Time: Tue Sep 30 16:41:09 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA06656;
	Tue, 30 Sep 1997 16:37:30 -0700 (MST)
	by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA16919;
	Tue, 30 Sep 1997 16:13:44 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 16:13:16 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: EIR Talks: banksters in trouble (fwd)

>covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>>         ``{EIR} Talks'' interviews Lyndon LaRouche.
>>         September 23, 1997 Interviewer: Mel Klenetsky
>>         [Note that { indicates begin emphasis, and } indicates end
>> emphasis]
>>         ``EIR Talks'' airs each {Saturday} on satellite at 4 PM
>> Eastern, on G-7, Transponder 14, 91 Degrees West, and each
>> {Sunday} on shortwave station WWCR, at 5 PM Eastern, 2100 UTC, at
>> frequency 5.070 megahertz. For further details call Frank Bell,
>> 703-777-9451, ext. 252.
>>         Welcome to EIR Talks. I'm Mel Klenetsky. We're on the line
>> with Lyndon LaRouche from Virginia. Mr. LaRouche, I trust you are
>> doing well today.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Frisky, I would say.
>>         EIR: That's good. I understand that you did not make it to
>> Mexico, finally. Instead, your speech was delivered by a
>> colleague. Tell us what happened.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, it has some interesting
>> ramifications. First of all, there was an attempt to prevent me
>> from going in the first place. And it came from an official in
>> the Mexican administrative apparatus, whose pedigree is that of
>> connections to former President George Bush, from the Salinas,
>> the President Salinas period. Then this negation, or
>> nullification of my invitation by the Mexican government was
>> overridden by an order from the office of the President of
>> Mexico, and therefore the visa approval was released for my
>> appearing to participate in these events. Then, at the last
>> minute, the same fellow who had sabotaged the invitation in the
>> first instance -- had been overruled by the President's office
>> (the President, himself, essentially) -- intervened at the last
>> minute, before a long weekend, vacation weekend, which was the
>> national holiday that features the "Grito" -- the address by the
>> President, which is an official holiday, and everybody's going to
>> be absent -- he pulled a switch, and cancelled the federal
>> security supervision of my trip, and since I have a lot of
>> enemies loose in the drug world, in that part of the world and
>> elsewhere, that just nullified the trip.
>>         What happened, of course, is that there were events. The
>> address which I had prepared to deliver -- I generally don't
>> present written addresses. I think it bores audiences to have
>> people read {text} to them. If you don't know your subject, and
>> require a text, you're not well-prepared. So, but anyway, the
>> prepared text was read by a friend of mine, who was there, then
>> later in the same period, the first event, I had a
>> question-and-answer period with 200 of the participants there,
>> and then had a subsequent event addressing a bunch of celebrities
>> in Mexico City by telephone. And, I'll be doing the same again.
>>         But the context of this is interesting, because the issue of
>> course is the fact that the IMF -- in Mexico, the banking system
>> is controlled, the majority of it is controlled by British
>> financial interests, not U.S. -- and the IMF has a virtual
>> dictatorship, political dictatorship over Mexico, a little less
>> rough, perhaps, than what it has over the Russian government, but
>> nonetheless, it's there.
>>         And, this occurred in the same context that the Asia Wall
>> Street Journal did a story on the Prime Minister of Malaysia's
>> attack on this predator, George Soros, who is a key bird-dog for
>> the British establishment, cooperating through Caribbean and
>> other drug-money laundering centers, attacking various countries,
>> which he's been doing -- he's been involved in attacks on
>> Thailand, other countries, and also in the attempted raid, which
>> didn't work, on Hongkong. So, Mahathir attacked -- publicly
>> attacked -- George Soros. So, Soros's friends replied, saying
>> that these attacks on him by Mahathir were the result of my
>> influence in that part of the world, and they made reference to a
>> widely-circulated report, circulated by EIR, which is
>> documentation, entitled, "Soros, the Golem," which references the
>> fact that Soros, himself, has said {publicly} in autobiographical
>> public statements, in his own voice, that during the World War
>> II, he as a person of Jewish provenance, disguised his Jewish
>> ancestry, and worked for the Nazis in targetting the looting of
>> Hungarian Jewish victims of Nazism. Not only did he do that as an
>> adolescent, but in recent years, he has claimed that the
>> techniques that he learned, and the practices he learned, the
>> principles of economics he learned from doing that are the
>> principles he uses today. And, therefore, since he still claims
>> to have Jewish provenance, the only term for him is -- the
>> appropriate term -- is Golem, so, Soros the Golem.
