[CTRL] AL GORE AND THE NUCLEAR DANGER

[Linda Minor]

 -Caveat Lector-

from:
http://x6.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=430151387&CONTEXT=917195221.1963983102&h
itnum=23


AL GORE AND THE NUCLEAR DANGER (was EIR Talks Interview 01/06/98)
Author:   John Covici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date:   1999/01/08
Forums:   alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich, alt.activism,
alt.politics.british, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.current-events.russia,
alt.current-events.bosnia, talk.politics.mideast, talk.politics.china

EIR TALKS, JAN. 6, 1999

- GORE AND THE NUCLEAR DANGER -

{The following is the full text of Debbie Freeman's speech at the
Baltimore meeting Jan. 5, which text will be edited down to be
the guts of both EIR Talks and the LaRouche Connection this
week.}

 DEBRA FREEMAN: I'm glad so many people came out tonight,
because we really do have a tremendous task. And what I really
want to make absolutely clear to people in no uncertain terms
tonight, is that completely contrary to what you hear on TV, to
what you hear on the news, the bottom line is that at this very
moment, there is an ongoing, British-style parliamentary coup
d'etat going on in the United States.
 Anyone who told you that ``the worst was over'' when the
impeachment fight moved from the House of Representatives to the
United States Senate, is a liar. Anyone who told you, that when
this fight moved to the United States Senate, that ``calmer heads
would prevail,'' {is a liar.} And at this moment, this nation is
in greater danger than it has been at any moment since the
Declaration of Independence. And I will explain exactly why that
is.
 But what I also want to make clear to you, is that the fight
against the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, while it is
an absolutely crucial fight, {while it's a fight that we can not
afford to lose,} it is also the case that it is only one battle
in a much broader war. And the fact is, that if we're going to
win that battle, you must understand the terms of the larger war.
Otherwise, we won't win this battle.
 Now, just a couple of facts, so that you understand the
setting in which all of this takes place. First and foremost, the
larger war against our nation, and against the people of this
nation, has been triggered by what is without question the worst
financial crisis that this nation has ever faced.
 Number two, something that you will not read about in the
press, but which I hope to make clear to you tonight, is that if
President Clinton was to be removed from office, and Al Gore were
to come in, the danger that you would face, would not only be a
danger that would be caused by the financial crisis. But the fact
of the matter is, that if Al Gore becomes president of the United
States, then nuclear war is not only possible, it is likely. And
if you doubt that, then simply look at the policies that Al Gore
has defined as his policies.
 First of all, Al Gore was engaged in a series of
behind-the-scenes manipulations that stopped the President of the
United States from attending the recent Asian summit meetings
that took place in Malaysia. I think everybody remembers that.
The backdrop for that, was what? It was the threat of a war with
Iraq.
 Al Gore was the single greatest promoter of a strike against
Iraq. At the last minute, that war was called off, and President
Clinton did ultimately travel to Asia. But at the crucial
meetings that took place, the man who represented the United
States was Al Gore. And if people think back -- and, you know,
that was just Thanksgiving time. It seems like it was years ago.
But at that time, Al Gore travelled to Malaysia, made a vicious,
nasty speech that undid five years of work that Clinton did as
President of the United States, in terms of forging relations
with other countries. And Al Gore put himself at the helm of the
IMF steamroller that is crushing the nations of Asia and Eastern
Europe.
 At the same time, although the immediacy of a conflict with
Iraq was avoided then, a short time later, again, while President
Clinton was out of the country on a trip to Israel that everyone
{except Al Gore} advised him against making, the plot was hatched
for the bombing of Iraq.
 Now, I don't care what you think about Saddam Hussein. I
don't think very much of him myself. But the bombing of Iraq, was
a set-up for President Clinton.
 First of all, he was misled as to the terms of that bombing.
President Clinton was informed while he was on his way back from
Israel, that Saddam Hussein had violated all agreements, and that
``every nation in the world,'' was in agreement that there had to
be a military strike.
 {Well, in fact, there was not one nation in the world that
agreed with us, with the sole exception of Great Britain.}
President Clinton was told that the Russians agreed. The Russians
did {not} agree, and they promptly recalled their ambassador. The
President was told that the Chinese agreed. The Chinese did not
agree, and the Chinese head of state issued a scathing attack on
the United States.
 The President was told that all the nations of the Arab
world agreed. No nation in the Arab world agreed. Even Kuwait,
who one could hardly refer to as a nation, refused landing rights
to U.S. planes. {The United States stepped completely outside the
boundaries of international law in the bombing of Iraq.}
 Now, why is that important? Well, in a world where there is
tremendous instability, where there is financial instability,
where there is political instability, if you have one nation --
our nation -- a nation that's supposed to have the utmost respect
for the law; if our nation steps outside of the law, then how in
fact do we pull an outlaw state like Israel in line, when she
violates the rights of her neighbors, when she violates
international law, when she abrogates international treaties?
 But that was the policy that was imposed on our President,
by Al Gore, and by Al Gore's friends in London. And the fact of
the matter is that if you think back to when the assault on
President Clinton in the U.S. Congress first began, when the
monstrous and lying evidence that had been gathered by that
sexual pervert, Ken Starr, was released on the Internet, that
same day, President Clinton appeared before the General Assembly
of the United Nations. And when he stood up to speak, he was
given the longest standing ovation by the heads of state of every
other nation; the longest standing ovation given to any head of
state, with the sole exception of Nelson Mandela, when he was
released from prison.
 After the bombing of Iraq, I doubt if that would have
occurred. And that's why I say that President Clinton was set up.
 But look at where we stand now. And I want to dwell on this
for a moment, because this question of Al Gore leading this
nation into nuclear war, is something which is very important,
and which you will not hear anywhere but this room. Because if
you turn on the news right now, what you'll hear on the news, are
the various reports back and forth about what's likely to happen
when the Senate opens tomorrow. They're now saying that a trial
in the Senate could begin as soon as Thursday, that all deals
have fallen apart, that there are people who are {adamant} that
Clinton has to be removed from office.
 And then, kind of on the tail-end of the news, they'll say
``Oh yes, and by the way, there was another engagement with the
Iraqis today. But nothing to worry about. No Americans were hurt.
We think an Iraqi plane may have crashed when it ran out of fuel.
Nothing to worry about.''
 But it {is} something to worry about. Because what it
represents, is an escalation of tension in the region. And it's
an escalation of tension at a time when Israel has run amok under
the leadership of that fascist, Benjamin Netanyahu. And this is
going on with President Clinton, who despises Benjamin Netanyahu,
and has already stated clearly his support for a Palestinian
state. What do you think would happen, if the President of the
United States was Al Gore, who is against a Palestinian state,
and who is a friend of Benjamin Netanyahu? What kind of arrogance
would you see coming out of the state of Israel then?
 So please be assured that when I say that a Gore Presidency
would bring us not only to the {possibility} but to the
{probability} of the engagement of U.S. nuclear missiles, that I
don't make that statement lightly.
 Another fact in this war that I want you to understand, is
that the war that we're fighting, is not against the Republican
Party. That would be an easy war to fight. But what you have to
understand, is that the war that we're fighting, is against
foreign-inspired treason, very much like that of the
foreign-inspired treason that led to the Civil War in 1861.
 And I think that by now, most people know that what brought
the United States to war in 1861 -- people tell you that that was
a war of the North against the South. But the Confederacy would
have never challenged Union forces, shots would have never been
fired, if that Confederacy had not been guaranteed financing and
materiel from the City of London. They would have been insane to
