LaRouche Delivers a Bloody Nose
To the British Empire
by Jeffrey Steinberg
Aug. 15—The British imperial interests have suffered a serious blow at the hands of Lyndon LaRouche, and they are reeling from the impact of that unanticipated strategic setback. Over the past 72 hours, President Barack Obama's failure to deliver on a made-in-London euthanasia scheme, disguised as a health-care "reform" program, has shocked the British media and the entire British political Establishment, and prompted them to launch a desperate defense of the British National Health Service and its affiliated NICE "death panel," which is the model for Obama's plan.
"The British elites suddenly found themselves facing a significant strategic defeat, in the face of the massive and spreading American popular revolt against the Obama Administration, and they were forced to launch an all-out defense of their own deeply flawed health-care system, as their last chance to salvage their Obama project," one senior U.S. intelligence source told EIR yesterday. "The issue is, London losing its grip over the Obama White House, and that is a really big deal, given all they have invested in that program."
Indeed, in response to the continuing mass strike ferment throughout the United States against the Obama Administration's failed policies, the British media, from the Fabian Society-linked London Guardian to the right-wing Tory Daily Telegraph, is carrying out a coordinated black propaganda campaign, to save London's grip over the White House—by defending British health care as a world-class system, far better than that of the United States. The normally middle-of-the-road British Independent today ran an article, headlined, "The brutal truth about America's health care," describing the thousands of poor people who turned out in Los Angeles for free health care, and defending the Obama plan. The Independent screed is typical of the propaganda line coming from the entire British media this past week.
Politicians from Labour Party Prime Minister Gordon Brown, to his Tory opponent David Cameron, have also delivered nearly identical defenses of the British system. Given the top-down orchestration of British politics, it is not unfair to presume that the Queen's Privy Council, headed by Lord Peter Mandelson, issued orders for the engineered effort last week, when the situation in the United States broke totally out of control.
'LaRouche Is To Blame'
The single biggest cause of hysteria from British quarters is the fact that Lyndon LaRouche has been publicly identified as the catalyst of the revolt against the Obama White House's efforts to shove a Hitlerian euthanasia scheme down the throats of the American people. Beginning with the Aug. 6 Romulus, Mich. town hall meeting by Rep. John Dingell (D), the LaRouche Political Action Committee poster, depicting President Obama with a Hitler mustache and the caption, "I've Changed," has grabbed headlines in newspapers around the United States and around the world.
This past week, as town hall protests swelled in size, more and more U.S. and international media began airing interviews with LaRouche PAC organizers; and the Washington Times went so far as to publish an interview with EIR Editor-in-Chief Nancy Spannaus, spelling out LaRouche's critique of the Obama health plan scheme, and LaRouche's alternative.
The next day, an hysterical reporter for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) conducted a live interview with LaRouche national spokesperson, Debra Freeman, in which Freeman denounced the British health-care system, as a genocidal mess.
LaRouche's well-documented denunciation of the Obama Administration's plan for the creation of IMAC (Independent Medicare Advisory Council), modeled on Hitler's September-October 1939 T-4 program of government-enforced euthanasia, has been picked up by leading Republican Party figures, including House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio); former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin; conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan; and scores of lesser known columnists, bloggers, and activists.
One senior political operative told EIR that the Republican Party, desperate to regroup after the electoral defeats of 2006 and 2008, picked up the LaRouche attacks on the Obama health-care swindle, studied the documentation, concluded that LaRouche was absolutely correct, and jumped on the bandwagon. By last week, according to the source, every faction within the GOP had picked up on the LaRouche message—to the point that a frantic Karl Rove warned Republicans that they were losing control over the issue to LaRouche.
Furthermore, a wide range of Democratic Party-linked voices, from The Nation's William Greider, to the New York Times's Frank Rich, to cultural commentator Eli Siegel, to Arianna Huffington (see accompanying documentation), have also joined the attack on President Obama, denouncing him for cutting a dirty backroom deal with "Big Pharma" and "Big Insurance," and accusing him of being a corporatist—i.e., a fascist.
In fact, White House sources have leaked to the media some details of the agreement, reached in recent weeks, between PhRMA, the industry lobbying group, and the President, further fueling the "revolt from the left" against Obama.
What LaRouche started, on April 11, 2009, with his webcast warning that Obama suffers from a severe "Nero Complex," has now mushroomed into a far-reaching popular revolt. The ostensible issue is the President's fascist health-care scheme, but the underlying factor, is that the American people are fed up with bailouts of Wall Street at taxpayers' expense, massive job losses, home foreclosures, and the bankrupting of nearly every state government—translating into a collapse in social services, and basic infrastructure like schools, hospitals, and core transportation systems.
That London is acutely aware of the danger that such a popular revolt—informed by LaRouche's clear alternative recovery policies—represents, was made perfectly clear by a pair of articles in the past 24 hours.
