From oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!caen!uwm.edu!wupost!uunet!ccs!covici Sat Mar 13 18:33:03 PST 1993 Article: 17763 of alt.activism Path: oneb!cs.ubc.ca!destroyer!caen!uwm.edu!wupost!uunet!ccs!covici From: covici@ccs.covici.com (John Covici) Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com Newsgroups: alt.activism Subject: EIR Talks to Lyndon LaRouche 3/8/93 Message-ID: <265-PCNews-124beta@ccs.covici.com> Date: 13 Mar 93 21:8:42 GMT Organization: Covici Computer Systems Lines: 714 EIR TALKS WITH LYNDON LaROUCHE Interviewer: Mel Klenetsky EIR Talks With Lyndon LaRouche March 8, 1993 Interviewer: Mel Klenetsky MEL KLENETSKY: Welcome to ``{Executive Intelligence Review'}s Talks With Lyndon LaRouche.'' I'm Mel Klenetsky. We are on the line with Mr. LaRouche from Rochester, Minnesota. - The Destabilization of Germany's Southern Flank - Mr. LaRouche, before we begin to discuss the World Trade Center bombing and the recent arrests, I would like to discuss a particular incident involving the Secretary General of the Italian Socialist Party, Bettino Craxi, who was under pressure, and who held up a copy of {Executive Intelligence Review} and an article in {Executive Intelligence Review,} which began to go into the recent destabilization that is taking place in Italy. Can you please give us some developments in terms of that article? MR. LAROUCHE: First of all, as we have discussed in previous broadcasts, the crisis in Italy is engineered from the outside by a network which is Anglo-American in character and Freemasonic in flavor, that is, the British Freemasons, together with the Southern Jurisdiction types in our own country, are key in orchestrating this destabilization in Italy. This is being done as a part of the operation which London orchestrated, together with Gorbachov, in launching the Serbians, partly through London, partly through Gorbachov, partly through people like Brent Scowcroft and [Lawrence] Eagleburger, who are close collaborators of these Serbians, to start a war on the Southern Flank of Germany. Because suddenly, at that point, in 1989-1990, Mrs. Thatcher announced that Germany was the major danger; and therefore, Bush and Thatcher blew the greatest opportunity in 20th century history by turning away from the opportunity to develop Eastern Europe and Russia along new lines, through economic cooperation, and instead used Russia, in part--that is, Gorbachov and Marshal [Dmitri] Yazov--to launch the Serbians in this hideous war against other peoples of former Yugoslavia, the Milosevic group. The destabilization of Italy is part of this operation against the Southern Flank of Continental Europe, specifically, most directly, against Germany, launched by Mrs. Thatcher and her crowd, the recently deceased Nicholas Ridley, for example, Conor Cruise O'Brien, and so forth, and complicit people in the United States. But to understand this properly, you would have to go back to about 1976, but certainly back to the beginning of the Reagan administration and the negotiations we had with the Soviets at that time. Q: What were those negotiations? Can you bring people up to date in terms of the current situation in Italy? What is the scandal, and what is at stake? MR. LAROUCHE: They are simply trying to destroy and discredit all the parties. That is being done through a law which was imposed by the occupying powers, the Anglo-Americans, at the end of World War II, in which, under pressure, Italy passed this law, under which there can be no competent financing of parties without resorting to things which are considered illegal or quasi-illegal; and that is being used just to pull down the system at this point. But back to 1981. For various reasons, due to certain developments we had with the Reagan administration in the transition period in 1981, elements of the U.S. government asked me to open up a back channel to Moscow which agreed to explore my proposal for what became known later as the SDI. After various negotiations, that back channel began in 1981, and you cannot understand the present history, the present crisis or even the way the [Berlin] Wall fell, without understanding the implications of that back-channel negotiation which occurred between the two governments through me. Just to review the situation: essentially, the problem at that time was that, under the existing policy, which was the nuclear deterrence policy, we were getting to the point that first strike was becoming a great danger because of the development of precision missiles, shorter range missiles with precision warheads, the development of Soviet submarines, the missile submarines off our coast, which meant that both superpowers were placed in a situation in which a launch of a few missiles against their territories, because of the so-called electronic pulse effect, which would pin down their missiles, would have to decide to go to total war within a matter of a couple of minutes of warning, and that was the situation which we addressed specifically from the military side. Could we not agree to develop defensive weapons systems based on new physical principles, which would remove this growing danger? What I added to this, apart from