Executive Intelligence Review
Subscribe to EIR

PRESS RELEASE


LaRouche Interviewed on Genesis Communications Network

April 1, 2008 (EIRNS)—Lyndon LaRouche was interviewed by Genesis Communications Network internet radio host Jack Blood on his "Deadline Live" program today. He and Blood last talked during the 2004 Presidential campaign, and Blood continues to follow larouchepac.com and EIR regularly.

JACK BLOOD: Thank you for joining us folks for this live, original edition of "Deadline Live." I am your narrator, your radio gun, Jack Blood, reporting today is April 1st, 2008... Joining us on the program here, in about 20 minutes, is the one and only, Lyndon LaRouche: perennial Presidential candidate, Lyndon is about 85 years old now, and has quite an organization going; a worldwide organization, has been predicting the downfall of the American economy for many, many years, and one thing about Lyndon LaRouche is, he was right about so many of these things. Of course, Lyndon and I won't come to the same conclusions on everything. But I haven't had him on for years, since 2004, and there are a lot of his people love listening to this broadcast, because we do have a lot in common, so I thought, "Well, let's go ahead and get Lyndon up." And he's getting' up in years, and I just want to make sure that we could have him on, and get him out in front of the people.

We'll also open up the phone lines in the second hour, so that you'll be able to talk directly to Mr. LaRouche, and have any questions? Ask any questions answered that you might have. I actually get a few emails asking about Mr. LaRouche from time to time. So we'll go ahead and put him before you, our listening audience, coming up here, in just about 20 minutes, at 2:30 Central Time in the first hour of our broadcast....

Now, it is my honor, my privilege to introduce my next guest: It is Lyndon LaRouche! We had him on back in 2004, when we were working at the Democratic National Convention. And we learned from Lyndon LaRouche and some of his people that there was treachery afoot in that election! Of course, that didn't surprise us.

Lyndon LaRouche is an American economist, a philosopher, a political activist, and founder of several political organizations in the United States and elsewhere, jointly referred to as "the LaRouche movement." He is known as a perennial candidate for President of the United States, having run in eight elections since 1976, once as a U.S. Labor Party candidate and seven times for the Democratic Party nomination.

The Heritage Foundation has said that he, my guest Lyndon LaRouche, "leads what may well be one of the strangest political groups in American history"—and that's a compliment coming from these scumbags (excuse my French) [LaRouche laughs].

In 1984, LaRouche research staff was described by Norman Bailey, a former senior staffer at the National Security Council, as "one of the best private intelligence services in the world" and many would agree with that. Please help me to welcome Lyndon LaRouche to the program. Lyndon, great to have you on.

LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, thank you very much.

BLOOD: I love that comment by the Heritage Foundation: If they don't like ya, you must be doin' something right.

LAROUCHE: Or, they're doing something wrong! One of the two! [laughs] It's a toss-up.

BLOOD: I think we know the answer to that.

Going back to our last interview in 2004, with your help and some of intelligence that we were hearing on the ground at that Convention, it looked very much like the Kerry and the Democrats were willingly throwing that election, in 2004. Do you think that's what happened?

LAROUCHE: No, I don't think so. I think John made a number of mistakes. Remember, at that point, when the last phase of the thing, after he received the nomination, I had become one of his supporters, and I was organizing for him. I think he made mistakes, but most people do make mistakes. But he was running, I think, an honest campaign, and what he was pushing was valid, and he lost it.

BLOOD: It never bothered you that he was a member of the Skull & Bones organization, and seemed to have almost the exact biography as George Bush, other than I guess, the military service?

LAROUCHE: Well, see he had a brain, George didn't—that's the difference. No, these things—I look, deal in these kinds of things all the time, but I don't really take them as seriously as some people do. I think people try to get ahead, they try to "in" with something. I don't, I don't like to do that kind of thing. But that's what's happening. They often are in on something, because that's the thing that will help them promote their cause, or grease the skids, or whatever they're trying to do.

BLOOD: Maybe if Kerry didn't throw the election, maybe the people that were behind him certainly didn't make it any easier for him, and maybe helped him lose the election in the end?

LAROUCHE: No, I think it was a much bigger issue than that.

The United States, in a sense, has been sold down the river, big time. And this comes from big international forces. They're very powerful, they're largely reflected as financier interests. And most people don't understand it, they don't know what it's all about. So you get the public tries to find an explanation for what, to them, makes no sense. To me, I understand it. But I also understand that most people in the public, even leading politicians really don't understand what the game is.

I think in part, that Kerry did not know what the game was. And I think that those who look carefully at the operation, there's some really very dirty tricks were run against him by some very powerful agencies at that time. And I don't think he was quick enough on the trigger to deal with them in a timely fashion.

BLOOD: What is your assessment—here we are in 2008, now, we should remind our listeners! [laughing]—what is your assessment so far of this election season?

LAROUCHE: Well, this is really a nightmare. Because, what you have, you've come into the greatest financial crisis in modern history, is now fully on. Some people call it a "subprime" crisis—that's just dubbing the issue. What you have, is a top-down disintegration of the present international financial system. And in this, you have some big players, which are largely centered on London, and that financial crowd, which is trying to orchestrate the situation.

