HIS ONLY ENDEARING YOUNG CHARM

LaRouche to State Legislators:
"In a Crisis: Leadership Must Go Against Popular Opinion"

From Volume 3, Issue Number 13 of Electronic Intelligence Weekly, Published Mar. 30, 2004

And, It Ain't So Young No More:

HIS ONLY ENDEARING YOUNG CHARM

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

March 29, 2004

Some leading Democrats are just so silly, it makes you wonder. They are so het up, fretting themselves half to death over all those millions in the re-elect Dubya campaign war-chest, that they overlook the most obvious of all facts about the coming election. The leading political issue of 2004, after the onrushing depression, that is, is the question: Are the U.S. voters so silly that they would re-elect a President whose one and only endearing charm, is that he is rightly perceived, more or less world-wide, as the dumbest man in the history of the Oval Office? That, in fact, his record of performance in office, is the worst accumulation of sheer bungling incompetence in relations with long-standing allies, in military policy, in economic policy, in budget-balancing, and, excepting weight-lifting, about everything else, including diction and elocution, in recent memory?

Take the way in which poor, dumb Dubya & Co. dealt with the publication of the book by former counter-terrorist chief Richard A. Clarke which the Bush Administration itself, first, held back from publication, and then claimed he had timed the publication to embarrass Dubya's re-election campaign. If Dubya's handlers had had any sense, they would have said as little as possible about the issues of Clarke's book. Their foolish frenzy, in their efforts to deny the undeniable, made a major election-issue of a book which an intelligent administration would have let pass with minimum fuss.

Richard Clarke is not the kindest cherub, nor the most brilliant in the U.S. intelligence constellation of recent times, but he has earned a widely acknowledged professional reputation as a hard-grinding fanatic for getting his job done, as he sees it, over quite a period of time. I, personally, would disagree with him about a number of matters in which I have qualified expertise, but I would hire professionals like him in my administration any day, and be thankful I had them around to do battle with.

I should know. I warned the incoming Administration publicly of the danger of something like "9-11" in January 2001. I do not agree with the simplistic way Clarke himself throws the name of "al-Qaeda" around; but, that is not the issue. The issue is, and was, that under the strategic economic and related conditions which the incoming President had inherited, combined with the new President's fanatical quality of stubborn incompetence in economic and other matters, something like Goering's setting fire to Germany's Reichstag had to be expected. Clarke has Cheney dead to rights on the security failures of the pre-9-11 Bush Administration.

Clarke's facts sent Dubya's reputation down to the mat. Dubya should have taken a reflective nine-count before trying to stand up to Clarke's blows. Now, Dubya is being pummelled on that front, at the same time his reputation is being hit from seemingly all directions.

Given the monetary-financial crisis rushing to overwhelm the U.S. now, unless the Bush campaign is able to use computerized voting procedures to pull off the most massive ballot-fraud in U.S. history, which seems to be the intention of some Congressional Republicans, Bush is implicitly unelectable. The signs are clear; the big money is shifting its bets, preferring a Democratic administration controlled by them, to a Republican Presidency already up about its waist-line in the quicksand of Dubya's colossal failures. The recent electoral defeat of Spain's Aznar government, and the continuation of the pattern in the opposition electoral victories which have just occurred in France, are signs of the times. With a deep depression coming like an avalanche, incumbent governments must expect to be toppled by the voters time and time again.

All that said about the Republican follies, the Democrats' major challenge is not the White House menu; the cause of their bellyaching is their obsessive attachment to Mother McAuliffe's cooking.

* * * * * *

LaRouche to State Legislators
In a Crisis: Leadership Must Go Against Popular Opinion

The following remarks come from an strategic statement by Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche to a group of state legislators meeting to discuss his campaign, on March 13, 2004. Subheads have been added.

This terrorist outbreak in Spain [the Madrid train bombing on March 11], is not just something in Spain. It's a strategic operation, inclusively against the United States.