>>         But the report is accurate, it's documented, it's shall we
>> say, it's asbestos, fireproof against suits because it is that,
>> and so Soros screamed, but the Wall Street Journal picked it up,
>> and much of the European press picked it up. So there is an open
>> warfare against me, in person, around the world, in which the
>> Mexico events are one expression of that, and the Wall Street
>> Journal reporting on another expression of that, which is then
>> picked up of course by a number of the European press earlier
>> this week. So, I am, at this point, a very hot item in the
>> international circuit, because of my forecasts of what's going on
>> with this monetary process -- this international financial crisis
>> -- has been thoroughly vindicated, and anyone who criticized, or
>> opposed my estimates on the forecasting on the nature of the
>> situation now looks pretty silly; so right now I've got a little
>> clout.
>>         [commercial break]
>>         EIR: Mr. LaRouche, the IMF conference which is now taking
>> place in Hongkong has many discussions, and I'm sure President
>> Mahathir's efforts against George Soros, his war on speculators,
>> must be quite a bit of a discussion-piece there as well. I would
>> like your thoughts about what's going on at this conference, at
>> this time.
>>                  - No Way Out for the Banks -
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, I was very much in the foreground in
>> that conference, even though I wasn't there, as a continuation of
>> the Wall Street Journal Asia and Europe editions -- these were on
>> the Internet, as well, on the Wall Street Journal page, but the
>> attacks on me became more prominent in the context of this
>> meeting in Hongkong.
>>         A little background has to be understood: That unlike the
>> Mexico case, in which the IMF moved in directly and got the
>> United States to accept an IMF package for bailout of Mexico, in
>> the case of the Southeast Asia crisis, the nations of Southeast
>> Asia, moved in to rally joint support of one another against the
>> IMF and George Soros, in this crisis. In a reflection of that,
>> Japan has proposed a fund, the creation of a fund, to deal with
>> and block some of these raids on these countries. Behind this, is
>> a suspicion, a very strong suspicion on the part of the IMF,
>> World Bank, and Soros and company, that the Chinese government is
>> also, in some way, supporting and encouraging at least, this
>> unity of Southeast Asian nations in resistance against the IMF,
>> World Bank, Soros, and so forth. Now, in this process, some mean
>> looks have been taken at me.
>>         First of all, Soros went on the air, on BBC, and elsewhere
>> to publicly attack Mahathir, and to threaten him. This was
>> reflected in the European press. There were several European
>> press earlier this week, attacking me, by name, as being the
>> person that Soros and company were after. In the middle of this,
>> there was a fake report [on the Internet], that is, faked,
>> attributed to EIR, which apparently originated with somebody in
>> the Isle of Man, in Britain, who put a fake report, parodying the
>> Soros report, and attributed it to EIR -- we're tracking that
>> particular piece of fraud down -- obviously done by somebody with
>> connections to British Intelligence.
>>         But, that's the nature of the situation, and people should
>> understand, there is generally now a political, as well as a
>> financial unravelling of the international financial system, at a
>> time when we're coming up to the September 30 point, at which the
>> Federal Reserve System, and some others are going to have to make
>> a hard decision as to what they're going to do in the face of
>> this mounting crisis. I should explain that the cause of the
>> crisis in Southeast Asia is partly the raiding being done by
>> pirates such as Soros and company. But, the general situation is
>> not peculiar to the conditions of Southeast Asia. It's global.