For example, we're almost on the verge of a war against China, being organized by London. We're on the verge of massive—since Kenya, where the British ran an operation in their own former colony—they're now running an operation in their other former colony, which has a much stronger resistance to the British Empire; that is, in Zimbabwe. You have all kinds of dirty games are being played in Southwest Asia. You have a crisis, where there's a line-up now—or the attempt to establish a fascist state in Europe, under the name of the Lisbon Treaty organization, which conscience-ridden people in Europe are fighting against. But they're trying to ram through an actual dictatorship from the border of Belarus and Russia, all the way to the Atlantic. And the same kind of crowd is running loose here.

Very few people really understand this. I think a lot of people are coming to understand it. But up to a point, they've been sort of—shall we say, "behind the eight ball" on this one.

BLOOD: Yeah, of course, this is engineered by our former owner here, the Virginia Company [laughs], as I've called them—yeah, Great Britain. I don't think it's a mistake that the dollar is completely dead, and the pound seems to be stronger than ever, no?

LAROUCHE: Not really. It appears that way—this is all orchestrated. For example, the entire international financial system is now totally bankrupt. It is not something which might become bankrupt: It is already bankrupt.

But the question is, the counting of the money has not been completed. When the counting of the money is completed, it may be too late for civilization, so what I've done, is proposed a number of actions, three particular kinds of actions, which could be initiated by the United States, despite the current President, but the crisis may make it possible to do that. Things are bad, and more and more people out there, including on the state-level politicians, as well as some federal ones, recognize that this system is coming down. And with the latest turn around Bear Stearns, and the consequences of that, and a Secretary of the Treasury who's acting like an idiot, that this system is really disintegrating and people know it. People in politics know that. Others suspect it. So there is not a crisis in that sense.

We could deal, by Roosevelt type methods, we could bring this under control. We could find partners abroad, powerful partners abroad who would collaborate with us, in dealing with the problem. We could deal with it.

Right now, those who are trying to hold onto their power, at the expense of the rest of us, are determined that those measures which could be taken, shall not be taken.

BLOOD: Well, what measures, specifically do you have in mind, Lyndon? I'm not sure if we'll agree on this or not, but let's hear what you have in mind.

LAROUCHE: Well, first of all: I've proposed last year, immediately after the developments in July of last year, where this crisis really began. It is not a subprime crisis—.

BLOOD: Let's take up on the other side of the break. We're with Lyndon LaRouche today.... [break]

We've got Lyndon LaRouche with us today. His website is larouchepac.com. You can Google "Lyndon LaRouche," I'm sure you're going to find it. We'll also give you a number you can call for a free intelligence report that he puts out on a regular basis, with his crew.

Lyndon has really an unprecedented track record of predicting economic collapses and economic problems. Of course, we might be in the middle of one of the biggest ones now. Lyndon, did you see this coming?

LAROUCHE: Yeah, sure. You have to look at these things—remember that economy can not be forecasted by simple statistical methods. Because there's human will intervention with policies which can change things. And the important thing for people is to know what the problem is, what the process is, and to know where to intervene to make the changes. So, predicting in the sense of forecasting like a gypsy fortune teller does not work.

BLOOD: Well, they manipulate the numbers, so the numbers can't really stand up on their own. This might be the problem with the TV economic analysts.

LAROUCHE: Well, no. They're totally incompetent. Their whole method is intrinsically incompetent. Because you can not forecast, in the way people try to predict by picking horses for example. That doesn't work, and that's where a lot of the problem is. And if you look at the record that all these forecasters have always been wrong.

So, but somebody sooner or later should have caught onto this, and recognized that this didn't work!

BLOOD: You know, Lyndon, we've been talking about it for years. In fact, we even pegged it at 2008, with the help of Al Martin and a number of other pretty sharp guys like yourself. So here we are, we're in the middle of this: We're hearing of course, the news came out yesterday, with Paulson—your buddy, I know you love him! —talking about how they're going to bloat up the Fed now. They're going to give the Fed steroids to make them even more powerful and centralize them even more than already are. I mean, that can't be the answer!

LAROUCHE: Well, what's been happening, on a global scale, is the same thing that happened in Germany, in general in 1923. Where they came up with a "stimulus package" to try to deal with an impossible situation, and they blew out the entire currency.

We are in a situation, in the United States, where the kind of stimulus package that's coming out of Bernanke, out of the White House and so forth, these packages are insane.

What we have to do, is recognize that we have a bankrupt international monetary-financial system, which has debts in the order of many quadrillions of dollars denomination. We could never repay these. We have to put the thing through bankruptcy reorganization, that is, put the U.S. economy, in effect, into receivership, by government, to reorganize things, and at the same time, to prevent essential functions of the economy and social systems from collapsing in the meantime. That can be done, as it was done by Roosevelt. The conditions are somewhat different, but the principle, the Constitutional principle, is the same.

BLOOD: And Roosevelt had many of the same problems, didn't he? In the sense that after World War II—or between World War I and World War II, with World War II adding up to a lot of money that we had to borrow, we faced some of the same and similar problems, not to mention, following a Great Depression.

LAROUCHE: Actually not. Our debt at the end of the war, was largely based on the war debt. Which had nothing to do with the economy as such, except that we had had to use this vast expenditure of money to defeat Hitler. And we did it.

The problem was with Truman. Roosevelt had a policy, that at the end of the war, we would break up the British Empire. Very nicely, no violence involved, but just break it up. And we would generate a system of credit internationally, the so-called Bretton Woods system, which was originally intended to fund the creation of nation-states where there had been colonies. Now our objective was, to eliminate colonies: to eliminate the colonial system, to eliminate all imperial systems, and make the planet one which was safe for sovereign nation-states. That didn't mean you had to prescribe what they were going to be, what they were going to be like, but their sovereignty of people was the important thing we had to work for, as opposed to colonies.