do so. They wouldn't have lasted a day. But they knew they had
the backing of financial circles in the City of London, and they
knew that they had the financial backing of Wall Street. And it
was only under those circumstances, that they went as far as they
did, and brought this nation to war.
 And the fact of the matter is that the same financial
backers of that treason 100 years ago, are the individuals that
you see again today, financing this treason, financing the New
Confederacy. And if you watched the House debate a couple of
weeks ago, and you have any doubt at all that this is a New
Confederacy, please, when you go home tonight, look at some of
the old footage of Mr. Asa Hutchinson, who is now one of the
managers of the impeachment. And when you turn on the news
tonight, listen for a few moments to the majority leader of the
United States Senate, Mr. Trent Lott of Mississippi. And tell me
again, that you're not quite sure that this is a New Confederacy.
 It is a New Confederacy, which makes very public their
support for the Old Confederacy. They support the principles of
the Old Confederacy. They support the principles of slavery. They
have done so repeatedly and openly. And most of them hail from
states where the Confederate flag still flies over their
capitals. And I will tell you, that in the state of Mississippi,
much to my surprise, a state which is the only state in the
United States that has a majority African-American population,
not in an urban center, but statewide, the majority of the
citizens of the state of Mississippi, are African-Americans. The
Mississippi State Legislature has the largest black caucus of any
legislature in the United States.
 And with all of that said, in the state of Mississippi,
slavery is still legal. That's right. Just in this last
legislative session, they tried to repeal slavery as a legal
institution from the state law books in Mississippi, and they
failed, by an overwhelming majority. This is indeed the new
Confederacy.
 Who are their financial backers? Richard Mellon Scaife,
whose family, the Mellons, were involved in financing the first
Confederacy. Conrad Black and the Hollinger Corporation, who hail
from the City of London, who own the majority of the newspapers
in the United States, just as they owned the largest newspapers
during the time of the Civil War.
 Lord Rees-Mogg, of the House of Lords in London, whose
editorials attacking this President, pre-date anything any of you
ever heard about Whitewater or Monica Lewinsky, or Linda Tripp.
 And what I want you to understand, is that these forces and
these individuals, haven't simply gathered together against
President Clinton. Oh yes, they do intend to remove William
Jefferson Clinton from office.{ But their principal enemy is not
Clinton. Their principal enemy is the United States of America.
Their principal enemy is the system of government, with all of
its flaws and pimples, that we live by. That is what they find
absolutely unacceptable.}
 And what do they say? They say ``Well, the United States,
it's a great place. The Constitution, the Declaration of
Independence, these are good documents. But, you know, they're
old. So, what we need to do today, is we need to reinvent
government. We need to reinvent the Declaration of Independence.
We need to reinvent the Constitution.''
 What the hell do we have to reinvent something that's
already been invented? Do you see any research corporations
giving out grants to reinvent the wheel? We don't need to
reinvent the wheel, we have the wheel! And it works real good.
 So, when Al Gore gets up, and he talks about ``reinventing
government,'' he's not talking about ``reinventing government.''
He's talking about {destroying} government. He may want to
reinvent some other form of government. But the form of
government that governs this nation, is something that he is
simply opposed to, because his masters are opposed to it.
 And when you hear people talking about a ``Third Way,'' the
``Third Way'' that they're talking about, is what? It's slave
labor. It's NAFTA. It's free trade.
 See, the only thing that's free about free trade, is your
labor. You work for free. It's a slightly different connotation
than ``free'' as in freedom. It's ``free'' as in no money, no
wages for you. But certainly the fruits of your labor are not
free. I guarantee you that the people who benefit from the fruits
of your labor, do intend to make great financial compensation
from them.
 Now, the problem that comes up when we discuss this, is that
what lots of people say, is people say ``Well, look. This is all
very interesting. But you know, it's too much. It's too
complicated. You're not going to get people to go with all of
this all at once. Let's just look at this thing right now.
 ``We don't want President Clinton impeached. So, let's deal
with that. Let's save the President. And then, after we save the
President, well, then we can deal with all this other stuff. But
right now, let's just make sure President Clinton doesn't get
impeached.''
 But the problem is, that if you look at it in that way, you
won't be able to stop President Clinton from being impeached,
because you will not understand the nature of the operation
against him. So that when someone comes along and says ``We don't
want to impeach President Clinton. Those of us in the Senate,
we're not like those crazy maniacs in the House of
Representatives. We're not a bunch of hotheads here, we're not a
bunch of fanatics. We're not a bunch of zealots. Everyone knows,
that in the United States Senate, we're calm. We don't run for
election every two years, we run every six years. We're not held
hostage so much to local constituencies. We respond to a broader
constituency.''
 And if you believe that, as many Americans did -- because
again, remember what happened. The day that the House voted to
impeach Clinton, the American population was {furious. People
were furious.} And they showed that they were furious. In
Washington, people came out in the streets. In polls that were
taken, within the course of one day, President Clinton, who is
the most popular president in American history, found that his
approval ratings -- everyone said his approval ratings would be
affected if there was an impeachment vote. And they were
affected. His approval ratings went up by eight points. Because
the American people were {disgusted} by the spectacle that they
had witnessed on the floor of the House.
 And one member after another, got up and said -- what?
``This is a coup.'' And the American people heard it, and they
repeated it. But that was last month. Now, people don't think
it's a coup any more. Now, people say ``Well, I don't think that
they're really going to remove President Clinton. I think that
all they're going to do, is censure him.''
 Well, do you know what that means? What is censure? Does the
Constitution allow for censure? There's nothing in the
Constitution that allows the Senate to censure the President of
the United States. If the President is guilty of impeachable
crimes, the Senate has the right, by a two-thirds majority, to
remove him from office. {If they can't do that, then they should
keep their damn mouths shut.}
 The only way that censure has any meaning, is if the
President agrees to it. So, what is the game?
 The game is: we don't have the votes to impeach you --
maybe. So what we'll get you to do, is destroy yourself. {You}
agree to a diminishing of your power. {You} agree to a
co-Presidency. {You} agree to move Al Gore more into the
forefront. We won't execute you. We will allow you to kill
yourself.
 Isn't that the choice that -- you know, that's the choice
that honorable tyrants give. Right? Barbarians just shoot you.
But an honorable victor, hands you your pistol, and allows you to
kill yourself. And that's what these guys are playing around with
right now. And the American people have got to recognize it. And
what's going on with President Clinton, is the equivalent of an
inside-outside operation.
 Because look at what he's faced with. He goes to the Senate
-- and again, the situation in the Senate is not better than it
was in the House, {it is worse.} Because in the House of
Representatives, what you did have, was you had a core of
Democrats, feisty Democrats, who were prepared to defend this
President. First of all, you had the Congressional Black Caucus,
who knows the Confederacy when they see it. They know the Klan.
Right? You don't have to come in wearing a white hood and robe,
for them to know that it's the Klan.
 And they know that you don't negotiate with the Klan. You
don't negotiate with a lynch mob. You can't negotiate with a
lynch mob. So, in the view of the Congressional Black Caucus,
they were fighting to the death. They had no choice.
 You had other good Democrats. I still remember Bob Wexler
from Florida, who shouted, at the top of his lungs: ``Wake up,
America! They are trying to impeach your President!''
 Who plays that role in the U.S. Senate? Forget about the
Republicans for a moment. There is not one Democrat -- not one in
the United States Senate, who has stood up and defended this
President. Who? Have you heard anyone? The best they have done,
is they said he should be censured. No one has defended him. He