>> Presently, in order to maintain the financial structures -- the
>> bubble that exists presently -- a certain amount of money is
>> required in circulation. The amount of money circulating in the
>> international system now, is falling short, of what is considered
>> an adequate margin to support these financial structures. At the
>> same time, these pressures which tend to be inflationary, under
>> these conditions, are impelling some central bankers to think
>> about raising interest rates, putting in what's called "fiscal
>> austerity." Now putting fiscal austerity in the works, under
>> conditions of a bubble like the present, is like throwing a
>> lighted match down to a cellar which is full of hot gasoline, and
>> who knows what's going to happen in October. There's no way out
>> for these bankers. If they do raise interest rates,
>> significantly, and more than one nation does it, then the whole
>> system can blow out, or at least go through a major shock. If
>> they don't raise interest rates, then their credibility is called
>> into question, which has an effect quite similar, but in a
>> different way, to raising the interest rates. So, everybody is
>> looking for a big shock in October. Those fears may be somewhat
>> exaggerated, but something is going to happen, and we're in an
>> ongoing process, a downward spiral of disintegration of the
>> entire world's international monetary system.
>>         Meanwhile, in Hongkong, at the IMF, and Britain's own World
>> Bank organization (Wolfensohn is one of the British aristocracy
>> these days), are acting in a way which I would say was like the
>> studies which Thomas More did of the fall of Richard III of
>> England, like the Wars of the Roses. These guys don't know what
>> they're doing. They're all acting like Hamlets, and they are
>> screaming. They're threatening. They're menacing. But, they don't
>> know what they're doing. The whole situation is under control, as
>> far as they're concerned.
>>         EIR: Former Secretary of State Caspar Weinberger called for
>> expansion of free trade, and expansion of NATO, and Weinberger
>> said that the United States is paying far too much attention to
>> the demands of Russia, on NATO expansion. He was obviously
>> critical of Clinton.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: It's {SIR} Caspar Weinberger, who received
>> his knighthood from Her Majesty Elizabeth ...
>>         [commercial break]
>>         EIR: Nr. LaRouche, we just began to discuss Sir Caspar
>> Weinberger, and his comments about free trade and NATO, expanding
>> NATO.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, Cap, remember back in 1982, Lord
>> Carrington, who was then the British Foreign Secretary, in the
>> Thatcher government, set up the Argentine government, to lure
>> them into a war by a "bait-and-switch" operation. This was helped
>> by Alexander Haig, who was originally the U.S. Secretary of State
>> in that period, but which was set up largely by Carrington,
>> himself. So what they did, is they promised Argentina they would
>> be getting back the Malvinas Islands, which the British call the
>> Falklands -- they never intended to do so, but they led the
>> Argentines on.
>>         The United States had asked the Argentines with military
>> special forces in Central America in the kind of operation which
>> Ollie North became featured in later, and presumably, Argentina
>> was going to get the Malvinas Islands from the United States,
>> from Britain, by way of United States help, as a part payment for
>> services which the Argentine military would provide to the U.S.
>> government in Central America.
>>         Well, then at the point that everything was about to be
>> signed, in early 1982, Carrington switched. Broke off the
>> discussions. At that point, the United States government,
>> including Secretary of State Haig, indicated to Argentina that
>> the U.S. government would commit itself under the Rio Treaty, and
>> so forth, etc., etc., which is the available law there, to
>> guarantee the return of the Malvinas Islands to Argentina. Under
>> this persuasion and encouragement, Argentina sent troops to
>> occupy these islands, peacefully, presuming that the United
>> States was backing this under the Rio Treaty, which would give
>> the United States the authority to back Argentina in doing just
>> that. And what Alexander Haig said was tantamount to saying, go
>> ahead and occupy the Islands; we will back you on it.