So, what happened is, Truman went with Churchill and Churchill's crowd, to defeat Roosevelt's post-war intention. So instead of converting our war industry into a capital goods industry for development of the world, which would have been a credit system, which we would not have been throwing money away, we would actually have been making long-term investments in the future, using our war economy capability, for an industrial economy capability.

Now, what happened is, Truman junked that, because the British wanted to keep their colonies, where Roosevelt had intended to break that up. So as a result of that system, and defending the British system, against Roosevelt's legacy, we made mistakes, which after the assassination of Kennedy, became a terrible problem for us. And with the addition of Vietnam War, which ruined us, in many respects, and then the 68er phenomenon, which broke up sanity, that we went against our blue-collar workers, against our industries, our farmers, and so forth, that was not very smart. And so therefore, from that point on, with the Democratic Party was broken up by the 68ers, at that point, Nixon came in; his policies were absolutely insane, and we have been becoming increasingly insane since the changes that were made under Nixon and especially under Carter.

Now, Carter didn't know what he was doing at the time. But Brzezinski and the New York crowd did know what they were doing.

So we were not really ruined in the post-war period: What we could have been was prevented. And after the assassination of Kennedy and the launching of the Vietnam War, we destroyed ourselves: Especially during the course of the 1970s, into the 1981. From that point on, we have been actually drifting downhill over the long term. And that's where we are today.

BLOOD: What do you see as a fix? I have about three minutes in this segment, and we can carry this back over into the second hour, but you mentioned three things that you think might be good suggestions. You want to get started on that now, Lyndon?

LAROUCHE: Yeah. Number 1, we have an act which is being supported by legislatures on the state level throughout the United States, many of them. It's growing in number all the time: the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act. That is, put the whole thing under protection: You must provide bankruptcy protection to maintain the operation of households without any foreclosures—postpone the whole issue until we can straighten the whole mess out; but at the same time, you must save the local, real banks, that is, the chartered banks of the United States, the way Roosevelt intervened. These must be kept open, because if these banks close their doors, or are taken over by international financial agencies, the way we're getting with Paulson now—if we do that, we're going to lose our society.

Number 2: We have to have a two-tier interest-rate system, in which we have 1-2% credit, on approved loans for long term, that's to build the economy. And let the other interest rates float, because we have to shut that whole sector down, and rebuild.

Thirdly, we must get into an international agreement among powerful nation-states to go back to a fixed-exchange-rate system of the type that Roosevelt had intended in 1944. That would give us, over the next quarter-century or two-quarter-centuries, the ability to build our way out of this mess, globally, as well as in the United States.

BLOOD: You know, I'm not sure I disagree with any of that. How do you accomplish it, though, is the question?

LAROUCHE: Well, you accomplish it, because we're now in a crisis. You will find that in the lower 80% of family-income brackets, which I think you deal a lot with on this program, these people out there, have been left out of actually making the decisions which have run our country, increasingly, since 1971-72. Now, they realize that they have been abused. They realize that the richer people, the upper 2%, and those that go along with them, have been mismanaging this economy. And they realize that they've got to stop being there, sitting to be taken by the sharpies, and have to come back and act like citizens again, and think through and choose the policies this country adopts.

BLOOD: Take an interest in actual policies that are being made for by our selected representatives.

LAROUCHE: And we're doing much better on the state level. On the federal level, we're in terrible shape with Pelosi in position now. She's ruined everything in this period—

BLOOD: Yeah, yeah. I agree.

LAROUCHE: But in the state level: We have politicians on the state level, both Republicans as well as Democrats, who recognize the nature of the problem, that they have to intervene in steering the politics in a way which corresponds to U.S. interest, not the interests of a group of bankers in New York City and London.

BLOOD: So you really begin to see, as I do, people kind of waking up to the problem, and realizing that they themselves are responsible and can actually do something to fix it.

I want to pick up a little bit on this. And the additional question I asked you about, which sent us this into this economic dialogue here, was your analysis of the 2008 election. So, I've got to go back to that question as well. We'll find out what you think. I know, as you know, as I know: Brzezinski's supporting Obama, Kissinger's supporting McCain, and Clinton! I mean, it's just really more of the same!

Lyndon LaRouche is with us.... we'll come back with the second hour with Lyndon LaRouche, and your phone calls, right after this top of the hour news break.... [break]

We are locked and loaded for the information war, the second hour of Deadline Live coming your way, this first day of April, 2008. This show is no joke, no April Fool's Day joke: We are serious as a heart attack, trying to get you information you're not getting anywhere else. Of course, I'm Jack Blood, your narrator, your radio gun, reporting for the next hour....

Today! With us is Lyndon LaRouche. We'll be taking phone calls here, in the second hour... anything you want to talk about, Lyndon and I will try to help you, try to comment on it, and answer any questions you have.... Lyndon LaRouche needs little to no introduction, he joins us on the program. And I want to correct his website: Here's a simpler way to get there, www.larouchepac.com. PAC is like a "political action committee," p-a-c, larouchepac.com. That'll get you right there. And here's a number to call, if you're interested in getting a free newsletter—I have it in my intelligence sources, you can get one of those by calling, the number: 800-929-7566....

Lyndon, thanks again for making the time for us.

LAROUCHE: Good to be with you.