is completely isolated.
 You have 21 -- 21 members of the Senate, who are absolutely
committed to removing Clinton from office. Twenty-one out of 100.
You did not have the same proportion in the House when this
process started. You now have a proposal that was worked out
between Trent Lott, the leader of the Republicans, and Tom
Daschle, the leader of the Democrats, a proposal which would say
``we want to limit this trial, limit the trial to 10 days.
Stipulate to all of the evidence that Ken Starr has presented.
Don't call any witnesses.''
 Would you stipulate to a trial like that? That's not a
trial! That's a lynching! {It is a lynching.} And what do they
say to the President? They say ``Well, do you want to paralyze
the government? You know, if we have a full trial, Mr. President,
well, if we have a full trial, and you call witnesses, and you
want to mess around with all this stuff, well, you know, no
business is going to get done.''
 Well, no business is going to get done, if the President is
impeached! And they say ``Oh, well, you don't want to bring out
all this sordid business by calling witnesses.'' They flooded the
Internet with pornography for three weeks! Why shouldn't that be
challenged? What is President Clinton going to present in his
defense, that is more sordid than what Ken Starr has already
paraded all over the world, completely unchallenged? How can you
ever conduct a trial, based on a prosecutor's bill of complaint
-- unchallenged?
 There was no opportunity to challenge it before the House of
Representatives. And our advice to this administration, is very
straightforward: you tell them you want to have a trial, fine.
Then we'll have a trial. And if the business of the nation is
stopped for one month, for two months, for six months, then
that's what will happen, because we will fight this trial, and we
will fight it until we crush you and your violations of the U.S.
Constitution.
 Because that is the only way that this President can secure
this Constitution and this nation. And the American people
wouldn't have any complaints if he did that.
 See, the Republicans tried to do this once before, didn't
they? When Gingrich said ``Either you agree to our budget cuts,
Mr. President, or we'll shut down the government. We'll shut down
the government, and the people will blame you.'' Well, at that
time, Clinton stood up. And he said ``I am not going to sign this
budget.''
 And Gingrich sure as hell shut down the government. But you
know, I don't think the American people blamed Clinton. Because
Clinton's got his problems right now, but he's the President.
Where's Gingrich? Where's Newt? And his revolutionaries, whatever
they called themselves. I keep thinking what I call them. I don't
want to say it, because he's got a camera on there.
 Where are they? And the situation now would be exactly the
same. But you have to see the fact that the situation is not
{better.} As far as the situation in the Senate, the situation is
worse.
 But then, what happens? And this is why I said it's an
inside-outside operation. Because, you see, one of the things
that they're holding over the President's head, is they're saying
to the President, well, if you don't make this deal with us, if
you insist on a full trial -- it's the same thing prosecutors do
when they try to force you to plea-bargain. They say ``You want a
trial? Okay, we'll give you a trial, buddy. But if you lose,
you're dead.'' Right? Isn't that what they tell you, when you
plea-bargain?
 They say ``All you've got to do, is say you're guilty. And
you say ``But I'm innocent.'' They say ``It doesn't matter,
honey. If you say you're guilty, you don't have to go to jail. Or
you only have to go to jail for a couple of months. You go to
trial, and we convict you, and you're going away for five
years.'' And most people cop a plea.
 Now, what do they say to this President? They say ``Okay.
You want a trial? You think you can beat impeachment? Maybe you
can. Maybe you will hold on to office. But when you come out, Ken
Starr is going to indict you, and he's going to indict your wife.
And anyone who ever supported you.''
 And, you know, this President is the first President since
Abraham Lincoln who is not independently wealthy. And he can
mount a legal defense as President. But as a private citizen? Ken
Starr has spent {millions, tens of millions of dollars.} Where is
Clinton going to get the money to mount a defense against that?
And don't think that that isn't on his mind.
 But then, what do his friends on the inside say? They say
``well, Mr. President, we think you don't have to worry about
that. Fight 'em. And maybe Ken Starr will come after you when
your term is over. But we can take care of that. All we've got to
do is make sure that Al Gore gets elected president after you,
and he'll pardon you.''
 And then they turn to Gore, and they say ``Right, Al?'' And
he says ``Ah-ha. Sure, I'll pardon you. I'm your loyal servant,
Bill. Whatever you want. You want to fight? I'll stand by you.''
 And that's how the game is played. But again, I want to come
back to my original point. You can't overlook the larger war,
because this is not just about a creepy guy who happens to be
vice president, and a bunch of ugly Southerners in the U.S.
Senate. It's not that easy.
 It really is something which is much more complicated. And
you have to understand this thing, from the standpoint of
history. Because the fact of the matter is, that there are
parallels in history for what we're seeing right now. And
unfortunately, the parallels are not pretty ones.
 But probably the model for this attempted parliamentary coup
against Clinton, is the coup that brought Adolf Hitler to power
in Germany in 1933. The reasons are the same. The individuals,
the financial interests involved, are the same. And the shocking
thing, and the thing which is most difficult for Americans to
understand, is that the result, as horrible as Hitler was, the
result this time, would be {worse.} And the reason why, is
because the conditions are worse.
 See, what occurred with Hitler, is something that really is
a very straightforward situation. You had the Great Depression.
In the panic of that Depression, you had financial interests
based in places like Wall Street, the City of London, and other
financial centers, determined to hold onto power. In the context
of their drive to hold on to that power, they were absolutely
determined to exact every last drop of blood they could, out of
the people who inhabit this planet.
 Treasury Secretary Mellon proposed absolutely vicious
austerity for the population of the United States. People talk
about Herbert Hoover's Depression. It wasn't Hoover's Depression.
It was Mellon's Depression. And he was going to exact the cost of
that Depression from the American people.
 Abroad, what you had was a grouping very similar to the IMF
today. The seven victorious countries in the First World War,
determined to exact every penny of war reparations from the
nation of Germany, from the First World War.
 They had already done a damned good job of dismantling
Germany's economy, and demanding that Germany pay that debt, in
the same way that they demand today, that nations kill their
populations to pay the debt. And that was the ongoing matrix from
1929 to 1930, 1931.
 But the problem was, that with the unravelling of the banks,
following the Crash of '29, they could not maintain their power.
And nations were breaking out. And you had two parallel
developments that threw these financial interests into an
absolute panic. One, was here in the United States, with Franklin
Delano Roosevelt.
 Because FDR basically told Wall Street to go screw
themselves. And he was very explicit about it. And what FDR did,
was he crafted a recovery program, which was based on the most
elementary points of American System economics. And what it
basically came down to, was looking at a bankrupt financial
system, saying the banks can't be saved, but the people can be.
And if you want to secure a nation, you put people first. And
that's what FDR did, and the nation rallied around him.
 The banks didn't like it. Wall Street didn't like it. But
the American people supported him.
 You had something else going on in Germany, something which
was far less publicized, which was that you had, after a series
of meetings of something called the Friedrich List Society. Now,
who is Friedrich List?
 Well, Friedrich List was a German economist, who was one of
the collaborators of our Founding Fathers. He was one of the
architects of what we call the American System. The List Society
was {illegal} in Germany, but they met in secret. And many of
Germany's leaders were a part of the List Society. That was how
they had been educated. They had been educated in these methods.
 And they came up with a recovery plan for Germany, which
entailed not paying the war reparations, rejecting the war
reparations, but actually rebuilding Germany from the inside, in
precisely the same way that FDR was rebuilding the United States.
And there was a Chancellor in Germany, whose name was von
Schleicher, who previously had been a military leader. He was a
general in the German Army, a very, very decorated military