>>         Now when that was done, a lot of Americans wanted to obey
>> the law, that is, the treaty law, the treaty being of course the
>> Monroe Doctrine, and the Rio Treaty, and things which are
>> appended to that, from the Franklin Roosevelt period. But there
>> was no one in the U.S. government who was more fanatically
>> pro-British, than Cap Weinberger. {Cap Weinberger couldn't give
>> the British enough assistance in conducting a war against
>> Argentina.} U.S. Intelligence services working inside Argentina
>> betrayed the Argentine trust, and turned over Argentine military
>> secrets to the British, to assist the British in running
>> operations, and actually engaged in the sabotage of some
>> equipment, military equipment of Argentina, in order to give the
>> Malvinas back to the British.
>>         For that kind of service, and similar services later on, Cap
>> Weinberger was given a knighthood, which is given only {for
>> outstanding services to the British Empire.} So therefore, one
>> must question Cap Weinberger's patriotism. His attitude on these
>> questions, both of free trade, and the Russian question, that is,
>> the NATO and Russian question, are totally contrary to U.S.
>> interest, and U.S. policy. Free trade is {not} our interest. The
>> free trade system is about to {die}. And pushing it, simply makes
>> things worse. That is, out of this financial crisis, there is no
>> possibility of maintaining what Cap Weinberger considers the
>> free-trade system. But he's a total British subject in his mind,
>> in his own mind, working for Forbes.
>>         On the Russian issue, he has the French-British line on
>> NATO, not the U.S. policy -- the U.S. policy is that Russia
>> should become an integral part of Europe, and that the process
>> should be {facilitated}. The French and British line is that
>> there should be -- we should recreate a kind of cold-war conflict
>> between Western Europe and Russia, which is not U.S. policy, but
>> it's British policy and it's French policy. So Cap Weinberger,
>> once again, while pretending to be a hard-nosed patriot, is
>> something quite different.
>>         EIR: Let me just begin with this question, and maybe you can
>> pick up on it after the break. Last weekend, over 1 million
>> rallied in Italy, in Milan and Venice, against free trade. And in
>> the past, we have spoken of the political resistance in Europe to
>> the protracted austerity demanded by the Maastricht Accords. So
>> perhaps, when we come back, we can pick up on this question.
>>         [commercial break]
>>         EIR: Mr. LaRouche, the Maastricht Accords is a particular
>> item that you and I have been discussing over the past couple of
>> months, and it caused great political resistance, the latest of
>> which is a 1 million rally in Milan and Venice against free
>> trade. Tell us what's going on there.
>>          - Lega Nord's Bossi: The "Nabucco" of Italy -
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, it's more than free trade. You have a
>> fellow called Bossi there, who is shall we say, the prospective
>> "Nabucco" of a reenactment of "Nabucco," the famous opera by
>> Verdi. As a matter of fact, among the 1 million who were rallying
>> in Milan, Milano, who were, who were going from the cathedral,
>> the famous Duomo there, which is just next door to the square
>> where the famous [La Scala] Opera House is, and then you had
>> about a million there, and several hundred thousand, also in
>> Venice, whose target was not only free trade, but also Bossi.
>>         Now Bossi is sort of a cheap, immitation Mussolini, and some
>> of the people got the theme, and were singing, "Va Pensiero,"
>> which is the famous song of the Hebrew slaves, who were
>> protesting against the oppression of Nabucco.
>>         So there are two aspects of this: There's a patriotic
>> movement in Italy, which is based upon, in part, the traditional
>> institutions, including the trade union institutions, which is
>> asserting the unity of Italy against its dismemberment, against
>> people like this "Padania"-freak, Bossi. That was a key part of
>> it, so it can not be looked at simply as a free-trade issue. It's
>> also against the dismemberment of the Italian state. But it is
>> part of a general revolt in Italy, in Germany, and elsewhere
>> against the kinds of agreements, which the IMF agreements, the
>> free-trade agreements, the WTO agreements -- what globalization
>> generally means, as in Germany, where it is against Maastricht
>> specifically. This is a turning point.