BLOOD: Hey, I want to bring you into what we were talking about at the beginning of our program today, and what we've been talking about for the last couple of days: It seems like that stars are beginning to align again for another Cheney attack on Iran—something we know he's been slobbering over here; something he's wanted very badly now, for many years. There are another indicators coming in that looks like something could happen in the very near future, including Russia warning us, Saudi Arabia throwing out some warnings, Israel having massive drills, and of course, those ships all sitting there in the Strait of Hormuz: Let's get your opinion on that.

And before I do, I should mention that in Jan. 3rd, 2001, in your webcast, you warned that the incoming Bush Administration would attempt to govern by crisis-management, in other words, like the Reichstag Fire in Germany. How are we going to tackle this major situation?

LAROUCHE: I think for a moment, we have defeated, or at least set back, Cheney's operation. This happened in an interesting way, which is typical, and it's useful to readers and listeners about this sort of thing, because this does happen:

What happened is that there's been a unification of common interest among nations in Asia, and this includes Pakistan, India, China, Russia, and so forth. Now, what happened was, that the Iranians who were sensible to what's going on here, played a useful role in preventing a go-ahead on this war which Cheney was in the process of starting. So Cheney was actually defeated because an agreement was made, among relevant forces to stop this war, which had been launched, in shall we say, Cheney's interest or the same thing.

So, you sometimes do get indications of what could be done among unlikely partners, who realize that their foolishness is costing them something, more than they can afford to lose. And that happens. It happened in this case, with Iran, which played a very useful role, in at least stalling for the time being, what Cheney was up to.

So, it was not a complete loss.

BLOOD: Yeah, this looked like it was going ahead in 2004 and no one could stop it. So it certainly has been delayed. But do you believe here, before these guys are done, in the next—what is it?—nine, ten months, that they can make this happen?

LAROUCHE: It's much bigger than that. The United States itself is under attack. The United States is not really in control of any of this. This is coming from a concernt of international financial interests, partly people who are Americans and so forth, like George Shultz or Felix Rohatyn and so forth, but it's not really an American operation. It's an operation by certain forces which think the time has come to sink the U.S. as a power.

BLOOD: I agree.

LAROUCHE: And that's what's happening. And so, if we look at it that way, you can understand it better. It's coming largely from London. There are forces in the United Kingdom which don't agree with this nonsense, but that's what the situation is.

And the U.S. election campaign, for example: Obama was set up by the British, to be sunk. And you see now the signs that there is movement to sink him. He was set up as a patsy. Now, that means that you've got a sick candidate for the Republican nomination—I don't think he could carry his way through this thing, and he is not really—he's got some nice handlers, people who try to keep from going insane—

BLOOD: Yeah, he's got Kissinger's hand up his back, and that's certainly bodes well for—

LAROUCHE: Well, something like that, but I think it's more from London than anything else. But the point is, that he comes from a Navy background, and the best side of McCain is the fact that he comes from a Navy background, that is, a patriotic background in the Navy circuit. But he also has emotional problems, and he has illnesses. And he is not doing too well, in performance. So therefore, you always think in politics, "well, are we going to survive under somebody even if he's not the best choice?" And I don't think he's shown much survival potential recently. I think they're going to sink him.

But, so therefore, you have Obama, who is scheduled to be shot down. He was set up only to destroy Hillary, and that isn't working now, so I don't know what they're going to do now. And some of the Obama people realize that there's something wrong with their situation, and are actually asking us, my associates, some questions. "What're we into? Are we buying into something?" they're saying. And they're right! They suspect there's something very fishy about this whole process.

In the meantime, Hillary has bounced back—I don't think she ever was sunk. I think it was mostly a press hype. And she's doing some interesting things.

My view is, that only a coalition of some Republicans and some Democrats, is going to be able to provide solutions for the kind of crisis we have now. And we have to sort this thing out on the basis of policies and issues, rather than traditional likes of —you know.

The fight inside the Democratic Party, of Pelosi against Hillary, is one of the most vicious fights you can imagine, and Howard Dean's on the side of Pelosi. So the Democratic Party is split, deeply, and it's not Obama versus Hillary. It's the Democratic Party internally that's split.

And Gore is coming back! And he really intends to run—

BLOOD: Well, that's what I was going to ask you: It looks almost like and he's not really denying it in his inner circles, that he could come in and save the day, here!

LAROUCHE: Well, he's crazy. He couldn't save the day, but he could make a mess—

BLOOD: [laughs] No, I mean that's the proposal, looming!

LAROUCHE: But he's a British agent: He actually is an agent of the British monarchy.

BLOOD: Well, I think Hillary is a British agent, so.

LAROUCHE: No, she's not. No, not Hillary. That's a different—

BLOOD: Just a part time agent?

LAROUCHE: No, no, she's a—

BLOOD: Not an agent at all?

LAROUCHE: She's a politician, who's ambitious, who has had some shocks in finding out what ambition brings with it, and who's trying to feel her way with the thing. And she's an American—Americans are often confused, even some usually very well informed ones.

But she's not the problem. The problem is the policy question. And Gore is actually an outright British agent, and he's an anti-American British agent. He's crazy, among things, but—

BLOOD: Well, I don't argue with that. I might argue your defense of Hillary Clinton, who I call "Hitlery Clinton," but I guess we can get into that. Are you supporting Clinton, then, for President?

LAROUCHE: I'm not supporting anyone at this point. I'm concerned about the outcome of the election, and I'm working on that. I'm in touch with the Clinton people, naturally; I'm in touch with the Obama people; I'm in touch with many Republicans as well. I'm concerned about the outcome of this election: That we get a candidacy which can deal with the problems.