Look, what's the Hispanic-language population of the United States? It's the largest single identified minority in the United States. What's it part of? The largest part comes from the Caribbean area, especially from Mexico. Now, many of these are fully American, in every sense, except they have some memory of the Spanish language and use. Others are recent immigrants—legal and illegal. The flood of Mexican immigration into the United States, recently, is based on the conditions we created in Mexico since 1982: We shut down their economy; they couldn't get the money to feed their families; and they would either come across the border, or sneak across the border; and from there, they would work at slave-labor wages, or the equivalent, to send money back to their families in Mexico. And communities, whole states of Mexico, depend upon remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United States, who are sending money back home. And that is the major source of the income of these people.

So therefore, you have a hatred against what the United States has done, since 1971-72—especially since '82—against the United States, throughout all of Central and South America. We are hated! We are increasingly hated—because we raped them. And, if you keep raping somebody, they may object eventually. And they object strongly.

So, on the basis of this hatred, among people below the border, which has spread to the north of the border, you have this guy Huntington, Samuel P. Huntington, the so-called "Clash of Civilizations" Huntington, who is an agent of a British agent called Bernard Lewis—who is his actual adviser, and shapes his policies, who's now resident, an old fellow, resident at Princeton, who runs these guys—runs Brzezinski, too. And did run Kissinger, for a while.

So what they've done, conceived of, is conducting asymmetric warfare, to destroy the United States. That's what happened in 9/11. It was an attempt to create a state of terror, under which they could manipulate the United States, and put it in the direction of establishing a dictatorship. The purpose of the dictatorship is obvious—what I identified: It's the Felix Rohatyn phenomenon.

So, now, we're in the situation; the system is coming down. They orchestrated this situation, such that they were going to wait, until they rammed through the selection of a Presidential candidate in the primary process in the Democratic primaries. They think they have done that now. Now, they'll go to work against that candidate, which will now be the one target. Assuming if they get that one candidate out of the way, with aid of massive computer-assisted vote fraud, they can take over the country, come November.

The Policy Is Felix Rohatyn

In the meantime, what's their policy? They have a policy, also for Kerry: The policy is the Felix Rohatyn policy. It's the reason I was kept out—by the orders of these bankers. Because—the issue is very simple: When you come to a financial crisis, and this system is coming down, now—there is no possibility of avoiding a depression. It's here! It's on! There's no recovery possible. It's gone. We're headed toward Hell!

Now, of course, with our system of government, if you have a President, with something in the Congress, and the people supporting him, you can not impose a dictatorship, under our Constitution. Our traditions and so forth, will not permit it, particularly in this day and age. The issue is going to be the people! Are you going to defend the people? Or, are you going to sell the people off, for body parts? Rohatyn says, they're going to be sold off for body parts. And, if a Democrat goes into public office, who is controlled by the Rohatyn Democrats, or the Soros Democrats—which are the same thing—then you're going to have a fascist dictatorship. I don't care who is the President. Kerry will be rigged, when the team is put together, if he's elected. It'll be rigged in such a way, that he has no control over his own administration. The bankers will have everything in place to pull him down—pre-set-up. And, you look for push on the Vice Presidential candidacy; that will tell you what's going on. They might even push for McCain. It's not impossible.

But, that's the general situation.

Now, what's going to happen? We don't have a nomination now. The fact of all these votes, and so forth—we don't have a nomination. We all know it. Incidents which blow apart the consensus of agreement, can turn the delegates in such a way that it doesn't go that way. We have that—number one. We have the depression coming on, which can bring that kind of situation on. This will probably hit with full force, well before June and July.

We go from there, we get a nomination. We go to the election: November. What's going to happen in the election? Are we going to get the computers out of there? Otherwise, I'll tell you what's going to happen: You might have a 20% vote fraud, in the national vote. It's all being pre-rigged. We're fighting against it; some people in the Congress are fighting against it. They realize what it is. That's good. I'm glad to see the fight—but we need more strength on it.

Then, you go to a jammed-up—at best—a jammed-up Electoral College, more jammed-up than in 2000. Now, you have a fascist monster, called Scalia. He's called Scalia, named for the scales on his back! And his financial habits, huh? What's going to happen with the five fascists dominating the Supreme Court?

