Executive Intelligence Review
Subscribe to EIR

PRESS RELEASE


I Defend President Jimmy Carter

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

Dec. 10, 2006 (EIRNS)—Economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche released the following statement today.

I intervene to defend former President Jimmy Carter at this instant, for two reasons.

First, he is right on the issue of the title of his current book. What the Israelis and others are currently practicing against the Palestinians, is nothing differing in principle from a continuing practice of Apartheid. Every sane and intelligent political figure I know agrees with that in fact, but only a few of those politicians acting in the tradition of "political animals," are willing to be caught saying that publicly.

Secondly, former President Carter has come to follow in the pattern set for ex-U.S. Presidents by John Quincy Adams and Dwight D. Eisenhower. He was elected to serve in the Presidency. There are also others, who have sought that office on the basis of competent advocacy of relevant, needed changes in principles of government, rather than personal ambition, as I have, who also represent a continuity of our Presidential legacy, just as the Baker-Hamilton Commission enjoys the aura of past service of George H.W. Bush as Vice-President and President.

Thus, President John Quincy Adams' role as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, paved the way for President Abraham Lincoln's rescue of our republic from the relevant Franco-British plot to divide and destroy us. The wave of 1960s coups d'etat, such as that against Prime Minister Macmillan in the United Kingdom, the attempted assassinations of President Charles de Gaulle by the forerunners of the just recently deceased Pinochet of Chile, the hastened retirement of Konrad Adenauer, the assassinations of President John K. Kennedy, Malcolm X, the Reverend Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy, over the 1961-1968 interval, left us with no active continuation of the Presidential tradition but that of the former President Eisenhower who set the pace for those, like Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton, who have been still significantly active publicly today on that account.

Former President Jimmy Carter had the great misfortune of being elected during a time that the 1970-1981 destruction of the U.S. economy was the reigning policy imposed upon any President who had the historic misfortune of becoming the future scapegoat for the wrecking of our economy which occurred under hegemony of institutions typified by the Trilateral Commission. He came out of that experience, momentarily bitter and confused; but, later, he played an important role, at times as a virtual maverick, in bringing the legacy of President Eisenhower's post-service role into play. The Eisenhower-Carter Presidential legacy is to be seen clearly today in the matter of issues of the U.S. "Middle East" policy.

As virtual founder of our modern U.S. State Department, President, and conscience of the Congress, John Quincy Adams, helped by our spies such as Washington Irving, Edgar Allen Poe, and James Fenimore Cooper, defined the legacy of such institutional functions; and diplomats in the footsteps of Benjamin Franklin and John Quincy Adams himself, all together, defined the function and practice of the U.S. Presidency as the distinctive soul of our republic. The best representatives of these professions have been the needed exception, when prevalent popular opinion and most legislators have walked the streets of political opportunism, with a large following from among the masses of Sophists from within the body of what Mae West might have defined as "popular appeal."

Some among us must stand apart from the caprices of so-called popular opinion, to take care of the future of our republic, and of civilization generally. It is those who think as a suitable President of our republic should, who represent the true conscience of our republic, represent those whose preference for principle over short-term popularity, qualifies them to see more clearly where the future interest of not only our own republic, but of the continuity of civilization, lies.

Among Twentieth-Century Presidents, McKinley, Franklin Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Carter, and now Clinton, have clearly taken upon them the challenge of that legacy. This is the same legacy echoed in the performance of the Baker-Hamilton Commission. They are not required to be right at all times; nonetheless, their honest commitment to seeking truthful and appropriate policies for our republic, sets a standard for all mere mortals occupying or seeking highly placed public office today.

With Jimmy Carter's frankly honest title for his book, something good for our nation and civilization were more likely to be gained. The Baker-Hamilton Commission's work is not perfect, but it is the launching-pad for the immediate changes in policy desperately needed to rescue our nation from the damnable follies of the current U.S. administration.

Without bringing about a peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israel conflict, there is no hope for the continued existence of Israel itself, nor the so-called "Middle East" as a whole. If the "Middle East" goes, as the Bush-Cheney policies would ensure an early catastrophe there, there is the danger that the entire planet is plunged into related political-strategic flames. Jimmy Carter is right.