emphasizing that the kind of weapons that [Gen.] Danny Graham was proposing cannot work for this purpose--we'll get back to this. [commercial break] Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have been discussing the past ten years of strategic policy of East-West affairs and their implications for the current crisis in Italy. You were starting to develop that situation that you were involved in, ten years ago. Please continue. MR. LAROUCHE: For those who are not familiar with it, what I indicated in this back channel, was to talk, through a channel, to the highest level of the Soviet government on behalf of the U.S. government; not to commit the U.S. government to policies, but rather to explore possibilities; and the possibility we explored was my proposal, number one, that we use what are called new physical principles, i.e., lasers and so forth, as a strategic anti-ballistic missile system, and that both sides develop it in order to eliminate the danger of a first-strike provocation under these conditions of new technologies developing then. To this, the Soviets ultimately agreed; they agreed that that would work, that that was the way to go. Secondly, I proposed that the two nations agree to share the civilian applications of these new technologies with the idea of promoting--not only between themselves but among others--a worldwide economic boom based on growth of productivity. The Soviets agreed that that would work, but they said that they would not accept it because the United States and its allies would outpace the Soviet Union in this. And I warned them. I said, ``Your system won't work, because if you don't go this way, the way you're going now, your system will collapse in about five years, beginning with a breakdown in crucial parts of the Eastern European economies, on which your economy depends.'' Of course, it did not happen in 1988, it happened in 1989; but it happened. The situation was thus created in two steps. First of all, one should understand that it was never the intent, at least from the middle of the 1950s, for either of the two superpowers to actually go to war. There were options such as those of Ogarkov later, where the Soviets actually considered the possibility of war, but the general intent was {not} to go to war. The intent was, to use the horror of thermonuclear warfare as a way of shaping global politics and as a way of controlling local warfare which we used to call, in those days, surrogate warfare. When the crisis came in 1989, at that point, if Thatcher and Bush had not blown it, we would be out of the mess now. What they did, was to reject my proposal, which I made particularly on October 12, 1988, indicating the imminent breakdown of the Soviet system and the reunification of Germany, and indicating policies to be followed for that case in respect to, particularly Poland, as well as Germany, and then offers to be made to the Soviet Union. They did not follow that policy. I made a specific proposal at that time which was called the Productive Triangle proposal, which paralleled a proposal made by a German banker, a Deutsche Bank banker named Alfred Herrhausen, who was assassinated on British orders, incidentally. So that policy was rejected. What they did instead, was to loot Eastern Europe. They ruined the Polish economy. The Polish people are living under worse conditions than they lived under during the previous twenty years or so under communism--far worse. The Russians are being driven into a state of rage against the United States because of the crazy policies we have imposed upon them through [Jeffrey] Sachs and others. We are now getting back toward a conflict between Moscow and the West, a conflict which is based not on a return of Bolshevism, but of a Russian Empire. It is not coming instantly, but it is building up, it is coming up, week by week, month by month, and the current April crisis in Moscow will be part of that process. What has happened, because the United States and Britain, under Bush and Thatcher, unleashed various regional wars, such as the Balkan war, which they sponsored with Gorbachov, is that we have gone back to a new version of the kind of conflict which existed prior to 1989. What we have, is regional warfare in the form of irregular warfare, spreading throughout the planet. The election of Hekmatyar as Prime Minister of Afghanistan means that the former Soviet state of Tajikistan is now in the center position of a new North-South war of tremendous proportions, potentially; and what we are seeing is the outbreak of global irregular warfare, as we call it, including forms such as terrorism, and including terrorism against the United States itself, often by some of our allies as well as some of our putative adversaries, as a general condition of life. We are headed for a kind of World War III which does not mean a thermonuclear exchange between what are really still two superpowers from a thermonuclear standpoint. If you count the divisions that the Russians have and the divisions the Western allies have, that becomes obvious. But we are headed toward wars typified by the present atrocities by this fascist group headed by Milosevic in Serbia; and that is