough for me.
RENSE: What can our listeners do, to support you, Lyn? What would you like best?
LAROUCHE: Well, I think the point is, they just get in on my website, and that's the way to engage. And, engage with me, and I'm going to stay in this fight all the way through, whatever happens. We're going to do something, and the people who are working with me, will find a way to do something.
The most important thing that I'm doing, is, I've built the only competent youth movement, which is functioning in the country, today. It's small. But, it's demonstrated that a youth movement can be built.
RENSE: Very true!
LAROUCHE: The people who are 18-25 years of age, are the future of this country. If we're going to have a future as a nation, we should concentrate on this generation. And say, when this generation becomes of the age of leadership of leading institutions, government and otherwise, a generation from now, what're they going to be? And we should support {them}: Because, what we do with them, now, is our future, 25 years from now.
RENSE: Very well said.
Thank you, very much, Lyndon LaRouche. Great to talk with you, again, Lyn.
LAROUCHE: Thank you.
RENSE: Take care.
From Muehlbauer
Lyndon LaRouche On The Jeff Rense Program
Jeff, is it just me or do you sense Lyndon LaRouche is getting too old ((too corrupt(ed)) to be of any service to America? I mean, he keeps going back in time as if nothing has changed since the nineteen thirties. When in fact the changes (governments-finances) since the nineteen thirties are like two different worlds. As it was, the changes that made the depression of that era a thing of gossip and documentaries today, and, not FDR. In fact, no matter how much influence the International Banker's had with Adolf Hitler and his administration, a hundred fold more they had with FDR and his administration. Meaning, The International Banker's they won the war(s), us people, as usual we lost, and all we thought we had.
Proving, depressions can end, be ended, at any time and by the mere signing (away of the peoples nation), there, on the dotted line. Or, as A.H. proved (another way to beat depression), by the nation's people pulling themselves up and out of the grasp of the International Banker's.
The simple truth is: world finances are not articles written in stone. A little accounting here, a little accounting there, suddenly, the books are balanced, the end of one financial era over, a new era beginning. A Jubilee year of sorts, nevertheless, a simple thing to do. Of course, the Internationalist Banker's, they, like a pool of blood, the blood of the innocent, mystic as they are, to stand in, while the deal is being done.
To equate FDR as anything other than a warmonger and Banker stoolie is to do a disservice to the reality that, cause, equals effect, and not the other way around. The reality of money, the peoples need to have it and the effects when people don't have it, it all has been proven so we know the truth. The cause is, except people have money and in abundance then Government's and Industries are helpless to make a future for the people they (are supposed to) serve. Through this hole in the fabric of society does the International Banker get into the game, but, it need not be this way, not at all. A.H., proved this can true.
A cat's eye oversized marble can and at any time change the game, when the players allow its use. Not that the marble has any value other than it is dominate over all the smaller marbles and easily pushes the lesser marbles around. The players, their game, all of it is without any effect when the rules are broken and the big marble is allowed to enter the game.
The cause, desperation, the effect, all the other players lose all their marbles, having decided the rules must be bent so the one with the cat's eye oversized marble can (continue) to play. People, they do this too when they allow organized religion's to bring their big marble, i.e., the fear of death that is -God, into play, into the game, the game of life.
Today, us people, we have the game well in hand (the Banker's, they cannot play without us, except, they feed on themselves), the player having the biggest marble (Rothschild) finds himself up against the wall, having put all his marbles (in the form of dollars) on the line. Which is to say, people are close to ending the disservice that is International Banking (the end of the dollar) and in the doing it begin a new and more ethical system of barter economics.
Where, value is established by the products offered for sale and not by the type of currency used in the exchange. So that quality and potential usage are of a greater value (the way it should be) than the money used to exact the exchange. Something, that would make Banking a non-player, giving over all power to the people, to their inventiveness, and, to their productivity.
The value of things, not derived by the backing of money or the kind of money used but by value, only value. It is during these times of barter economics that the greatest of science and scientific achievements are accomplished; one part of this would be the discontinuing of gasoline powered transportation. Also, cities built around Industries, Schools, and Stores, would be the norm again. Close societies, tied together, with one purpose and with one hope, one for all, all for one.
What LaRouche misses in all his Germany diatribe is the fact that Germans before A.H. were being systematically starved to death and by the Banking Interest's were they being starved to death. A.H., for this reason gained fame and power, in that A.H. put an end to starvation in Germany, and, after that, issued in a new generation of ideas and possibilities, so much that the whole industrial world, itself being selectively starved, marveled.
Marveled, not just at the accomplishments but in the simplicity of their having been accomplished. The nation with no big time player, without any cat's eye oversized marbles, playing exactly by the rules of the game, began to, and in a simplest of ways, win the game. No matter how much the rules were tending to be bent or broken by the other player's, the International Banker's that is, no matter how many times they were allowed to use their cat' eye-oversized (overstated) marble (the American Dollar and/or English Pound) the German player's they just kept on pulling in the marbles knocked out of the game and until they won the game.
The only thing left for the International Banker's to do, if they wanted to keep playing, was start a fight. The old pool hustler tactic and at its bloodiest.
In summation: LaRouche, well, fuck him and the old horse he keeps trying to ride in on. LaRouche, is just more of the same, one other of them, hoping to get in the game by picking off the marbles knocked out of the game. Marbles, that don't belong to him, not in any sense, shape, or form. LaRouche, is just an (another) International Banker without a Bank or any money to start one a religion, not yet having any god or any commandments, a shout in the dark declaring come this way, but, the cliff is just as close as ever. Maybe even closer, as it could be, LaRouche, would send the world through America into a most disastrous and final war.
I'd rather have a benevolent dictator like A.H. was, rather than all these democratic and republican politician's in America, these politician's who are working for the International Banker's abroad, and, all the time do they do the work of the Banker's, no matter how many Passover's they commit US/us to.
Not yet is the end near, but, someday, someday the likes of Rothschild, Rockefeller, Bush, and LaRouche, these obscene player's, playing with the sweat of other peoples lives, and like they own it, these swine will be nothing more than a bad memory. A bad memory, forgotten



This Site Served by TheHostPros