BLOOD: Y-ye-ah. The only problem is, out of the three people we have, I just don't see that getting done: I see the problems getting worse, although I think we might disagree on some policies issues. So there you go. We'll come back with Lyndon LaRouche. Phone lines are open, folks. Call in, you can help me out... [break]

Lyndon LaRouche is with us today.... I get the intelligence report that they put out, and I think there's some good information in it. I have to kinda read it with some a wary eye, but I really do learn some things from it, so I recommend it, at least in that capacity. Free newsletter at 800-929-7566. Lyndon LaRouche with us.

I'm going to go to the phones here in just a minute; Patrick, Paula, and John. We have a few lines open...

Lyndon, I'm just always perplexed at your support for Clinton, considering the fact that you see the British Empire as one of our key enemies, the weapon of mass destruction against our American sovereignty, here. When Bush has come out and said, Clinton is my son. When he's a Rhodes Scholar who was educated at Oxford University, where his Clinton Global Initiative reads like a Who's Who list of the Bilderberg group. Where evidence has come startling so, about what happened in Mena, Arkansas, with the Bush and Clinton families, and the Rose law firm. With Waco, and the death of so many children, burned alive; Oklahoma City, which turned out to be likely to be another inside job; with the World Trade Center in 1993, which was an FBI sting operation that killed people and set up what we saw in World Trade Center 2001: I'm just not sure how I can add all these things up, Lyndon. Maybe you can help me with it.

LAROUCHE: Yeah sure. First of all, Bill is a very intelligent person, but he came in—as you know, where he came in from, and he adapted to many things, because he believed that's the only way he was going to be effective. Like many politicians. You always have to understand the American politician, really believes in being successful, and being successful means, kissing butt.

BLOOD: And by adapt, you mean compromise?

LAROUCHE: Absolutely! That's exactly it! And you will find, almost no politicians, in the United States, who do not do that: The best and the worst, they all do it. Very—because, you know, we're living in a sophist society, in which truth is not at a premium. Success is! The game is success. Now I don't have to—

BLOOD: I don't play it.

LAROUCHE: I don't happen to play that game, but I understand it. And of course, I came into the situation, when he was President, I came into the situation much more informed on what the realities of the world are than he is, even today. So, you have to understand that most politicians—and he's a smart one, he learned, he's a quick study. He's very bright. But most of them really don't understand this problem, they don't understand what the United States faces.

BLOOD: So he's a willing dupe, he's just a willing dupe, in your opinion.

LAROUCHE: Nearly everybody is! That's the product I deal with. But my view is, that I have to stick to the truth, that's my function, other people think success, in the sense of election, or some of that sort, or money or whatnot, is the game. I don't! I think that you have one life to live, and how you spend it, what comes out of having lived is what's important: That's where success is defined for me. And there are many other people like that system: for example, in our intelligence system, you have people who are devoted to the United States, who do things for the United States, who are seldom honored and often abused. But they know what they're doing, they're serving in our country, and they're proud of it.

But there are a few of us, and those of us who have that persuasion, try to do the best we can to persuade others to look at things as we look at them. And they will always come back to us, and say, "But you aren't elected." And I say, "Well, I'm not elected, because I was on the right course."

And eventually, in the course of history there are moments where this principle that I stand for, works. There are many times, most times in history, it appears not to work. But I say, that the times that it does work is what we're living for. And that's the difference.

BLOOD: Y-ye-ah. Well, I only know what I've studied, and I've studied a lot of different angles to this, and just can't see Clinton as anything but a little more than a willing dupe. But we'll agree to disagree.

Now, going back quickly, before I go the phones, to your warning about the Bush Administration, attempting to govern by crisis management, maybe having a Reichstag Fire type of thing; of course, we had 9/11. Did you make your feelings known? Is your feeling that we've been told everything that happened on 9/11, or that—?

LAROUCHE: We're lied to all the time! Our government is a system of lying [Blood chuckles], especially in the recent nearly eight years now. It's been richer in lying—

BLOOD: Do you believe that it was orchestrated by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda?

LAROUCHE: Not by them, but by those who control them.

BLOOD: So, they were used as patsies in the event?

LAROUCHE: Well, I say, frankly, look: You have to look at the British BAE, and the entire operation which happened in Manhattan, in September 2001. Which is the kind of event I expected—I didn't know where it was going to come from, how it was going to come from, but I knew it what it was. And I said it was going to happen. I said it before Bush was actually inaugurated. I warned of this thing. It was obvious it was going to happen: those of us who understand history, and know these kinds of events, looking back, for example, at the German Reichstag Fire, and similar things like that, which I did then, said, "they're going to do it!" And they did it!

And it came from London. It came through the only capability that existed, which could have done what was done, in September of 2001, was BAE, the British-Saudi connection. And that Prince Bandar, of course, is a key figure in this thing. He's a very important figure, he's a key—. He's British intelligence, actually, he has been since he was 16 years of age. When he was sent to Britain as a Saudi prince, to be educated in the British military program.

BLOOD: You do believe that 9/11 was used as a false-flag event to perpetuate the Project for New American Century global government. What is it exactly do you think they wanted?

LAROUCHE: Well, the point is the British Empire. Think of it as the British Empire. That's exactly what it is. And the idea is, you have some people who are more British than they are America, particularly in our financial interests in Manhattan and so forth, and their view has been for a long time, to reestablish a British Empire, and assimilate the United States as a sort of minor Commonwealth factor inside the British Empire. That's happened before, that's what the big fight was.