the characteristic of this period. In that circumstance, the destabilization of Italy, the attempt to destroy the nation-state, the attempt to set up one-world forms of government, all that [Jimmy] Carter nonsense, which Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen represent; this is pushing the world deeper and deeper into a kind of a New Dark Age, something like but much worse than the kind of chaos which prevailed in Europe during the middle of the fourteenth century. That is what the Italian crisis is really all about. - How Economics Determines Politics: - - How My Policies Could Reverse the Coming Disaster - Q: You might characterize these developments as a New Yalta, and in contrast to this New Yalta policy, you have proposed several policies which call for economic cooperation. You mentioned two periods: the 1982 period, when you presented what you had called the Mutually Assured Survival doctrine, a Strategic Defense Initiative proposal for economic development, and in 1989, you proposed the Productive Triangle. How do those two policies differ from what is actually taking place in terms of the past ten years in terms of economic policies, and how could those policies have created a different context? MR. LAROUCHE: The point is, economics determines politics--not in the way the communists argue, but in other, very simple terms. It is determining politics, for example, in the United States. This weekend, the SPD, the Social Democrats, who had ruled the German state of Hessen, were not defeated but took a big loss, about an 8 percent drop in their vote, and they are a minority government in the State of Hessen. The big increase was for the so-called right-wing party, the Republikaner. This Republikaner growth and the collapse of the SPD and the collapse also of the CDU, the Christian Democratic Party, reflects a desperation on the part of even the German population. The fall of the Mitterrand government or the Socialist government in France, which is due soon, will reflect the same thing. You will probably see a growth of the right-wing party of [Jean] Le Pen there, as well. In the case of Russia, the fact that we did not orchestrate a general global expansion of infrastructure investment, railroads, power systems, and so forth, as part of a global recovery, meant that {we have virtually lost} the opportunity; and the forces of chaos and desperation and hate are taking over. Probably, we have still one last chance. And the chance is to implement my policy as I formulated it, which certain people in Russia will recognize. If that policy, the Triangle policy, is not implemented, we are, {within a very short period of time}--maybe a year, maybe months--before an {unbreakable,} hostile situation develops anew between Moscow and the West. If that situation develops--that is, if in the minds of the Russian government and people what is called in German a {Feindbild,} a hatred, like two dogs who will kill each other whenever they see each other will develop; that kind of hatred you cannot reverse. And we are a very short distance, in terms of historical time, months, maybe a year, maybe two years, probably less, before that develops. {The only thing that will stop that,} is a reversal of policy to adopt explicitly the policies that I put forward particularly in 1988, 1989, and very early 1990. If that is not done, we are headed for the worst strategic situation in the twentieth century history of the world. - How Thatcher and Gorbachov Unleashed the Serbian Fascists - Q: There recently occurred the death of a particular individual, Nicholas Ridley, who played a role in terms of attacking Germany, and you had a great deal of criticism of that. What was the significance of the Ridley policies, and how did you offer an alternative to that? MR. LAROUCHE: Ridley was nothing but the bark of the Margaret Thatcher dog. He was her minister and even though she was a rather nasty person, she as head of government in Britain, could not say openly, diplomatically, the kinds of things she could have some of her ministers say. So she had this scoundrel, Conor Cruise O'Brien and Nicholas Ridley, one of her ministers, spew out this venom, talking about a Fourth Reich. Many people will recall, if they look back at the newspaper files, they will find that it was this Fourth Reich formulation and the negotiations between Thatcher and Gorbachov to unleash the Serbian fascists and the kind of genocide and other war crimes being committed in Yugoslavia today. This was all the same package. You will find certain Israelis who were supporting the Serbian fascists in this genocide, were using the same formulation: ``Fourth Reich,'' ``Fourth Reich.'' And Ridley, who was otherwise a completely unimportant, inconspicuous figure, now dead of cancer (poor fellow), unfortunately will go to his grave as being one of the scoundrels of post-1989 world history. - The World Trade Center Bombing and the Israeli Mossad - Q: We have had some recent arrests in the World Trade Center bombing, arrests which start to point the finger at Muslim terrorists. What is your analysis of these arrests, and do you think that this might be used by certain forces to whip up hysteria