leader, who was implementing this plan. He was implementing this
recovery plan.
 And the financial oligarchy, faced with the prospect of a
strong, independent U.S. economic recovery under the likes of
Roosevelt, matched with the rebirth of the German industrial
giant, was more than they could stand. And you had two operations
that were launched. One, was the parliamentary coup against von
Schleicher, in which Hitler took power.
 There's all this crap that you read in modern history books,
about the ``great popularity'' of the Nazi Party. They had just
suffered the greatest election defeats in their history. Their
popularity was going down, not up. They would never -- Hitler
would not have won an election in 1933. It was only {after} the
parliamentary coup. Because first you had the parliamentary coup.
Von Schleicher and the Lautenberg economic recovery plan, was
forced out.
 Hitler came in on Jan. 28. One month later, the Nazi Party
staged something called the Reichstag fire, where the equivalent
of the Congress was burned down. And they blamed it on the
enemies of Hitler, which wasn't true; it was the Nazis that did
it. But it gave Hitler the right to bring in emergency decrees.
And all of the rights of the German people were taken away.
 And by the time Hitler went through this process, within a
year of the consolidation of power, then there was no possibility
of opposing Hitler. And the next attempt to oppose Hitler, came
not then, not in '33 or '34, but it came 10 years later, with an
attempted coup against Hitler by the German military, which was
sabotaged by -- who? By the British.
 The British installed Hitler in power. Then they fought a
war against him. And while they were fighting that war against
him, they gave up the names of every person who was trying to
overthrow him. And that's part of the public record. That's a
well-known part of history. And any American who lost a relative
in that war, from 1944 on, should know that they have Winston
Churchill and the British to thank for it, because it was the
British who prolonged that war. It was the British who kept
Hitler in power, because they wanted him in there, because he
served their purpose.
 And the fact of the matter is that the people who financed
the Nazi Party, before Hitler was made Chancellor; the people who
financed the Nazi Party when Hitler's popularity was waning, are
the same people, the same families, the same interests, who not
only are financing this coup against Bill Clinton, but who are
the principal financial backers of Al Gore.
 And again, you have to be very clear on what Al Gore
represents. Because if you listen to President Clinton -- and you
know, sometimes, you need to listen to him, and sometimes, you
need to ignore him, because he doesn't know what the hell he's
talking about. I mean, he's a good guy, and he's got good
instincts, but he's very gullible.
 And President Clinton gets up there, and he talks about his
great Vice President Al Gore. And he says that Al Gore is a
``good guy.'' And Al Gore stands by him, and he's the best vice
president anybody could ever want, and he supports me, and
blah-blah, and this is a partnership. And Al Gore nods his head,
and says ``Yup, I'm with you, Bill. I support everything you
do.''
 And probably 90% of the time, if you were just hanging
around, watching what went on in the White House, he does look
like a real sycophant. He just seems to love everything Clinton
does. He's Clinton ``yes man.'' But then, when you get to the
core of what these two people represent.
 Well, we know what President Clinton represents. We know
that he locates himself in the tradition of Kennedy and
Roosevelt. We know that he doesn't like the British. His whole
schooling is based on an anti-British, anti-imperialist outlook.
We know that he's a great student of Roosevelt's drive to lead
the U.S. out of the Depression. We know also that he's a student
-- I wouldn't go so far as to say that he's a student of
LaRouche. But we know -- and if you don't know, I'm telling you
-- that his administration has been engaged in an open dialogue
with Mr. LaRouche, from the time he first came to Washington.
 He's not a product of Wall Street. He really does believe in
putting people before banks. And he does believe, that that
global financial system needs reform. Now, that doesn't make him
the greatest guy in the world. He's got a lot of problems. He has
a lot of weaknesses.
 But fundamentally, he's a good person. And fundamentally,
he's a great supporter of the American System. He supports
progress, he supports development. He tried to forge a new
relationship with Africa. It didn't work. He couldn't do it. He
tried to forge an alliance with the Chinese. He said that the key
relations for America in the 21st Century, would be the alliance
of the Pacific, not with the old countries of Europe.
 Why? Well, because the vast majority of the Earth's people
live in Asia. And you can't ignore that. If you talk about what's
going to make the next century, if you believe that the greatest
resource that any nation has is its people, then there is no
question that China is the richest nation on Earth, because it
has the largest population, and a new commitment to that
population.
 Well, What's Al Gore? Well, you know, people say ``Well, you
know, Al Gore, he's not so bad. Okay, I wouldn't vote for him.
Maybe he'd never win an election; Yeah, it's true, he kind of
looks like he's made out of wood, doesn't have much personality.
 ``But I mean, he's not a {bad} guy.''
 Well, he {is} a bad buy. And he's not a bad guy just because
he has a rotten personality. He's a bad guy, because in terms of
his outlook, his outlook is a poisonous outlook. And it's an
outlook which -- it doesn't matter if he says that he agrees with
the president. His basic, fundamental ideology is {opposed} to
the President's. It is no accident, that when he was in Congress
-- do you know who one of his closest friends was in Congress?
Newt Gingrich.
 Together, they formed something called the Congressional
Clearinghouse on the Future. And what were the principles of the
Congressional Clearinghouse on the Future? Well, they were Al
Gore's principles. Al Gore says what? Reinvent government. What
does he mean? He means destroy national sovereignty. He's against
the principle of the nation-state. It's not a slander. He'll tell
you that. He'll tell you that. He'll tell you that every nation
must sublimate its interests to {global} interests -- that you
don't have the right to protect your nation. That when a nation
trys to protect it's own industry, by implementing certain
protectionist measures, by imposing tariffs, or taxed on foreign
imports -- {that's bad.} That's not {free trade}. That's not
{globalization}.
 So, when he says reinvent government, he {means}, take away
the constrainsts that allow national sovereignty. It means
sublimate your national institutions to international
institutions. And he means it doubley for developing sector
countries, as he does for advanced sector countries.
 Number two, in his outlook, against something he holds, in
close similarity with Mr. Gingrich, if anybody ever vetures to
read the book that Al Gore wrote, or, I don't know if he actually
wrote it, I don't think he writes, but it was issued in his name,
when he was a Presidential candidate -- this book called {Earth in
the Balance}. What you will read in there, is the most
{unbeliveable} anti-science, anti-technology tract that you will
ever see. As a matter of fact, if you take Al Gore's book over
here, and you take, do you remember that beserk 210-page thing
that they printed in the newpapers when the Unibomber threatened
to kill a zillion people? {You read} the Unibomber's tract, and
you read Al Gore's book, and they had the same ghostwriter. {It's}
the same outlook, {complete hatered of science}, complete
{hatered} of technology. {Hatered} of development. The idea that
you would actually, you know, disturb some snails for the sake of
building a dam, to provide electric power for a rural community,
is {totally contrary} to Al Gore's rural mint-julep outlook.
 Number three: use the author of NAFTA, biggest supportor of
slave labor on the planet. Bill Clinton, when he ran for
President was against NAFTA. Al Gore was for NAFTA, before it was
called NATFA. He supported NAFTA when he was in the Congress, he
supported NAFTA when he was in the Senate, and when he ran for
President, he ran on a pro-NAFTA plank. He {supports} slave
labor. It is the very basis of his reinventing govenment
{principle}. And finally, like his predecessor, as vice President
Georger Bush, and he hopes that he will follow in George's
footsteps. He has a {vicious} population control outlook. And one
of the reasons {why}, he and President Clinton cannot come to
agreement, on Asia policy, or Africa policy, is that the basic
principle of Gore's outlook toward Africa and Asia, is population
reduction, population control. {That is his outlook}, so
{please}, {do not tell me} that he's really not such a bad guy.
Maybe not the greatest personality in the world, not the greatest
speaker, but {not} a bad person. {What else could he do?} {You
take} the poison that this guy puts out, and you combine it with