>>         We're now in a period of history in which all the things
>> that I think that Al Gore thinks are true, are no longer true.
>> You can no longer shape policy, or a successful election policy
>> by calling in the pollsters to find out what the trend-lines are
>> in popular opinion, as the reaction to the murder of Princess
>> Diana shows: That not only in England, with their mass revolt,
>> revulsion -- more than just a revolt -- against the British royal
>> family, but we had similar reactions throughout the United
>> States. A great number of Americans, who normally would be very
>> cautious about saying anything against the British royal family
>> -- it's almost like inciting insulting Hollywood or something,
>> you know -- but many Americans became outspoken against the
>> British royal family.
>>         We're in a period where very rapid and sudden, and
>> revolutionary changes in popular opinion, or at least manifest
>> popular opinion, would erupt to the surface. One person, a
>> psychologist, mass psychologist in Europe, described this in
>> terms I would agree with. That over the past 31 years, in the
>> aftermath of the things such as the Missile Crisis of 1962, and
>> the Kennedy assassination, the playing of the Vietnam War on your
>> nightly television blood-and-gore station, the majority of
>> people, especially the so-called Baby Boomer generation, and its
>> complements in other parts of the world, went into a retreat,
>> into {unreality}. For 31 years, the ideas which have become
>> prevalent within the population, or at least politically
>> acceptable, politically correct, have reflected unreality, a
>> flight into the "me" generation, the unreal generation. Now,
>> suddenly, with things like the assassination of Diana, which
>> typifies the whole pattern, {reality has struck!} And, it's like
>> the day, Sunday, December 7, 1941, when the news of the bombing
>> of Pearl Harbor occurred, and there was a sudden shock of
>> reality, coming out of the '20s and '30s -- suddenly the American
>> people were {shocked into reality} -- and that's happening now.
>>         What you're seeing in Italy, with a 1 million trade union
>> demonstration in Milano, echoed by a several hundred thousand
>> demonstration in Venice, indicates that the reality shock is
>> taking over, and the politicians who think that past and recent
>> trend-lines can guide politics, are going to find themselves like
>> Robespierre and Saint-Just at the beginning of July 1794. The
>> bloody dictators, Robespierre and Saint-Just were convinced they
>> had total control over France. A couple of weeks later, their
>> heads were chopped off in the guillotine! So much for prevailing,
>> mainstream opinion, or recent trends. So much for the pollsters.
>>     - The Key Strategic Issue: Clinton-Jiang Zemin Summit -
>>         EIR: At the beginning of November, there will be a summit
>> meeting, between Russia and Japan's Prime Ministers, Yeltsin and
>> Hashimoto. What do you think are the important issues that you
>> would hope would be discussed at that time?
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, first of all, this is one of those
>> cases where you have to go to analysis situs. You can not try to
>> deductively interpret or analyze the relationships between Japan
>> and Russia to make any sense out of this summit. Nor can you look
>> at the Yeltsin government, the presidency in Russia, and perhaps
>> a little more so, the Hashimoto administration in Japan, is of
>> more importance. But here's the problem: The key issue, the key
>> strategic issue, apart from the financial crisis, which is
>> defining the world situation today is the upcoming summit meeting
>> between President Bill Clinton and President Jiang Zemin of
>> China.
>>         Now, the Republicans and other idiots, want to slap many
>> conditionalities on the President's discussion with the President
>> of China. That, I would hope, will not function. Most of these
>> issues are garbage issues. They're taken out of a hat someplace,
>> by somebody who has no knowledge of the reality of the situation.