That was Roosevelt's fight, for example, against Churchill, during the war. Here we are, we had to deal with Hitler and Mussolini. The Hitler problem, Hitler's had established days before Roosevelt was actually inaugurated. So the moment that the President walked into his office to look for a pencil, with which to begin to govern, Hitler had already become a dictator, and the die was cast for some form of what became known as World War II.

So, we were obliged, by our own interests and our conscience, to defeat Hitler. We allied with the British, whom we despised, and knew was our enemy, but we knew that, the practical thing for all of humanity, we had to defeat Hitler at that time! And the minute we had done the job, and Roosevelt was dead, then the people in New York, who had originally backed Hitler—like the grandfather of the present President of the United States—came back to power. That's what our problem, since that time.

BLOOD: Yeah. We're going to Patrick, Paula, John, Jim, Heather's holding... I promise to go right to your calls when we come back. We're with Lyndon LaRouche today.... [break]

Thank you for tuning in, folks, "Deadline Live," Jack Blood, your radio gun. Lyndon LaRouche has been our guest here for about the last hour. He'll stay with us till the end of the program. We'll be taking your phone calls... Lyndon, are ya ready?

LAROUCHE: I'm ready.

BLOOD: Okay! Let's go to Patrick in Toronto. Patrick, thank you for holding. You're on the line with Lyndon LaRouche.

Q: How ya doin' Brother?

BLOOD: Okay.

Q: Good. I listen to your show pretty regularly, and I know just by the subject matter that you cover, you probably have a lot of similar interests and the same vein as myself. And up in Canada, the CBC, which is the Canadian Broadcast Corp., this past week, they started a two-part mini-series called "The Trojan Horse." And it basically encompasses, the North American Union, rigged elections, faked assassination attempts, kidnapping, the MI6, the CIA, the GDSC, the BND, shadow government, China, the House of Saud, big oil, you name it. And I wonder why, at this point, it's becoming pretty mainstream. I wanted to ask Lyndon what he thought, in regards like what was happening with the North American Union, and if he was actually in favor for it, or against it. And I'll take your answer off-air, and I appreciate your show. Thank you.

BLOOD: Thank you, Patrick, I gotta check out that documentary.

Lyndon, the NAFTA highway here, the North American Union. I'm sure you're up to speed on that?

LAROUCHE: Yeah, yeah. Well, the point is, I'm against this process of globalization.

My view is, the standard for me, for politics, civilized politics in European and other politics, is the Treaty of Westphalia of 1648. And this of course, is a Christian principle, but it's not only a Christian principle. And therefore, we should support the sovereignty of sovereign nation-states, as partners, which limited attempt to manage them, and impose values upon them. It's by cooperation with them, in behalf of this principle, the principle of Westphalia, that we can achieve a planet of sovereign nation-states, where they can over centuries to come, work out their differences, but work them out but in the meantime, achieving progress in the human condition.

That's where I stand, and I'm against all this funny stuff, in terms of world government, all this nonsense.

We need to preserve the sovereign nation-state, which is the difference between us and barbarism.

BLOOD: And that we agree on, for sure!

Paula, in Florida, thank you for calling in. You're on the air with Lyndon LaRouche. Go ahead, Paula.

Q: Hi. There was some information that would sort of put all this together for you: That if you'll start looking in the Book of Hosea in the Bible, Ch. 12-14, it tells you all about this. But anyway, what you were saying about Germany, and all this, Nazi Germany.

But anyway, this whole thing, you're right about the British Throne: This is the House of David, and this is why they're taking over everything. And anyway, 9/11 was also in your Bible, Jeremiah 30, and it tells you everything that's going to happen afterwards.

But anyway, the thing, this is all planned. I mean, the family had this planned a long time ago. And I tell ya, this family's so screwed up, it's unreal. Matter of fact, I mean most of them are mentally ill.

But anyway, the family came on the radio from Europe.

BLOOD: Which family are you talking about, now?

Q: The Royal Family of Amsterdam, and tell us to get 'em all out of office, right now. That they're totally screwed up.

LAROUCHE: [laughs] Well, I think your information on the latter point is probably quite relevant.

Q: Yeah.

LAROUCHE: But, the Anglo-Dutch Liberal system, I'm not much on the Old Testament, except for the Book of Genesis, and otherwise my politics are New Testament. [laughs]

Q: Mm-hmm, well, see like the taking down the Towers, was taking down the sycamore trees and raising the cedars of Lebanon. And they start in Jeremiah: 30.

But anyway, this family of mine is so sick. And I've been trying to get through GW and tell him he's gotta stop all this craziness. And—

BLOOD: Yeah, if you would do that for us, Paula. But hopefully—

Q: Well, I'll tell ya what, they need to be stopped, they really do. 'Cause I mean, they're totally screwed up.

BLOOD: Well, you know, we've been trying to do that, and Lyndon's been trying to do that for years. And look how we've been treated. So, it's good to know that the American people, the people around the world can be begin to see this, as we just heard from Patrick in Toronto, talking about the "Trojan Horse" aired on CBC, I mean, really laying it out for the people! It's beginning to happen. The awareness is beginning to set in. Thank you for the call, Paula.

It almost sounded there, for a minute, like a celestian prophecy, there, Lyndon, or something. [LaRouche laughs] I don't know. Let's go to John in Michigan. John, thank you for holding. You're on "Deadline Live" today with Lyndon LaRouche.