his unbelievable personal ambition, and what you come up with is
a national security threat. Both domestically, and
internationally. Everything that he represents, is not only
against the view that this President have, but it is absolutely
against the vital interest of the United States.
 And if you go back to the reasons why they are attacking
this Presdent, again you have got to understand, that this is a
war, it's not a domestic war, it's a global war. On the one side,
you have the principles on which the Declaration of Independence,
on which the U.S. Constitution and on which the form of goverment
that we enjoy are based. With all of its flaws, it's the best
system available right now. What you have on the other side, is
the continuing directly contrary free-trade outlook. And its the
outlook of this nations most ancient and continuing enemy -- the
British Monarchy. And in this country the British Monarchy is
represented by their Wall Street interests. And that is what's
behind this coup on the President. And people have got to get it
straight, because we are, right now, whether you like it or not,
whether you're a willing army or not, {we} are locked in a mortal
conflict over this question. If you're a willing army, we can
defeat our enemies. If you are not a willing army, then this
nation does not have a chance. And that is really what it comes
down to, but you have to understand, that these are two
axiomatically opposed forces. And what's happening right now,
thaty the fight {is} being excelorated by the instability in
relations among nations that provoked by the accelorating
financial crisis -- because look, you {just have to face the
facts}, what we've seen, and we've seen this since 1987, you have
a collapse in financial stability, it was kicked off in 1971 with
the floating exchange rates, but it's gotten progressively worse,
at the same time you've had a contraction of real economic
output, and that has gotten worse, and as this process has
proceeded, what you also have, it a process of disintigration
{among people}, where as unempolyment grows, as pysical output
decreases, as people's standard of living is driven down, you
have an inherent distrust of government, you have cynicism, you
have people who say, {I don't give a damn}  about what goes on in
Washington, which is exactly what the enemy wants, and we're in a
phase were that kind of situation is intensifying. And look, I'll
tell you something, this mixture, is an explosive political
mixture. It's this same mixture that preceeded Hitler's rise to
power.
 But, when I said earlier, that if this thing happens now it
will be worse -- let me explain to you the one added ingredient,
that you didn't have in the 1930s, because what you didn't have
in the 1930s, but which you do have now, is you have a lunacy,
that has never been witnessed in the world before. You have a
whole class of people, not the bankers, not the financiers, but
what you have are these financial parasites.
 I was in New York last week, you get to see them up close,
they're these {hideous} young financial zealots, who masterbate
with their little hand-held electronic calculators. Did anyone
ever see the movie Wall Street? Beware of anybody who has a shirt
which is stripped, but with a white collar. (laughs) It's their
uniform, and they're there, with their little calculators.
{Hysterically}, trading derivatives, and calculating their mutual
funds.
 They have no power, but they also have no skills. They have
build careers on managing mutual funds, on dealing with paper, on
trading derivatives. And as this system starts to blow apart,
they are like fear-maddened rats. And there is nothing worse that
a herd of rats driven by fear. If you frighten a group of rats,
you frighten a group of any other kind of animal they'll turn
around and run, you frighten a group of rats, what will they do?
Attack. They're crazy. Absolutely crazy. This new class, that
didn't exist in the 1930s, this is what made the Gingrich
revolution. You want to see one of them up close?, Take a good
look at Bobby Erlich. Take a good look at him. Looks like a nice
guy. Didn't seem so bad when he was in the state legislature,
watch him in the hall of Congress, he is a vicious, murderous
bastard. Somebody should put a pair of handcuffs on that guy. He
{is a killer}. Why? Because if Clinton continutes to proceed with
his policies, then the base of power, that supports people like
Bobby Erlich is striped away, and he will {kill} to hold on to
that base of power. And you have to understand, the nature of
these individuals. They don't have to be jeering, ugly
Mississippians like Trent Lott. Those guys are easy to recognize.
You know somebody comes in whereing a white sheet, you say, you
can't fool me, he's a member of the Klan -- good work Sherlock. But
those are not the guys, those guys are dangerous, I mean you see
a guy with a white robe, and a rope, you know your better off,
either shooting him or going someplace else, but it's the guy
who's not wearing the white robe, who sometimes is even more
dangerous. And you have to learn to recognize people, not only by
the outward appearance, but by what they believe in. What
policies they support, what they act on.
 And again, if you go back, to the 1930s, if you go back to
the policies that were imployed by Roosevelt, by what they were
attempting to do in Germany, what you can see, is that, okay, we
have a terrible financial crisis, right now, it's worse than what
we face in '29, without question, but in principle, it still is
the case, by applying American System policies, the crisis could
be solved.
 Understand what I'm saying -- not that the system can be
saved, the financial system can't be saved; it's hoplessly
bankrupt, but {so what}?, you can have a new financial system.
Bank goes bankrupt, fine, put it through bankruptcy, form a new
bank, on sounder principles. That's what a nation has the ability
to do. It's what a nation uniquly has the ability to do. That's
what Lincoln did. It's what Roosevelt did. It's the direction
that John Kennedy was moving in. And obviously the current fear
of the finacial oligarchy is that it is precisely what Bill
Clinton will do.
 When Bill Clinton gets up, and starts talking about a new
fincancial architecture, when Bill Clinton goes to Korea, and
says to the Korean people, what has happened here it not your
fault, but it's the fault of trillions of dollars flowing in and
out of financial markets. Not your fault. Something that comes
from outside, something that has to be regulated, something that
has to be brought in line. The financial oligarchy goes {crazy}.
 Now, you might sit there and say, well gee, if in fact it's
true, that by applying these policies, you could resolve this
crisis, why wouldn't they want to do it? If these policies would
work, if the kind of policies that Roosevelt implemented, if the
kind of policies that Mr. LaRouche is proposing, if they would
work, then why not go with them? Well, because in fact, they've
been implemented repeatedly, both this country and elsewhere, in
other countries that have modeled themselves on the American
System. Well, then why object? Well, the answer is elemetary, my
dear citizen. Because the fact of the matter is, that these kinds
of Ammercian System methods, well they work all right, and they
save the institutions of governement all right, and they do a
damn good job of protecting you, but they do have a side effect:
and that side effect is they cut down to size the power of the
financiers. It diminishes the power of financial centers, like
London, and Wall Street and Tokyo. And what we've seen repeatedly
in history, is rather than allow that power to be dimished, these
guys have shown that they would prefer to destroy the world -- and
they came damn close when they put in Hitler
 But the fact is that if they are allowed to do it now, they
will succeed, and therefore, when we talk about stoppint the
impeachment of Bill Clinton, and when we talk about how Al Gore,
and the installation of Al Gore, as President, or as
co-President, would be the parallel to the parilamentary coup
that installed Hitler, only with worse results. You have to
understand it in this broader context, and you have to understand
that the differences between the two sides, these are
irreconcilable differences. They're not going to be settled by
negotiation. Not on the big scale, and not on the small scale.
There are two diametrically opposed outlooks, they're two
diametrically opposed views of man. The American System believes
in man created in the image of God. The Constitution is based on
it. All principles of good govnerment are based on it. The
British system {does not} belive in that. There is no such thing
as a citizen in the British Commonwealth. Ask anyone who's a
member of the British Commonwealth. Rebecca's not a citizen,
she's a {subject.} That's the term that's used. They're
considered subjects. And power doesn't come by the fruits of your
own labor, it's inherited. It's a different outlook, the two
can't live together. They have different {goals}. And the two
goals are constantly banging away at each other. And we've