>> To the extent that there's any substance to these issues, the
>> Chinese, and we hope President Clinton, himself, will push these
>> things to one side. Human rights questions, and so forth, yes,
>> the Chinese themselves are determined to improve the human rights
>> conditions inside China. So there's no real quarrel between the
>> United States and China on human rights issues. Only a bunch of
>> nutty Republicans who are mostly working for the British
>> Intelligence service, such as Christian Solidarity International,
>> which is a front for British Intelligence. But there is a
>> substance, a problem here which there are certain bad Republicans
>> and others who are trying to play up, and that is the idea that
>> there must be a conflict between Russia and China, and between
>> Japan and China.
>>         Now, people who understand Japan know that there is no
>> intrinsic interest of Japan, which puts it in conflict with
>> China. Japan's vital interest is to have China develop and Japan
>> be a partner, as it already is, in fostering that development.
>> Japan is one of the most important contributors, among foreign
>> nations, to the internal development of China, in a substantive
>> way, as opposed to the sweatshop kinds of operations.
>>         The problem here is, that some idiots in the United States
>> and London would like to play the so-called Taiwan card, would
>> like to take Japan-paid assets in Taiwan's political life, who
>> are also British assets, and utilize them to create a conflict
>> which otherwise would not exist between Taiwan ...
>>         Oh, we're going to have to come back to this.
>>         [commercial break]
>>         EIR: Mr. LaRouche, we were just discussing the
>> Japanese-Russian upcoming summit meeting, and the Taiwan issue,
>> as it came into play.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Now, if you look at the map, you look at
>> the Japan chain, and it runs down to the Okinawa chain, and leaps
>> across to another chain which is originally China territory. The
>> friends of George Bush and his brother Prescott in Japan, who are
>> part of the destabilization factor -- George Bush is not really a
>> patriot of the United States by any stretch of practical
>> imagination -- are trying to project Japan into a conflict with
>> China, over Taiwan, through operations staged through these
>> islands, islands which actually belong, traditionally to China,
>> as an extension of that chain. So, the important issues that the
>> United States has to consider in dealing with China and Japan,
>> are: Number one, the United States must not be trapped into
>> seeing the mutual security with Japan as a basis for putting U.S.
>> military forces, naval forces especially, in the Taiwan straits,
>> between Taiwan and China -- that would blow things up. That's a
>> big problem.
>>         Secondly, there is a conflict between Japan and Russia, and
>> there are potential conflicts all over Central Asia, which is an
>> area of concern to Iran, to India, to China, and to Russia, as
>> well as other countries, and therefore, cooperation between
>> Russia and China, cooperation without this Taiwan straits
>> nonsense, between Japan and China -- a four-power agreement on
>> Korea, that is, to bring about the ultimate reunification of
>> Korea, are vital strategic interests of the United States.
>>         And also, therefore, it's important that the Japan and
>> Russia, in the context of the preparation for the summit between
>> the President of the United States and the President of China, do
>> something to ameliorate the tensions in that quarter, and that at
>> the same time, that something be done to lessen the perception on
>> the part of the Chinese that the British play -- that the British
>> faction in Japan might be played with the Taiwan issue, to create
>> a problem in the Taiwan straits, which would be a point of
>> tension between China and the United States, more than between
>> the United States [Japan?] and China, so therefore, Clinton must
>> have these two things brought under some significant degree of
>> control. And therefore, to understand what the significance of
>> the Yeltsin-Hashimoto meeting is, the primary significance is the
>> context of the later meeting between the two Presidents of the
>> United States and China.
>>         EIR: It's interesting that you mention the North Korea issue
>> and the Four-Power Treaty. Sir Caspar Weinberger characterized
>> these talks, the Four-Power talks as embarking on a course of
>> appeasement, so he's obviously on the same line ...
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: He's on the British line.
>>         EIR: ... as some of the people you've been talking about.