Q: Good afternoon Jack, good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche. Jack, if you'd be so gracious enough, I'm actually running for elected office in Michigan. And if my question touches on some good intellect, maybe you'd let me give out my website.

But I think Mr. LaRouche would appreciate my stand: Bob Schultz just came through from the We The People Foundation.

BLOOD: Yeah, yeah.

LAROUCHE: Yeah.

Q: And he gave a four hour presentation, where he said, they wanted the Supreme Court to address what the original intent was, the last ten words of the First Amendment, about "petition of redress of grievances." And they told him, "we will not hear it."

BLOOD: They will not hear his petition, regarding his petition!? Yeah, that's great.

Q: Yeah! They just said, "we will not—"; they'll hear the Anna Nicole Smith case, but they will not hear his right to petition for redress of grievances.

But what I'm saying is, he kind of let the air out the balloon of my campaign—I'm running under the Constitution Party banner. But, can we elect our way out of tyranny? Because I'm officially running as a statesman here, I'm not running as a politician.

LAROUCHE: That's fine.

Q: I would die for my faith in Jesus Christ. I don't do the idol worship of America. I love this country, too, but nonetheless, I go, "at what point do I back—" I can't compromise, I can't be a politician, and I can't go into the glass ceiling of the Republican Party, and be told "hey, raise the Christian flag, after you're elected to office." [LaRouche laughs heartily] It's who I am! We're not reinventing the wheel—we point to what the Founders said, so it's going, "hey, stay within the boundaries, here."

BLOOD: Yeah, John give out your website. I'd like you to do that.

Q: It's goodmichigangovernment.com, all spelled out.

BLOOD: All right folks, and I'll get your question to Lyndon here, as I thank you for the call. Lyndon, can we elect our way out of this mess?

LAROUCHE: We can mobilize the American people to take their self-interest and use the Constitutional structure we have, which has not been used much lately, and use that to reform our system. That's what's the intention of the system, and that is what rightfully can happen under the system, if we mobilize to bring that about.

BLOOD: You know, I look at—and we were supporting Ron Paul, I'm not sure if you guys do; I would guess you wouldn't. But what we did learn is that if we call their bluff, and we raise more money than anyone else, we win the straw polls, we have a massive support, and signs, and we win all the online polls—we do all these things that they said we were supposed to do to be taken seriously, and we still weren't taken seriously! So, of course, when you're talking about national politics, I don't know if there is a way to elect our way out of the way.

Local politics, I believe there is, as we're now seeing the Ron Paul supporters going in and infiltrating the Republican Party, taking over the state chairs, and the delegate process, which is not easy to do. So there, we are beginning to see some results happening. What do you think?

LAROUCHE: I'm optimistic about the situation now. I'm not optimistic in the sense of guaranteeing anything, but I'm optimistic in the sense, that, it is important now, to fight. That we have to fight, we need to fight for our own souls' sake. And we can win. Let's try! Let's just try.

BLOOD: We'll never know unless we try, and we certainly can't just roll over here, and let them have their way. So if one way is the electoral process, the other way is the kind of information war, and getting people educated; maybe another way is through direct action—we've got to do all these things!

LAROUCHE: Yeah, you've got to get the population up out of the mud, and start to think of themselves as sovereign individuals, who are responsible for what happens on this planet. And the moral question, "what am I doing for society, while I'm alive here?" has to be the guiding interest. And we're told, we're taught, we're influenced—corrupted, if you will—into not thinking that way. And that's what the problem is.

BLOOD: If we can get you on American Idol, or some more people can hear this message! [laughs] Maybe we'd be doin' better.

LAROUCHE: Well, we try to do the best we can.

BLOOD: Can ya sing, Lyndon? Can ya sing for your supper, on American Idol, and then you can tell the American people. Look folks, one thing about Lyndon LaRouche is, no one has been under more attack than him, over the last 40 or 50 years. And that obviously means that the establishment isn't too happy with his message. This is why we are brothers in arms, for the information war.

Shawna is holding from Washington, we'll take more calls in the next segment....[break]

This is our final segment today. Lyndon LaRouche has been our guess for the majority of the program. If you missed it, you go to gcnlive.com, you hit the "on demand" button and you can hear the show for the next 24 hours. Of course, this will be archived, somewhere. I believe our last interview, myself and Lyndon from 2004, is up on Google; you can find it.

I hope, that when I get to be Lyndon's age, I have as many hit pieces written on me, which probably number into the tens of thousands [LaRouche laughs]. Of course, he has been mocked on "The Simpsons," and on "Futurama." I used to love those "Saturday Night Live" pieces, "Masterpiece Theater." I think one of the skits had Queen Elizabeth as a drug dealer. And this of course was also, "Lyndon LaRouche Theater" is what they called it—which must have been funny for you to watch.

LAROUCHE: Well, it shows how absurd they are. [laughs]

BLOOD: Now, what about the rumor that you were the founder of Wikipedia? You want to dispel that?

LAROUCHE: No, absolutely not! Jimmy Wales and I are on different wavelengths entirely!

BLOOD: I was going to ask if you can get me reinstated. I've been banned, from Wikipedia for absolutely no reason at all. So you see, I'm right on the track to accomplish what you have throughout your life, Lyndon! [laughter]

Let me go to Shawna in Washington, she'll be our last caller, and then I'll let you put anything you want on the record, that you think our audience needs to know.... [gives out website and 800 #]. Jim Bakker once said about my guest today, that "he seemed to know things weeks before they appeared in the newspapers." Well, you'll know them too, by looking at that newsletter. I get every issue, thanks to some of your supporters, Lyndon. They send it to me and make sure I'm reading it.