reached a point now, it's not a terrible moment in history, it's
a wonderful opportunity, because the fact of the matter is that
for years, this enemy within the United States has been able to
function, how? Well, they functioned in secret, they functioned
behind the scenes, they don't call themselves the Tory Party,
they don't say we don't believe in the American system, but they
do their dirty work behind the scenes. What's happened now,
because of the nature of this crisis, is these guys are way out
in the open. They're not operating in secret anymore. They're way
out there in public, in the light of day. And what you saw, when
this operation in the House of Representatives, you got the first
taste of what the American population thought when they saw these
guys in full daylight. And it was {revulsion}. And that's good.
 Because we're now at a point where they can finally be
defeated. Because this fight has been going on from the moment
this nation was founded. And it's high time that they were
defeated. Now only here, but you see if they're defeated here,
then what hope does any other country on this planet have, what
hope does Africa have, or actually going into the 21st century?
as full partners with other nations of the world. What hope do
the people in the Middle East have of ever living without the
constant threat of war looming over their heads? What hope do the
people in Eastern Europe, who fought all these years against
Communism, who finally overthrew the yoke of Communism, only to
find that the freedom of capitalism brought them a worse life
than they had before?
 The fight has to be won in the United States. And it has to
be won by you. See, what all the American people, sure Clinton
has the highest popularity, and the American people {hope to high
heaven} that this guy fights to the bitter end, but he's not
going to fight, unless you fight. You want him to fight to the
bitter end in the Senate? Well fine, what are you going to do?
He's completely isolated, he has no support, there is no one in
the Senate who will speak out for him.
 So, what we have to determine, is that while it's
true that there'll be a trial in the Senate, that the fight
doesn't get determined in the Senate, the fight gets determined
outside the Senate. In a different court, in a court where there
actually is some law, and don't get fixated on what goes on in
the Senate. I go {crazy}, I hear people say, but they can't do
that, why that's illegal, why that's unconstitutional, well {what
the hell is the matter with you}, where have you been? You think
they care? They make up the rules as they go along, this is a
{lynchmob}. They don't give a damn about what are the rules.
We'll all play by the rules, this is not a gentlemen's agreement.
And the fact of the matter is, the question of fighting to the
death, Clinton's going to have to fight, whether he wants to or
not. Because they do {not} make deals. Every deal they've up to
now, they've broken. Can you picture -- let's look at it this way,
let's forget about Clinton and the United States Senate, you're
a young black man in Mississippi, you've been accused of raping a
white woman. You didn't do it, but it doesn't matter, you've been
accused, and there is a lynch mob coming after you, they're
wearing white robes, and they've all got ropes. You want to
negotiate? You want to make a deal? What are you going to tell
them? Your going to say, look, boys, you want me to admit I did
it, will that make you feel better? If I admit it, will you leave
me alone? Do you think they will?  I don't think so. Okay, how
about this: I'll leave the state; don't touch me, I'll leave,
I'll never come back, then we'll just forget the whole thing
happened. I don't think so. It doesn't matter what you do, if
you're that young black fellow, you can beg, you can confess, you
can run, {it does not matter}, they are going to kill you.
Therefore, you should fight. And that's what Clinton is faced
with, and that's what you're faced with. People would prefer not
to fight. People would prefer to find some way to settle this.
{There is not way to settle this}, {it is a nasty ugly bitter
fight}. We didn't chose it, but that's the way it is. And if you
have the idea that maybe we can just deal with this, and then
everything will go back to normal -- forget it.
 And let me remind you of something, Abraham Lincoln fought
the Civil War, and he won, and they killed him. You have to win a
total victory. And right now, the only institution, that's
prepared to do that is the LaRouche movement. And that's okay,
because we can be the catalyst for it, we can be the catalyst for
mobilizing citizens, and if people respont, other institutions
will kick in. It happened when we formed Americans to Save the
Presidency. We saw it happen repeatedly, and it will happen now.
But it really does mean, that all of you, people who just, you
know, you're just, look people are just kind of ordinary
citizens, you're trying to make a life for yourselves, your tring
to make a life for your family, and sure you're concened about
your country, but the fact is, that as in any war, you're
drafted. And you have to turn yourselves into an army. I'm not
suggesting you go out and shoot the first Republican you see
(laughter); it won't work. You have to fight differently, and we
have all the ammunition. We gathered up the arsenal, people see
it on the table, we did a first run, which was released today, of
about a 1/4 million leaflets -- which is about all we can get out
in a few days. If we get out a 1/4 million leaflets in a couple
of days, if we have to do another 1/4 million, we'll do that, we
didn't want to print them all at once, because the way that we
see it, the way the situation is moving now, we might want to say
something different a couple of days from now than you're saying
today.
 But, we have the day of action, tomorrow, we have the
newspapers with Mr. LaRouche's article in it, on Gore and Hitler,
which draws out the parallel of this parliamentary coup that took
place in Germany, to now, it makes clear to people, the danger of
a Gore Presidency. It establishes it as an unacceptable option,
and see the one thing that you got to understand in this war, is
that right now, the enemy is operating on this Gore option. Get
Clinton out, bring Gore in. Not for a long time, Gore is a
transitional figure. He's like a self destruct missle. You just
kind of fire him, it's true with any missle, when it hits, by
virtue of its nature, it destroys itself. But the idea is, bring
Gore in there, let him finish term, then let him be the
Democratic nominee against George Bush Jr.--who is their actual
candidate, who is their actual candidate. He's the person who they
rely on to really implement these policies. But Gore probably has
more support as a Democratic nominee from Republicans than anyone
else. They {want} him as a Democratic nominee, and they can
guarantee that he'll be the Democratic nominee by making him the
President, or the co-President. But if we destroy Gore as an
option, they've got to regroup. They don't have another option.
Right, because their idea is that the only way the American
people will for this, is if they -- and this has been said
explicitly to groups that have gone to Washington, when people
went to see, this guy from Louisiana, who was supposed to be
speaker of the House, Mr. Livingston, before they opened his
closet, and by the way, that wasn't done by Decmocrats, that was
done by Republicans, the Republicans wanted him out, because he
wasn't enough of a zealot. But when a women's group went to see
Mr. Livingston, Mr. Livingston said, look, ladies, you're very
upset, I understand you like Clinton, but look, why don't you go
see Vice President Gore, he's really a very nice guy, you'll like
him. And that's the card that they're playing. They know the
American people are upset about the attack on Clinton, but they
figure they can soften the blow, if they convince the American
people that Al Gore will -- he's just like Clinton. But, {he's
not}. And people have to be very clear on that. So, I want
people, before they leave here tonight, if they have questions,
if you're not sure, get your questions answered. But, then make
sure that you leave her ready to fight. Take leaflets. Take the
newspaper, make sure you yourselves buy a copy of that {EIR}
special report, because you need in-depth understanding if
you're going to organize other people, if you're going to bring
other people on board, you need to know a little big more than
just what it says on one side of a leaflet. There's no good
giving people advanced weapons, if you don't know how to shoot
them, and you have to look at these things as kind of the
instruction manuals on how to use your weapons most effectively.
 But, I really want to end, where I started. Which is that
you {please}, if it's not {clear} to you that there is an ongoing
coup, to overthrow the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton,
if it is not clear to you, that we face a graver danger than we
have at any time since the founding of this nation, then let's
make sure that it is clear before you leave here, so you're
prepared to do what we have to do. So, that's all that I have to
say.