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: It's a British line. The man is so -- take
>> Forbes magazine, for example. Look, Forbes magazine, the Forbes
>> interest has {always} been, from the beginning of its position as
>> a family in the United States, has always been more British than
>> American. Cap Weinberger has adopted a British title for services
>> done for the British Empire, contrary to the interests of the
>> United States and its allies in the hemisphere. Cap now works for
>> Forbes. And Cap doesn't have a single policy lately which
>> corresponds to any of the vital interests of the United States.
>> So what else is new?
>>         It is urgent to the United States that we not have -- that
>> this starvation, this famine, this mass death, this holocaust of
>> death, of famine death among children in North Korea come to an
>> end. People don't understand Asia culture. This is the kind of
>> thing you must not allow to happen, to become a festering sore in
>> a relatively small area of the world, North Korea, a festering
>> sore which ruins everything.
>>         If you look at the map, and look at the projects, and look
>> at topics of agreement in that map, and see where North Korea
>> stands with respect to that, you see what {idiots} they are!
>> Anyone who opposes this four-by-four, or etc., talk, to try to
>> bring together an amelioration of the crisis with South and North
>> Korea, and to bring about eventual accomodation together with
>> Japan and China, as well as the United States, that this is
>> essential. And Cap is not working for the best interests of the
>> United States.
>>         EIR: In the last week, a little bit more, a second car has
>> emerged as part of the investigation of Princess Diana's death.
>> Is there anything more that you want to say on this issue?
>>    - Behind the Murder of Diana: A Fatal Financial Crisis -
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, what's happending, as we've indicated
>> before, that you look at the issue, and you say, is the murder
>> the issue? Yes, the murder is an issue. For example, if a
>> soldier, say a U.S. soldier, commits a rape on a civilian, in the
>> course of a U.S. conductable war, that rape is of strategic
>> significance, or potentially strategic significance, and
>> therefore, you look at it -- or a murder of a civilian by a
>> soldier, say a looter, or something of that sort. That's a very
>> important issue; it's as important as a battle, and the military
>> command will look at it as such, if it's a sane military command.
>> And you have to understand the murder of Princess Diana in that
>> term. Because it's {nothing but murder} -- there's no question
>> about it at this point.
>>         The fact that the French government has been putting out all
>> these lies, which it's been caught in, in the attempt to do a
>> cover-up in the interests of the British monarchy, as I've said
>> before, I've no indication that the monarchy actually organized
>> the murder. {Somebody} organized the murder, but the murder
>> itself, the death of Princess Diana, is a great {threat} to the
>> Windsors, and therefore to make it {appear to be an accident,}
>> rather than a murder, is an advantage to the Windsors, and it's
>> an advantage which the French government is doing. The Chirac
>> government, and the Jospin government, or shall we say the
>> neo-Mitterrand government. So, it's a murder, without question.
>>         The evidence keeps leaking out. The evidence was there from
>> the beginning. The French government covered it up. But what's
>> happening? Yes, the murder of a Princess, for reasons of State,
>> by somebody -- and I have a number of lists of possible suspects,
>> which is why I say, be cautious about accusing the Windsors,
>> themselves, of organizing the murder of Diana. It could be
>> someone else. Very likely, as part of the operation against the
>> Windsors themselves, from a different quarter, different rival
>> quarter. But the issue here is to say, what's going on? And you
>> say, why is it, the French government, which is pretty good at
>> fixing up cover-ups of murders, assassinations, and things like
>> that, why was the French government, in collusion with the
>> British government, unable to keep the lid on this coverup? Why
>> couldn't they cover up the assassination? Why is it that the
>> information leaks out -- tapes, all this other stuff, which show
>> the whole thing is a murder? Because the whole situation is
>> coming apart.
>>         The financial crisis, which is a {fatal} financial
>> crisis -- this financial system, the IMF system, free-trade system,
>> the whole thing in its present form is doomed, is finished. It
>> might be finished the end of this year. It might take another
>> year or so, but we're going through a series of crises -- this
>> system, in its present form is finished for good. Nothing can
>> save it. The question is what kind of a system will replace it.