Edward Luce, the London Financial Times Washington bureau chief, penned an article today, dripping with sarcasm, titled "Healthcare paranoia is part of America's culture war," which did, in fact, admit that the health-care battle is actually a much deeper one, centered on American values and the U.S. Constitution. "Anyone who visits a few of this month's rowdy town hall meetings can grasp that opposition to Mr Obama's healthcare proposals is a lightning rod to a far larger world view, which seeks to protect American values and the US constitution from an alien takeover," Luce writes. "Their issues are diverse. But their sentiment is common: America's constitution is being trashed by un-American values.... No amount of contrary evidence will puncture the view that Mr Obama plans to establish 'death panels' that will decide which grannies get to live or die. Nor will reason counter the view that countries such as Canada and the UK push their weakest to the back of the queue.... Forget the details of healthcare reform. The side that identified with American values will get the upper hand."
The second article, posted in the widely read Huffington Post, written by Chris Weigant, went directly at the central issue that has London and Wall Street totally up in arms: the fact that the decades-old containment of LaRouche has totally broken down.
Back in 1976, Washington Post editorial writer Stephen Rosenfeld published an infamous op-ed, speaking for the Anglo-American Establishment media. He declared that, henceforth, there could be no media coverage of LaRouche, that was anything other than a mocking slander. Rosenfeld put in writing, what had been delivered, face-to-face, in December 1971, as an official Establishment pronouncement to LaRouche. Sidney Hook, the grand-master of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, told LaRouche, moments after the latter had decimated Keynesian economist Abba Lerner at a Queens College debate, that his ideas would never be met with serious debate again. LaRouche had dared to commit the crime of publicly proving, before a large university audience, that Professor Lerner was a devotee of Hitler's chief economist, Hjalmar Schacht.
In his Huffington Post rant, Weigant assailed the Establishment media for breaking the more than 35-year containment pact: "I truly believe that some of the overpaid, well-coiffed talking heads on television finally woke up and became embarrassed that they were lending so much legitimacy to people who normally would be referred to as the 'tin-foil hat brigade' (see, for example: followers of Lyndon LaRouche). There's an unspoken rule in the mainstream media that once a consensus is reached that any one person or group is from 'the fringe,' then all they deserve from that point on is ridicule. Look at how they treated Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul in last year's campaign, for instance.
"But," Weigant continues, "the media found themselves in a quandary last week. They loved the 'angry person screaming at member of Congress' video so much (and ran it so many times) that they knew they were culpable...."
The reality is obviously more profound than Weigant's nasty admission about the Establishment media's black-balling. LaRouche called the shot on President Obama's Nero Complex, and dared to draw the accurate historical parallels between the President's health-care reform swindle, and Hitler's universally despised T-4 euthanasia program, which was the precursor to the concentration camps and the Holocaust. As events proved LaRouche to be right, and as the American people suddenly woke up one day and realized that they were about to lose everything, because they had foolishly gone along with a culture and an economic policy that have brought us to the brink of total breakdown, all hell broke loose.
For the Record, Mr. President
After initially cancelling all scheduled town hall appearances by President Obama, the White House spin-meisters decided last week that the President had to be sent out to salvage his all-but-lost health-care reform plan. A series of tightly screened and engineered "town hall" meetings was staged, to give the President the opportunity to lie through his teeth. President Obama tried—unsuccessfully—to reassure the American people that he does not plan to create "death panels" to set limits on medical care.
But, at the same time that Obama was visiting New Hampshire, Montana, and Colorado, delivering carefully scripted lies to carefully screened audiences, sources on Capitol Hill were telling a far different story to EIR. In fact, the top White House health-care aides, from Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, to Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag—to Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm's brother, administration health policy advisor, and a leading euthanasia advocate—were all arm-twisting and threatening Congressional leaders, telling them that the only issue that is not up for negotiation is the President's plan to create an independent board, to set absolute limits on health-care services and payments. The very "death panel" that the President said was off the table, is the only issue that the White House insists is non-negotiable.
One senior U.S. intelligence source verified the Congressional accounts and explained that the President has been sold on the need for massive austerity. "The bailout could cost $24 trillion, so there have to be austerity cuts, to reduce the Federal deficit," the source revealed. "Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and White House chief economic advisor Larry Summers have both promised the Chinese, and other major holders of U.S. government debt, that there will be massive cuts, to reduce the deficit. Unless they get their independent panel, to impose severe cuts in health-care services and payments, they won't succeed.
"This is what the President believes, for now. Health care is just one part of the overall austerity scheme they are trying to pull off."
These austerity schemes are doomed to fail, and that poses the next big question for Obama's ultimate controllers in London: When do they decide that the President is beyond salvation, and what do they do then? For the moment, they are reeling from a serious defeat on a major battlefront, a defeat that they identify with the name "LaRouche."