 We are currently entering into one of the most
turbulent and dangerous periods in world history. Without
{EIR,} you will simply not know what is really going on.
The success of the LaRouche movement, and the worldwide
influence of Lyndon LaRouche personally, are essential,
if mankind is to find a way out of this crisis.
 The forecasts and analyses published in this
magazine, over the past 24 years, represent the
most consistently effective economic forecasting in modern
history. Why is this so? How can we account for the
superiority of LaRouche's economic forecasting, over the
babblings of other economists and government officials?
 ``Behind our qualitative advantage over this
publication's putative rivals,'' LaRouche wrote in {EIR}
of Jan. 2, 1998, ``there was no `crystal ball,' no
statistical pseudo-science, but only superior science:
that of Johannes Kepler, Gottfried Leibniz, Carl Gauss,
and Bernhard Riemann, most notably.''
 It is just not a matter of pride in {EIR'}s
outstanding accomplishments, LaRouche continued: ``This is
the crucial issue upon which the survival of the U.S.A.,
and of this global civilization now depend.'' If
governments and other relevant institutions fail to heed
LaRouche's warnings, and to adopt the policies he
advocates, then we are heading for a new Dark Age.
 Escalate the fight. Help bring others on board.
Redouble your own efforts to achieve victory against the
British-led financier oligarchy. Your future, and that of
your posterity, depends upon it.