So, nothing is decided! In the meantime, all kinds of Hell are going to burst loose around this planet. In this process, the launching of another terrorist raid. Now, remember: If those trains had all come into that train station [in Madrid] on schedule, instead of all coming in late—you'd have had something comparable to New York, in terms of death toll! I mean, imagine the trains come into the enclosed train station, with these explosives on them, going off, and timed to explode at the time the trains were all supposed to be simultaneously in the station. All you do, is look at the list. What was the date and time of arrival of each of these trains? At what time did these bombs go off? Where were the trains then, as opposed to where they were supposed to be, if they'd come in on schedule? And the Spanish usually pride themselves, on the bringing the trains in on schedule these days—one of their big braggadocios.

The Synarchist International

Who runs it? Who's capable of doing this? The same people who ran the Bologna train station thing in 1980. The other guys, I'm familiar with. We know who they are. We know the top people by name. We know who's behind them: The synarchists are behind them; the Synarchist International. So, don't take any little fairy stories, about the mystery of who's behind it. We know who's behind it. It's a major strategic operation, whose included target is the United States. And, one of the elements that's a potential here, is the orchestration of an Hispanic revolt, inside the United States—provoked. All you have to have, a few atrocities and so forth thrown in—you've got it. You've got Ashcroft in power; you've got Cheney still in power. These guys, and the people behind them, would do it. Have no illusion.

When you know a guy is a man-eating tiger, you don't have to convict him of eating another victim. He already has a record: That's his character—he's a man-eating tiger. You've seen what he's done. You're going to say, "Well, let's give him a fair chance!" "What? Eat my cousin?"

And so, these guys are there; they have the power; they've demonstrated it. Look, a war was imposed on the United States by an act tantamount to treason. The use of the War Powers provision, of the design of the Federal Constitution respecting the Executive, to put constraints, through checks and balances—especially the Senate—on the war-making powers of the Presidency, such that we could not have a George III using Executive power to start wars on his own, against the will of the people, against good reason. - Soros's 'Cowardly Lions' -

So therefore, what they did, is they got the cowardly Congress, the "cowardly lions" of the Congress, to agree to an in-between condition of bullying, and these guys—one by one, after the other—capitulated all the way, until we're deep into the war. And even though it was known that Cheney had done it, they wouldn't say so. They'd say, "Well, we're going to get Bush in the next election!"

"How do you know you're going to get a next election?!" Why wait?

"Oh, we want to play fair." Well, the reason is, you got a bunch of skunks in the Democratic Party, who are also part of the synarchist operation: Look at the number of people in the Democratic Party, who are financially controlled by people like Felix Rohatyn and George Soros. How many people are on the take, for George Soros? How many people are defending George Soros? He's the guy who's helping us out against Bush? Who owns you, if George Soros owns you? Who owns George Soros? The London synarchist bankers.

That's the problem, you see. That identifies the problem. The fish-bowl problem: That we've become so conditioned to "popular opinion," we say, "We have to adapt to popular opinion. We have to go along with the way people have been conditioned to go."

In a period of crisis, leadership consists, usually, of going against popular opinion, when it's necessary! And when you're going to do that, you have to know what you're doing. There's an element of risk; there's always an element of risk in leadership. And, if you're unable to take that risk, don't pretend to be a leader! Because, in times of crisis, such as the Battle at Leuthen, facing Frederick the Great, you either are a leader, who is capable of seeing the opportunity, taking the necessary risk, or get out! Scram! Git! Be gone!

And the problem is, and what I have to do in this process, none of the other guys that are in the running, have the knowledge or guts to deal with this situation. And that's what my job is: Somehow save this nation. Because I'm telling you, what's out there, in terms of prevailing institutions, has no capability of saving this nation. We have the troops out there. We have the forces with which to win victory. But we don't have the leadership, which can utilize and mobilize those forces for victory, in a time of conflict. If we can't change this thing, we're doomed.

All rights reserved © 2004 EIRNS