Shawna in Washington, you're our last caller today. Go ahead. Do we have Shawna?

Q: Hi!

BLOOD: Hi Shawna, you're on the air with Lyndon LaRouche. Go ahead.

Q: Yeah, my question is, is even if we don't go into Iraq [sic] right before Bush comes out of office, do you think whoever you know the powers that be lets us elect next are going to try for it anyways?

BLOOD: She meant Iran, obviously

Q: I meant Iran. I'm sorry...

LAROUCHE: Yes, well, what you have— right now the threat is, that organized out of London, and it's organized also around what's called the Lisbon Treaty organization, which is not yet officially affirmed. But this thing, together with some things in the United States, plans, and is launching war against nations in Africa, against nations in Asia. The attack on China is part of this thing—the whole thing is a fake.

So therefore, we have the threat of a general war continuing, after this administration leaves office. It is a terrible threat. It is extremely dangerous. It must be feared. But we must not think of it as something we can't defeat. We can defeat it.

Q: I was hoping you'd say that.

LAROUCHE: Yeah. We just have to be aware.

I think we're now at a point where the American people realize that they're waking up. The lower 80% of family-income brackets is waking up, not only to the fact that they have been abused, and cast aside and treated as irrelevant. But they realize that the system is coming down. And they're beginning to think "maybe, they can do something about this."

And that's where I stand: I think, it's rousing the American people to begin to understand, this is their Republic, this is our Constitution, and if they can wake up, and begin to organize around the power they represent—remember, 80% of the population is these people, who have been shut out, essentially, of any real control over politics for a long period of time, at least in terms of ordinary lifetimes. If they realize they've got to take it back, in a situation where they can take it back. And there's a movement in the United States, in process, not necessarily a political movement in the sense of some party or something, but a movement among people which is moving now in that direction. I'm optimistic about the possibilities of what can be done. I have no sense of any guarantees, but it's the fight I have to wage, and I'm going to wage it.

Q: I have one other question.

BLOOD: Quickly, Shawna.

Q: Isn't it true that our government is supposed to serve the citizens, the people, and not we're supposed to serve them?

LAROUCHE: Well, in a sense we are the people, we are the government.

Q: Yeah, but... our government's walking all over us.

LAROUCHE: That's right, that's right! And the reason is, that we have accepted, the ordinary people of the country, have accepted their defeat. Especially since the developments of the 1960s.

BLOOD: Is it that, Lyndon? Or is it just easier to put your trust in your politicians, and let them do your business...?

LAROUCHE: No.

BLOOD: And not have to worry about it?

LAROUCHE: No. This is actually a very systematic effort, which destroyed the United States, especially with the phenomenon of the 68ers. And they just lost their fighting spirit from that point on.

BLOOD: Yeah, socially engineered by, likely, the Tavistock Institute, which is another—

LAROUCHE: Yeah, a lot of things like that.

BLOOD: Thank you for the call. Shawna's with the military. And I don't know if you have a message for a lot of the military people that listen to this program.

LAROUCHE: Well, I want to rebuild them. I don't wars, but I certainly do want to rebuild a national defense capability, which is not just a capability for fighting wars. It's the securing of the peace: And we do need that arm. It's being destroyed now. We still have something left of the Navy. The Air Force, I think sometimes needs a revival. But we need to rebuild the Army. I am for, particularly, in these times, some form of universal military service, which enables citizens to sense that they are part of our military and they in that sense—

BLOOD: You would be for compulsory service, then, as they do have in Israel, and I believe in Norway and other countries?

LAROUCHE: Yes. I don't want a professional military controlled by people who often are not even citizens—I don't reject the fact that they're trying to be citizens. But I think the American people have to be an integral part of their military institution. And where they are a part, as they are not now—when they are, then they are able to control it. For example, I go back to World War II experience, I was in that process. And I know that it was extremely important, at that point, that we had a sense that we were the military. People who were taken off the streets, given commissions, non-commissioned officers, took responsibilities, did things: This was ours! It was not somebody else's, it was ours! We were not the subjects of the military, we were the military. We were the militia: and that's the way it should be.

BLOOD: What do you think about putting foreigners, such as Mexican nationals and offering them citizenship to go serve on the front lines in Iraq, or Iran, in this case?

LAROUCHE: Not as substitutes for Americans. If they want to become Americans, yes, that's fine. If they want to become Americans. But they shouldn't come and serve in the military as foreigners. There are exceptional cases—

BLOOD: Do they understand the concept of "fighting for the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic"? Or, "defending the Constitution..."?

LAROUCHE: I don't think that our military, in the Army—. Well, you have many generals, for example, retired generals and others, who do understand exactly what I'm talking about. They tend to get pushed to one side by the present administration. And that's a problem.

BLOOD: Which has just happened to Admiral Fallon.

LAROUCHE: That's right. That's exactly it. He's a perfect example of that.

BLOOD: Lyndon, I wish we had more time to talk to you. It has been a pleasure. I know we really fundamentally disagree on some of the conclusions, but I think we ultimately agree on the state of the world at large. And we certainly know that we need to fight back. We need to stand up to it. And Lyndon puts out some great information; some of it you're just going to love, that is, larouchepac.com for more information on that.

Lyndon: The best for you. I hope we have you around for another 50 years. I hope I have you back sooner than four years. Thank you so much for joining us.

LAROUCHE: Thank you!