Call 8883473258
 Sincerely yours,



 Susan Welsh
 Associate Editor

********** NEW **********

LaRouche publications now has a web site: http://www.larouchepub.com .
For further information send Email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .  On
the web site you can find information about how to order various
publications, the Table of Contents of recent Executive Intelligence
Reviews, lots of articles by LaRouche and much more.  You can also
hear the real audio version of this program as well as some past
issues.

EIR Talks can be heard at 5:00 PM Saturdays Eastern Daylight time on the
following satellite: Galaxy 7 (G-7), Transponder 14, 91 Degrees West,
7.56 Audio.

     ``EIR Talks'' also airs worldwide on shortwave radio on
Sundays starting at 5:00 PM  Eastern Daylight Time (2100 UTC) on WWCR,
on frequency of 5.070 MHz.

     The full-hour program includes commercials for The New
Federalist, Executive Intelligence Review, and other periodicals
and books. Radio stations which pull the program down from
satellite have the option of using the included commercials and
other material that rounds out the hour or substituting their
own.
For further information, contact Frank Bell at 703-777-9451.

EIR Talks can be sent to you each week via Email.  To receive this
Email you must subscribe to the LaRouche mailing list.  To do this,
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a line (not the subject
line) saying
 subscribe lar-lst

         John Covici
          [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Copyright © 1995-99 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conditions of use  ·  Site privacy statement reviewed by TRUSTe

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om