against Persian Gulf leaders such as Saddam Hussein? MR. LAROUCHE: Let's look at this from the FBI standpoint. First of all, the FBI was under tremendous political pressure to make an early arrest. They made one. The FBI however, of course, has {not claimed} that the fellow they arrested, the renter of the car or the van, was the bomber. They have not claimed that. However, that has been strongly implied by the press, and we have had this Islamic nonsense coming out of people who are {chiefly} assets of the Mossad. So what we have had on television, as in the case of that phony operation--unfortunately bloody--which the Mossad or at least those interests set up in Waco, Texas, with the entire media domination of the United States, is the idea that there is Islamic terrorism loose, this sort of thing, which is entirely orchestrated by the Mossad as a propaganda campaign, playing upon the fact that [FBI Director William] Sessions and the FBI and the U.S. government are under tremendous pressure to come up with a quick arrest and a quick solution. Unfortunately, from a technical standpoint, the whole thing is ridiculous. Somebody may have used some Jordanian Arab--not a Palestinian, but an Arab--as a patsy in some way; for example, some Mossad agent. There is a big debate over this now in certain press circles today. A Mossad agent is indicated as having hired him to rent the truck. That is all speculation at this point. But certainly, that bombing could not have been done by a bunch of Arabs. This is a highly sophisticated operation. There are a few people, a few teams in the world, that could have done that--relatively few. Most of them are known; this was not simply done by that blind, 80-year-old sheikh. That sheikh is a British intelligence asset. We have his pedigree; he is British intelligence. He was brought into the United States in 1991 by the State Department and protected by the State Department, up until these recent events, up until a few days ago. So the man was a protected State Department asset actually owned by British intelligence out of the old Arab Bureau network. This whole thing is a can of worms. It is not the true story. It is not leading in the direction of the true story. This World Trade Center bombing is an act of terrorism against the United States, like that we saw in the strategy of tension in Europe in the late 1970s. [commercial break] Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have been discussing the World Trade Center bombings and the recent arrest and certain inconsistencies which have come up in that regard. Please continue. MR. LAROUCHE: The problem here, is who could have done that kind of bombing? That was a highly secured facility, as private facilities go; the chance of doing that without an accident, without being detected and blowing the whole thing,--that is quite an interesting proposition. The other thing that seems to be confirmed as factual, is the use of ammonium nitrate as the explosive charge. The interesting thing about ammonium nitrate is that about 200 pounds of plastique would have about the same amount of explosive power of 700 pounds of ammonium nitrate. And the ammonium nitrate would have to be in some kind of a slurry, which would probably add up to about 1500 pounds, or something like that. So you are lugging something around which is pretty big and also fairly tricky. Many people would know about this stuff because many people have worked in mines or used ammonium nitrate as an explosive for various kinds of purposes. It is a very common kind of explosive. But to handle it in these circumstances and not have it go off in the wrong way, not have it have all kinds of problems, is a tricky operation; it requires an expert to set up an explosive charge of this type, with the right timing devices and so forth. Then you have the proposition of cracking the intelligence screens, finding the flaws in the intelligence screens in the World Trade Center itself and exploiting those or manipulating them in some way, so as to use[?] the crack in the screen to get the job to come off without pre-detection and to come off successfully. We are talking about a very large team. We may even be talking about up to 70 people being required, specialists of various kinds to do that in a highly compartmentalized operation, that is, in which one part of the team may not know what the other is doing or what the target is. This is a kind of job for which, if, say, some Arab country wanted to have it done against the United States, it would cost them somewhere between a half-billion and a billion dollars to pay for getting that job done. So we are not talking about something that a few Arabs, or one who needs his 200 bucks back, is going to be involved in. He would never sign for a truck in his right name, if he were going to do it; he would not worry about his deposit; he would have vanished. So this whole thing is certainly not a very professional job by the FBI; but one has to understand the pressure which they are under. But the other part, of course, is that everyone who was puffing this Islamic terrorist angle, for which there is no credibility whatsoever, was one of these Mossad or Mossad-linked types. For example, you had Uri Dan on television: Mossad. You had Neil Livingston, Mossad agent, Halevy sidekick, a Mossad agent--not a member of the Mossad, but an agent of the Mossad. And so forth and so on. A parade of these guys. Now you have Roy Godson, an old adversary of mine, who is a part of the same thing, spreading the same garbage. And that is not the situation. Somebody else has done it; it is done against the Clinton administration, just as that dirty operation that was done down in Waco, which was run out of Australia, of all places, in order to set that thing up--out of Australia. And used a convicted a felon as the complainant to get the thing moving. These are operations to destabilize the United States under President Clinton; and that is the only way to understand it. - How the ADL Corrupts U.S. Law Enforcement Agencies - Q: One of the important figures in the Waco, Texas event, someone who appeared on television, who was a member of the Cult Awareness Network, and who has been recently arrested, Galen Kelly, who was also involved in some developments with a member of your association, Lewis du Pont Smith, a kidnapping attempt on Lewis du Pont Smith. Can you please give us a sense of how the Cult Awareness Network operates in this kind of situation? MR. LAROUCHE: The Cult Awareness Network is a group of throwaways who serve as a front for kidnapping for hire. They do it for groups like the American Family Foundation and they work very closely with the Anti-Defamation League. The way this story developed, the Waco story: There was no basis for this kind of dog-and-pony show, bloody show, that was put on by the A[lcohol], T[obacco], and F[irearms bureau]. The problem is that their intelligence was penetrated by the ADL's friends. Misled (I will get to one illustration of how that is occurring). But here is the story on this. The case in particular starts {in Australia.} A fellow called Isi Leibler in Australia who is an ADL asset, who has recently been disowned by the Mossad, and his circle, have control over certain sections of the Australian government. Through a department of the Australian government, a misinformational report was sent--very alarming and very electrifying--to the U.S. State Department. The U.S. State Department, because it involved weapons, turned the case over to ATF. ATF, which had been penetrated by the ADL and CAN, its intelligence section contaminated by that, was then misled by a guy called Rick Ross, according to the reports a convicted felon out of, I believe, Arizona, a jewel thief, who had been working as a kidnapper for hire for CAN. Rick Ross was put forward as ``the expert''; and then, of course, into it came Galen Kelly on television backing up Rick Ross in talking about this case down in Waco, Texas. At about the time Galen Kelly was on the air this past week backing up Rick Ross (his crony among the kidnappers' ring), {he was indicted} for kidnapping a woman in Washington, D.C., and carting her across the state line to Virginia, and then discovering that he had kidnapped the wrong woman and taking her back to Washington and dumping her on the streets, leaving her very angry and making very loud complaints back last year. So this is the character of the operation. These, of course, are enemies of mine. We hope to get them fully exposed. There is also a case in San Francisco, in which a police officer, now a former police officer by the name of Gerard was working closely with an ADL asset by the name of Bullock. What happened then was some paperwork from secret police files turned up in the possession of South African government agencies, and this went through the San Francisco Police Department, according to the public record on this, through Gerard, to Bullock, and Bullock passed a lot of this stuff over to the ADL. The ADL has unlawfully penetrated police and law enforcement agencies all over the country to mis-direct them, to manipulate them, and to get information unlawfully from them, for use in various cases such as the shipment of this information to Israel against the two Americans, one from Chicago, who were arrested in Israel on the basis of this information, and to South Africa. And this case of the penetration of ATF, which may lead not only to the embarrassment of ATF, but which may lead to its downgrading, is a result of this penetration of ATF by ADL and related types; the contamination and subversion of our police forces by the ADL. We see this also, of course, in the World Trade Center, the same thing. We see through the news media a massive contamination of law enforcement and security forces, who are [manipulated] by misinformation agencies, such as the ADL. The case of former government official Roy Godson is an example of this corruption. I see very little difference between a Roy Godson and a Jonathan Pollard who is now sitting, shall we say, in the basement at Marion Federal Prison. These people are breaking the law, we are tolerating it, and these are some of the things we suffer as a result of letting these people get by with things like this. - The World Trade Center Bombing: - - A New Yalta Alliance Between Washington and Moscow - - Could Lead To an Unholy Crusade Against Islam - Q: This is ``{EIR} Talks With Lyndon LaRouche,'' and if people want to send in questions to Mr. LaRouche, they can send in questions to ``{EIR} Talks With LaRouche,'' P.O. Box 17390, Washington, D.C., 20041-0390. Mr. LaRouche, earlier, we mentioned a strategy of tension. Would you say that there is a strategy of tension taking place in the world, looking at the kind of conflict that we are seeing throughout Europe, and now the conflict that we see in the United States of America? MR. LAROUCHE: Yes, there is. And this particular case, the World Trade Center bombing has all the earmarks of that. In the last days or so, this weekend, this Hekmatyar, who is a part of the same network as that fellow Kansi who was identified as having shot up the CIA center; this Hekmatyar is an asset of the Saudis and the U.S. government and the British. He was used as the extremist, a drug-pusher, political force, in the U.S. operations with Karen McKay and other people in Afghanistan, as opposed to, shall we say, the more moderate, the more rational, the more sane Afghanis who wanted the Soviets out. Now Hekmatyar, with Anglo-American and Israeli support, has managed to put himself in the position of Prime Minister of Afghanistan, which means that Hekmatyar and Afghanistan will now deploy its intervention into the former Soviet republic of Tajikistan, the so-called ``roof of the world'' republic, from which many things which have upset world civilization have erupted. This is a strategic threat to world civilization. What is in progress, is the following. Some people, in the context of this East-West agreement, aim to find a kind of a New Yalta agreement with Moscow as Bush and Thatcher negotiated with Gorbachov, who is now out, and to make such an agreement with either Yeltsin or his successors in the near future. The idea is to develop a common adversary for this. The common adversary of choice is Islam; and these sections of Israel are key in this situation[?] of trying to define Islam as the enemy. The Islamic population in the world, next to Christian population, is the largest religious group in the world. What is intended is to declare war on not only the Arabs, but Islam. That means Pakistan, Iran, it means a large part of the population of India. It means Indonesia, it means Malaysia, it means part of the Philippines, the Moro [Liberation Front], for example, in the Philippines--it means real hell. It means a real crusade of that type, an unholy crusade. And that orchestration is taking place, and this is the kind of thing which is in progress, which threatens to plunge this planet into a dark age. That is what the significance is, not necessarily of the bombing of the World Trade Center, because I do not think that was done by any Arabs or any Islamic interests; it was done by somebody else much closer to home--a highly skilled intelligence capability closer to home; but rather, through the orchestration of publicity through the news media and through the pressure on the FBI, what is being done is to help create in the American people a {readiness} to enter into an alliance with Moscow on a New Yalta agreement for a {jihad,} so to speak, against the Islamic population of the world. Race war, or religious warfare. This is absolute lunacy. This is a crime. We should have to recognize that the trigger point, the detonator point, for this lunacy, was that the United States and Britain put a British asset, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in Iran. That is when this started. Then the United States, over the objections of the Afghan patriots, stuck this drug-pusher, this corrupt scoundrel, Hekmatyar, with Saudi support, in charge of the Afghan Resistance--that is, with our support. He has now come to power; he is now a strategic destabilization factor, and we are now playing that game with these kinds of scoundrels. Q: In terms of the Muslim and Arab world, recent developments have brought a certain amount of sympathy, specifically in the cases of Bosnia and also the plight of the Palestinian refugees. Are you saying that whoever is behind this World Trade Center operation or the orchestration of it, is trying to reverse that sympathy, and create a new target? MR. LAROUCHE: Not really. Yes, in part, but that is not the purpose. That is obvious. You have to look at the Waco [Texas] operation and the World Trade Center bombing as of one piece. That is the way terrorism works. Forget who the perpetrator is. You may catch the perpetrator, and then you have to catch who is behind the perpetrators. That is the way these things go. You have to look at it from the top. This is targeting one thing: It is targeting the Clinton administration, and I am very concerned about the security of the President with this kind of targeting going on. We have heard Lord Owen, the British ambassador, screaming the most undiplomatic screaming against the United States on the territory of the United States over this policy, not just the Bosnian policy, but over the British policy of creating this one-world order. And [President] Clinton, who may not be the most profound in his thinking, is going on the basis of saying he would like to be re-elected; and he is thinking about being re-elected, at least instinctively, while he is President. And he is trying to respond to this, and that in a way which seems to him to be the response of a guy who wants to be re-elected. So he is doing things--he is backing off like a weathervane, often. But he is doing things; and he represents a destabilization factor from the standpoint of certain Anglo-American [Establishment] and other circles, and they are not particularly happy with him. They have made that very clear, particularly from some of the neo-con[servative] attacks on Clinton for not having the right Jew. He had enough Jews in the administration, but they said he did not have the right Jews, and that kind of stuff. So I think this is an attack against the American people, but it is specifically a political attack against the Clinton administration, to frighten it, and to intimidate it. - Agriculture Secretary Espy Responds - - to Grass-Roots Pressure - Q: One of the more interesting developments coming out of the Clinton administration is a speech that the Secretary of Agriculture [Mike] Espy made at the National Farmers' Union saying that he would implement a debt moratorium policy. How does this particular debt moratorium to the FmHA, the Farmers Home Administration cohere with the policy directions that you have been trying to get the Clinton administration to adopt? MR. LAROUCHE: Of course, I have been for this kind of measure for years. It has been a feature of my efforts. In 1979-1980, many people will recall the efforts I made on behalf of this sort of thing in agriculture; then in 1984 Billy Davis and I did a program on this issue, what was going on in that region. But in particular, back in September of this year, following the significant result--we had a technical victory, a Democratic primary victory in North Dakota--we operated from North Dakota where we had this support to initiate this particular movement. It took time to build it up. We had a former state of Washington Supreme Court judge who volunteered, together with some other people who were distinguished public citizens, who formed a Blue Ribbon Commission, to hear evidence in North Dakota and South Dakota from former government agency officials, testifying to the illegality of the way in which some of these FmHA agricultural loans were set up, and other testimony about how they work. [commercial break] Q: Mr. LaRouche, we have been discussing Mike Espy, the Secretary of Agriculture, and his recent discussions of possible moratorium on farm foreclosures. Please continue. MR. LAROUCHE: What we did, following this investigation by Judge Goodloe's Blue Ribbon Commission, is to take the facts which had been developed in those hearings and present them in a number of locations, including before Rep. Kika de la Garza's committee and also, of course, in North and South Dakota and elsewhere. This resulted in the initiation of legislation for an investigation of a moratorium in these matters, in, first, the North Dakota legislature, and then, following that, [by] 12 Senators and 12 lower house legislators in South Dakota. Just recently there was a hearing in Pierre, South Dakota, attended by 150 people testifying at the hearing on the matter. What we did, of course, was to not only lay out the evidence; but one of the key bankers who was involved in this swindle is a banker from Minnesota named Carl Polhad, who is very much organized-crime related. I mean Meyer Lansky/Kid Cann-related in his background. He is one of the biggest and dirtiest sharks in Minnesota. He is part of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer Labor Party machine. So his representatives were there at the hearing, and at that hearing it was laid out exactly how dirty Carl Polhad is, and how he has contaminated and controlled this guy Levitas, who was used by him and his circles, and how he controls Sarah Vogel, the agricultural commissioner of North Dakota. Polhad is a key figure in these loans; he is looting these farmers with the aid of this illegal operation. So this stirred up quite a fuss, and at that point, Mike Espy, who was aware of the issue, decided to take the steam away from our organizing effort with our legislation building up and simply say that {he} was going to take an initiative in this direction to suspend all foreclosures that were not already in the courts, and to set up an independent commission, a board, to which people could write their complaints within the next thirty days, to have their cases reviewed. Q: Thank you, Mr. LaRouche. We will return next week with ``{EIR} Talks With Lyndon LaRouche.'' - 30 - THE PRECEDING TRANSCRIPT WAS PROVIDED TO FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE BY EIR NEWS SERVICE, INC. FOR MORE INFORMATION, WRITE EIR NEWS SERVICE, P.O. BOX 17390, WASHINGTON, DC 20041. EIR TALKS WITH LYNDON LAROUCHE IS BROADCAST SATURDAYS FROM 7:00 PM TO 8:00 PM EST VIA SATELLITE: Galaxy 2, 74 Degrees W Trans 3, 74.9 mHz NB, SCPC 3:1 Companding, Flat or Satcom C-1, 137 Degrees W Trans 2, 7.5 mHz Wide Band Video Subcarrier ---- John Covici covici@ccs.covici.com
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.