>> That's the only issue. Under these conditions, you have a
>> condition in England, or a condition in England and France, like
>> the Hundred Years War or the War of the Roses, in which the
>> various oligarchical baronies, are making baronial, feudal-style
>> allignments with, and against one another, in a rapidly changing
>> way, under conditions of crisis. In this circumstance, they can't
>> hold anything really together. And the fact that the facts are
>> coming out that {show} that Diana was murdered, by vehicular
>> homicide. The fact that they {do} come out, shows how fragile the
>> control over the situation is, under these Wars of the Roses-like
>> conditions.
>>               - Janet Reno Is a Gutless Wonder -
>>         EIR: Janet Reno has initiated the process to decide on a
>> Special Prosecutor, if a Special Prosecutor will be appointed in
>> this issue of fundraising, alleged fundraising that might have
>> been done from the White House, either from the President or the
>> Vice President. She's initiated a 30-day process ...
>>         LYNDON LAROUCHE: I don't know what's wrong with Janet Reno.
>> I know there's something very wrong with her. I have direct
>> evidence of this. This woman somehow, who was supposed to be a
>> tough prosecutor, has turned out to be one of the most gutless
>> wonders I've ever seen. She walked in there, presumably as a
>> tough prosecutor, and the Jack Keeneys, and the Mark Richards,
>> and the others -- the old apparatus that runs the Criminal
>> Division of the Justice Department -- just took her over, and
>> later made her their patsy, right from Day One, as the Waco case
>> shows, and the other cases.
>>         She has been unable to do anything she was supposed to do as
>> Attorney General. She's simply a patsy for these guys. Now, then
>> the Republicans, a bunch of Republicans, who want to get an
>> impeachment process going in order to orchestrate something --
>> and remember, an impeachment process going at this time, means
>> that as we go into the crisis, there will be no effective
>> government, to lead this nation under conditions that a
>> leadership is absolutely required, that to push an impeachment
>> process on these frivolous charges, at this point, is {virtual
>> treason against the United States.} There's no grounds for it.
>>         But Janet, "Gutless" Janet Reno, once again, with a slight
>> threat to {her}, a threat of {embarrassment} to her, crawls,
>> sniffles, snivels, and drivels, once again. Her performance in
>> this is disgusting. But I think she's only a pathetic, cowardly
>> creature. But the interesting thing is, who are the people who --
>> hyenas -- who she's afraid of? That's the interesting question. I
>> think I know, but I think other Americans should ask themselves:
>> Who is it that terrifies this cowardly Janet Reno into doing
>> {whatever the Republicans want her to do} -- almost. Or
>> particularly, the corrupt Justice Department machine wants her to
>> do?
>>         EIR: Mr. LaRouche, we don't have a lot of time here left.
>> You just wrote a piece for EIR, "Sudan: Target of Rice War." Is
>> there anything you want to say about it?
>>         LaRouche: Well, very simply, is that if the President of the
>> United States {does not stop the British from launching a
>> four-front invasion of Sudan}, using Israel to back up the
>> British forces, particularly in Eritrea, then the President of
>> the United States might find himself losing his job long before
>> the year 2000. [lar/brj]
>> ********** NEW **********
>> LaRouche publications now has a web site:  http://www.larouchepub.com .
>> For further information send Email to larouche@clark.net.
>> EIR Talks can be heard at 4:00 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.
>> The LaRouche files are now available by automatic list service.  To
>> get  an index of the files, you must subscribe to the LaRouche
>> mailing list.  To do this, send a message to listserv@ccs.covici.com
>> with a line (not the subject line)  saying
>> subscribe lar-lst
>> After that, to get an index, say
>> index lar-lst
>> --
>>          John Covici
>>           covici@ccs.covici.com
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: vladnar@alterzone.com

Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in tool bar]       : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail