This transcript appears in the June 7, 2002 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Dialogue with LaRouche

The following is a selection from the questions and answers following Mr. LaRouche's May 28, 2002 Memorial Day address. The moderator is LaRouche in 2004 campaign spokeswoman Debra Hanania-Freeman. Audio/video archives of the entire webcast, in Windows Media Player format, are available in the following forms:

We Can Make a Political Earthquake

A staff member on the Democratic Congressional campaign committee: Mr. LaRouche, Joe Lieberman has emerged as the leading Democratic contender for the Presidential nomination in 2004. Over the past few weeks, Senator Lieberman has emerged with a strident defense of the "New Economy." It's very hard for those of us who are preparing for the mid-term elections to explain why it is that the leading Democratic contender for the Presidential nomination is doing that. It has left us somewhat outside the circle of reality. Do you have any idea what Lieberman is doing, and why he is doing it?

LaRouche: Lieberman is a very strange animal. He's a very intelligent person, and I don't think he has quite as many short circuits as McCain does, but his ties to McCain are intricate and extremely exotic. We have to look at this—you know, Arizona has some very strange things in it, apart from gila monsters. And it has organized-crime connections, like the Joe Bonano connection, who used to be a drug pusher, sitting up for the mob, in Canada, tied with Sam Bronfman. And, there was a big scandal up there in the 1950s about Bonano and drugs, and John Foster Dulles, the Secretary of State, and so forth, which caused the fall of the government up there, the Canadian government. So the thing is rotten.

You have the Emprise thing—the murder of the [investigative reporter Don] Bolles in Arizona. You have scandals about Indian reservations gambling concessions; you have big questions raised about John Irwin III there, the biggest landowner, or one of the biggest landowners in the state, the grandson of a former governor of the state, and also a member of the IBM family, of the Watson family, who runs some very nasty operations under his American Family Foundation and other things. This is a very messy thing.

Now, when you look at this closely, you find that John McCain says he's a Bull Moose, and all we're getting is a lot of flap, eh? He says he is a Republican, or he's not a Republican, or whatnot. And Lieberman and McCain are almost like twins. So you have a faction: McCain says he's a loyal Republican; Lieberman says he's a loyal Democrat, but we find both of them are hybrids—we don't know what party they belong to, when you look at their issues and you look at their connections. And some of their connections really worry me. They really worry me from a standpoint of ethics, shall we say.

But also, Lieberman is something else. In a case like this, you have to look at a person by their policy, and what their hands and feet do. And Joe is bad. For example, Joe's intelligent enough to know what he's doing, and that's bad. Because what he's doing, is, he's a supporter of a fascist movement in the United States. This fascist movement is associated with people like Wolfowitz and so forth; it's associated with Samuel P. Huntington, with Zbigniew Brzezinski, and people like that. It's a movement which, in the post-war period, proposed a military reform, called the "utopian" reform, which is based on the model, in fact, of the Nazi international Waffen-SS: That is, to produce a professional army, no longer a citizen army, but a professional army, which would do the enforcing, like the Roman legions, or the Waffen-SS, for the command. And this is well known.

As soon as they could get rid of MacArthur, which they did fairly quickly, in the post-war period, then they got rid of Eisenhower, when he retired from office. And you know what happened when Eisenhower retired: All the cats and dogs, and squirrels and gila monsters, and so forth, that had been hiding in the cages, came loose in 1961. Eisenhower steps out of office. All over the world: assassinations, coups d'état, all sorts of things, usually pointing toward Allen Dulles, as one of the perpetrators in these things, or Colonel Lansdale.

We had an assassination movement against de Gaulle in France in 1962. We had a very suspicious overthrow of the Macmillan government in England, in the so-called Profumo scandal, in the same period. We had the early ouster of Adenauer, in Germany. We had other assassinations. We had the Kennedy assassination, Mattei assassination. And certainly by 1965, with the ouster of Erhard in Germany, by another kind of coup d'état, you had a change in the world. The United States had gone into the Indochina War, which is the kind of war—the no-win, perpetual war, prescribed by the Brzezinski-Kissinger-Huntington and so forth types. The world had changed.

In the middle of the 1960s, we stopped being a producer society, by recruiting our youth into what was called "post-industrial society," or, sometimes it was known as the "rock-drug-sex counterculture," and this strictly concentrated upon the most vulnerable part of the youth: the university-educated youth. If you corrupt the students in the leading universities of a country, by this kind of a program, you will do grave damage to the existence of the nation as a whole, because these are the guys who are going to move into the secondary positions in professions and in management. And if you destroy the people who are going to run the country, by tradition, you are going to ruin the country. And it worked. It worked just fine.

We destroyed the country with the aid of the Baby Boomer generation, those that came into maturity, or semi-maturity, or immaturity (whatever the case may be), in the middle of the 1960s. We destroyed them: We put them on drugs; we made them crazy; we told them industrial society was no good; and we used the threat of the draft over their heads to scare them, bring out their native cowardice, and get them into the kinds of things they did.

So we destroyed the United States. We became a consumer society. In 1966-1967, we shut down a lot of the space program, which was the major technology-driver for the United States at that time. By 1969, we could no longer have built the space shot! We had destroyed so much of the industry essential to the space shot, we couldn't have replicated the man on the Moon.

That's what we did to ourselves.

So we became a consumer society, which, as I've described it before: It's like Rome, like ancient Rome. During the period of the Second Punic War and afterward, Rome underwent a change in character, from a Roman society into a consumer society, an imperial consumer society: extensive use of slavery; they turned the people into pigs, the citizens to bread and circuses; that is, mass entertainment very much like our television entertainment today, but they didn't have television screens, so they used stadiums, to get Christians to eat lions, or something, eh? That sort of thing. And this kind of mass entertainment destroyed the morality of the Roman people, who no longer worked for a living; they lived on bread and circuses, on entertainment and dole. They destroyed the civilization. Rome lived by looting other countries!

How do you think the United States lived, over the period from 1966? We destroyed our industries, and with the help of the floating-exchange-rate system, and reforms introduced under Carter, we became the greatest looter of other nations on this planet. The United States has been living—like the Romans—by looting countries that are afraid not to concede to its demands. That's how currencies were rigged. That's how runs on currencies were created. That's how the Latin American debt was created: by stealing, by fraud! Fraud, practiced largely by the United States, with the help of Britain. They make a run on a currency; the IMF would come in like the shock troops, like the Nazi SS, tell the country to devalue its currency, but increase its debts, to make up for the devaluation. And they looted South America.

What they did to Africa, since 1966, is unconscionable. We have mass murder and genocide all over Africa, run by the British, United States, and certain Israeli operations, including Barrick Gold, which is an investment of the father of the present President of the United States! Genocide all over Africa.

We're doing the same thing in other parts of the world. We've been looting the world. We looted Japan, with the "Big Bang." We got the Japanese to print currency to bail out our financial markets, and they're going bankrupt as a result of it. And the Japapnese are afraid to say no. We're destroying the world with this system. And we're trying to set up a military system, based on an American people who are uneducated, highly opinionated, but ignorant, with no particular skills for any kind of skilled work; we've lost the skills; the jobs have run overseas; the farm area is a disaster area, psychologically and morally, because of what's been done to the farmers. Industrial centers in the United States have been destroyed; and the people in them have been largely destroyed. We don't have families any more; we don't even have latchkey children—our children are being destroyed by the social system which is being developed. We took away people's health care; we stole it from them. We're condemning them to death because we want to get rid of excess population—the best way to do it, is to cut back, through the HMO program—you'll increase the death rate quite nicely. The shutting down of D.C. General Hospital is a typical example of this kind of process.

So, you have a policy, centered in the Democratic Leadership Council, which Joe Lieberman represents, as Al Gore did, and this crew is behind this policy. They're behind the so-called New Economy policy, which has just blown out. This country is no longer the nation that produced a Martin Luther King. It's a different kind of a nation. And Lieberman represents that. So what we're dealing with here is, you're dealing with the inertia of a guy who was an ambitious, savagely ambitious person, completely untrustworthy and slimy, controlled by you know not whom; this guy is running for the top position in the Democratic Party in the United States. Ever since Jeffords resigned from the Republican Party, the Congress doesn't work, because you have an alliance in the Congress, typified by the McCain-Lieberman alliance, with Daschle going along with it, and the Congress can't get through a decent piece of legislation. Oh, a couple of things get through there, if the President of the United States wants them, at the time. But you have a system that doesn't work.

So, the Lieberman problem is very simple: Lieberman has to go. Let him sit in the Senate; if Connecticut wants to support him, let 'em support him. But he should not run the Democratic Party! We have to take over the Democratic Party! Because there are a lot of good people in there, but they believe that they have to go along with the leaders. Well, I don't know, I don't want to bring the guillotine in, or something like that, but I think we do have to have some change of leadership around there. And people like the questioner, knows what I mean. We have to get our gumption up. And the people will support us. Don't kid yourself. They will support us. The American people—now that it's clear to them, that this whole "recovery" was a fraud, a big financial fraud: Don't trust an accountant; never believe an accountant! You gave up on lawyers; now you can give up on accountants too!

So, in this kind of situation, I think the American people, if they sense there's a movement—and I know the American people from a long time. I knew their grandpappies. I know what's inside them. And if the American people see, with a sense that this is the crisis, that this is the time to start moving, we can make earthquakes, political earthquakes throughout the country. And the good Democrats inside the Democratic Party, can take over the Democratic Party, and they'll find cooperation from any good Republicans they find loose on the landscape. We can change this. The world is ready to accept a certain kind of leadership initiative from the United States. And if we show the gumption to our people inside the United States, and to the world, that we're ready to take that step, you'll find that people who have been spitting at us, will suddenly come to like us, and cooperate with us.

How To Get Peace in the Balkans

U.S. correspondent for the Macedonian daily Vecer: I would like to ask Mr. LaRouche to turn his attention on the issue of war and peace, actually, the security in the Balkans: because over the past ten years, we had three wars in the Balkans—in Bosnia, in Croatia, and in Kosovo, and in Macedonia last year.

So, we do have three peace agreements there, but we do not have peace, in the sense that there will be no more extremism there, and attacks. So, last week, we did have a Kosovo Parliament resolution which does not recognize the border agreement between two sovereign nations as Serbia and Macedonia are. Do you think that the role of the international community, the role of the United States and NATO, which are involved, deeply involved in this crisis in the Balkans, and soldiers are there also—do you think that they're trying to stabilize the region, or they're doing just the opposite?

LaRouche: The policy involves someone who's very close to Brzezinski: Madeleine Albright, who also has a connection to Condoleezza Rice, of course, who is now the President's teacher, or something, schoolmarm. And they all have this common feature, through the teacher of Condoleezza Rice, Josef Korbel, who's the father of Madeleine Albright. They all have a common feature, and if you look at the common feature, then you understand exactly what's going on.

These people are followers of a policy which was pulled together in 1928 around a book by H.G. Wells, called The Open Conspiracy. The Open Conspiracy, which was joined immediately by Bertrand Russell, has been the basis, the center, of the creation internationally, of a proposal for a new Roman Empire, a new kind of Roman Empire, which you can find detailed in The Open Conspiracy, what the issues are. It was this group, Russell and Wells—Wells, from 1913, was the first political figure, then as an official of the Fabian Society, and an intelligence operative for the British government at the time, wrote a book in which he added a preface—the book was fiction, but the preface was not—and what he proposed was that radioactive weapons, which were now possible, and he referred to Frederick Soddy's proposal on radium, radium bombs—that these should be used as a weapon so terrible, that governments would give up their sovereignty to world government, in order to avoid national wars.

This was the continued policy of Wells and of Russell. It was Russell and Wells and their group, including the Unification of the Sciences group of the United States, the development of cybernetics, the development of all these things, by the same group. The development of the drug programs of the United States; all these things came from this group. To destroy the sovereign nation-state, to create, in effect, a new world government, a new Roman Empire, of a new style, in which an elite, typified by Wells and Russell themselves, would actually run the world as an elite.

Now, this was the kind of thing you would see in a film that was done in the 1930s, composed by Wells, called "The Shape of Things to Come," in which this kind of world empire, post-war world empire, was proposed, with super-weapons.

Now, what this means is, in designing a new Roman Empire: It means that you declare certain areas of the world, as border areas, or what the Romans called "limes," the boundaries. What has been designated, is to take the former Yugoslavia, with some adjoining states, and destroy it, to turn it into a no-man's land, a limes. Now, what they've done, is they've gone in, and run, after the conclusion of the Desert Storm operation—the reason the United States pulled out of Iraq in Desert Storm, is because they wanted to get the Balkan wars started. That's why it happened. You want to know why they stopped the war in Iraq? They wanted to get the Balkan wars started. And Powell, who was then in charge of the operation, said no. We can not overextend ourselves. So they decided to go into the Balkan wars.

So the Balkan war is the intention to destroy the Balkans—a limes principle. Just as the declaration by Brzezinski, who is also a follower of this H.G. Wells philosophy—he's a fascist, just like the rest of them—is to destroy Islam, and to make Islam a limes area; by declaring Islam as an outlaw, a free-fire zone, you can destroy and control the countries which border on Islam. You can control Central Asia. You can destroy China, and one of the long-term objectives of this, is to destroy China. But the way you do it, is the way the Romans did it, with their limes policy—the Roman Empire—is you use military forces, as legionnaires of the professional army of the type described by Huntington and company; use that kind of army, which is our special warfare army, deployed in every part of the world, using naval power and air power, over the territory—just the way navies used to be used in the old days—and troops going in, hit-and-run troops, operations, guerrilla warfare, and so forth, playing one side against the other.

So the intention here, on the part of this faction in Britain, and in the United States, a faction typified by Madeleine Albright, her father Josef Korbel, and Brzezinski, is to destroy the Balkans.

So, what happened is, as you know, the Kosovo destabilization, in the case of Albania—was organized by the British, and by Madeleine Albright, to create precisely the problems which Macedonia faces now.

And the best thing I can say—practically, of course, my attitude about this is obvious. What I think should be done is obvious. My answer is that we should be developing the Balkans, with large-scale projects, because the Balkans is an essential part of the underbelly of Europe as a whole. If you wish to develop Europe effectively, if you wish to develop the connections, the trade connections, the economic connections, to the Middle East and other parts of Asia, you develop the Balkans. [Freeman interrupts here.]

Greetings From a Malvinas War Hero

Freeman: We have on the phone right now, Col. Mohamad Alí Seineldín, who is a distinguished military hero [applause], who led his nation's troops during the Malvinas War. He is speaking to us today from a prison in Argentina.

Colonel Seineldín: My great brother, friend of humanity, my good friend, Lyndon LaRouche.

This is Col. Mohamad Alí Seineldín, speaking to you from the military prison camp, of Campo de Mayo, in the Republic of Argentina. Who sends you a very warm embrace, and my tremendous joy in being able to share in your orders, this hard, but marvelous struggle, for the good of humanity, and for a better world.

You can be absolutely certain that from Ibero-America, together with our common friends Marivilia Carrasco, Lorenzo Carrasco, Gerardo Terán, and many others, we are struggling for a triumph of your ideas, and your projects, which are now being accepted, and propagated throughout all circles.

One of the most evident facts of this is the integration we have achieved between Argentina and Brazil, which is advancing with a lot of strength, and a lot of faith. And the other one is the acceptance, without a doubt, of your economic proposal, which is the only lifesaver for those nations of Ibero-America that are currently being destroyed.

Finally, so as not to extend myself too much, be aware of the fact that we are working with the message, your message, for unity. Either we hang together, or we will be hung together. The alternative we face in this crucial moment: Either we continue with the destruction of the world that has been carried out by the international establishment, the Bushes, Soroses, the Kissingers, etc.—or, we raise the standard of the reconstruction of the world with the gentleman, and patriarch, Lyndon LaRouche.

I pray to God and to Mary of Mercy, for the good that you represent to triumph, and we can save humanity, and the human species from the danger which it faces today.

For God and the great Ibero-American Fatherland, Mohamad Alí Seineldín, former colonel. [applause]

Freeman: Colonel Seineldín, we look forward to the day when we can host you here in Washington.

Seineldín: With my entire pleasure, I am looking forward to that opportunity, and thank you very much for having given me the opportunity to speak to Mr. Lyndon LaRouche.

LaRouche: Thank you very much, Colonel Seineldín.

Freeman: Lyn, would you like to say anything?

LaRouche: Well, it speaks for itself. What can I say? Can you top this?

Freeman: That was certainly a treat.

Before I take our next question, Lyn, before I interrupted you, do you have anything that you want to go back to, on that previous question, or shall we move ahead?

LaRouche: Just one final point. It's that, what is needed is a contrary policy to the present policy. I think Europeans would tend to support it, without U.S. pressure to the contrary. And that is the idea, that there should be a development project with the idea that the whole region below the Danube, to the Mediterranean, and to the Black Sea, should be a development area with large-scale projects, linked with the idea that this is a natural underbelly of Europe, and therefore it should be developed, with its economic potential, as the underbelly, and I think the nonsense would stop. I think the military nonsense could be controlled. There are forces who would very much love to control this mess, but the United States and Britain won't let them. If the United States and Britain would let these forces act, the mess would be cleaned up. You would have stability, and if there was a commitment to an economic development program, it would work. And that's what the area needs.

Stop Fascism in Amreica

Freeman: Okay. The next question is one that has been submitted by the youth committee of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation. That question is as follows: "Mr. LaRouche, we are rapidly approaching the Summer, and we are doing so in a period not only of economic collapse, but also of social collapse. There are almost no jobs available for inner-city youth, and we are faced with large numbers of idle youth, during hot weather, under very bad conditions. We are extremely concerned as to what the plight of American cities will be during these Summer months, particularly given the fact that we fear that current Attorney General John Ashcroft, and the people around him, will use this situation to consolidate top-down control.

We are not convinced, that the situation in America's cities will not become the equivalent of the kind of treatment that is currently being meted out to Palestinians in the Middle East.

We are not sure, whether or not Homeland Security, or the policy that you've referred to as the U.S. Northcom operation, is relevant to this or not, but, either way, we believe that we face a significant problem this Summer. Do you have any thoughts on this?

LaRouche: It's all true.

First of all—but you have to look at this historically; you have to look at this in a strategic, historic way, not just an "issue" way. Because it's much bigger than any issue in the particular sense.

What the U.S. government is tending to do now, under present economic and strategic policies, particularly since the reaction to Sept. 11, especially since the beginning of this year, the United States is embarked on a course which cannot be maintained, unless the United States becomes a fascist state, in the full sense of the term "Nazi." The elements are there. The tendencies are there.

You had, for example, in Germany, you had the comparison of 1931 to 1932, before 1933, you had these movements which were all moving already in a direction toward establishing a totalitarian state. The British, and certain people in New York, decided to make Hitler, and his movement, the choice. Hitler was bankrupt, he was about ready to fold up, in December of 1932. And money from New York, from Harriman, that great Democrat, and his circles, through the British circles, went to bail out the Nazi Party, and kept it alive, and through those same influences, with von Papen and others, they got the President of Germany to put Hitler into the Chancellery on Jan. 30, in '33, just shortly before the time that Roosevelt was going to be inaugurated in the United States.

Now, if that had not happened, Germany would have adopted the same policy, or similar policies, to those of Franklin Roosevelt, for recovery. In that case, no war would have ever occurred. No Nazism would have ever occurred.

Now, we're facing a similar situation in the United States itself. If this were to continue, unabated, the United States would become a fascist, terror state in the full sense of the word. And the Homeland Defense, and other measures, would be instruments used to bring that into place. Ashcroft has already made moves in that direction, whether he understands it or not.

The irony of the situation is this: The United States is now embarked, under the current President—I don't think he knows what's happening to him, but he's going along with it, because, I guess, Condoleezza tells him it's all right—but he's embarked on the Roman model, to set up a Roman Empire, based on English-speaking interests who rule the world as a Roman Empire. The problem here is, that when the Roman Empire was established, Rome was at the height of its power in the Mediterranean region. This empire is attempting to be established at a time that the United States is at its weakest internally, worldwide. It is ready to collapse.

We are in an economic crisis, a monetary-financial crisis, which can mean a total collapse. A physical collapse. The United States is trying to run wars all over the world. It does not have the capability of mobilizing for wars all over the world! It has nuclear bombs, thermonuclear bombs; it has bombers, which are aging somewhat. It is producing some new hardware in factories which need a bailout, because Bush's friends have interests, stock, in those factories. But for the economy itself, there is no basis, there is no war economy. So, the idea that the United States could repeat the Hitler war-economy model—it's not true. The United States is in worse condition, today, as an economy, than Germany was in the beginning of the 1930s. It can not do what the Nazis did.

So, under these conditions, with the breakdown of the system, and more and more of the world not only frightened, but hating the United States, and these policies, we're at a point where nothing is a foregone conclusion.

If we decide, if enough people around the world decide, this is not going to happen, it will not happen. But if we don't decide that, it will happen. If we do not decide to change the present economic system, back to the kind of model that Franklin Roosevelt represented, over 1933, through the continuation of his policies, in partial form, through 1965, there is no hope for the United States. Nor is there any hope for any of these problems. We are not going to solve any of these problems unless we have a change in the general economic policy of the United States—a fundamental swing, away from the policies of the past 35 years, to the policies more in keeping with the Roosevelt Administration, and post-war reconstruction. Without that, there's not a chance for the United States. That's why I spoke of courage today. Because there is no middle ground. There is no compromise. You can not compromise with Satan, when Hell's under siege. And that's the problem.

We have to move forth positively, not just negatively. Not against things that are bad—that won't work. You've got to move for things that are good; you must, in a time of crisis, not run around screaming how bad it is: You must inspire confidence by coming forth with programs which actually will give you the new kind of system which will deal with the problems. And that's what's needed.

We must take over the Democratic Party right now!

And as many Republicans who want to come along, they're welcome.

Freeman: On that note, before I take the next question, I'd like to just introduce someone whom I think everybody may already know, but we have Nancy Spannaus, who is the editor of New Federalist, but who also is seeking the Democratic nomination for Senate from the state of Virginia.

I think Nancy is accepting volunteer labor, and I know that she has a table out back, which I would invite all of you to visit. . . .

Ecumenicism versus the Roman Pantheon

Lyn, the next question, which is kind of a statement and a question—it was submitted by Monsignor H—, who is the director emeritus of Boys Town in Omaha, Nebraska. He writes:

"Dear Lyn,

"It is useful in times like these to have a life span, as you and I do, and as does our beloved friend Pope John Paul II, of just short of a century. It also helps to be punching a time clock that reads Eternity, rather than any particular day or hour, so then, you are looking at any event with a vision of the eternal, rather than just reacting to things.

"It also helps to have a lot of guts. Look at the Holy Father: He's apologized for everything from the Crusades to the Inquisition, and for the abuse of any child—whether by abortion, starvation, or sex. We should be spreading his example; his apologies have been some of the most important additions to the moral authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

"Look around and see that all our major institutions, from the White House to St. Peter's, are under attack; then ask, as I do, and as the Bishops meeting in Dallas next week must do: Who benefits from this mob mentality, screaming against the institution of the Catholic Church: `Crucify him! Crucify him!'?

"Now, you know that I am no newcomer to uncovering cover-ups. In 1973, after observing the goings-on of a new assistant assigned to me one week before, I went to the then-Archbishop and told him to do something about this guy. Anyone who could face up to what was going on could see it. But it was only last year, after decades of blinders-wearing bureaucracies, that anyone took this guy on. Today, he is sitting in a jail cell in Lincoln, Nebraska. I was ready to deal with it after one week. And, of course, you know that when I went to Boys Town, and had to have a 24-hour-a-day police guard, because I was cleaning up that mess, some people chose to use me for target practice. On one hand, you can roll up your sleeves, wade into the pig pen and clean it up; or on the other hand, you start letting the wildlife manage the humans.

"In Wisconsin this week, the TV news was going after some priest's, allegedly, miserable sins. He died 12 years ago and the TV news went out to the cemetery and broadcast pictures of his grave! I'd say they're really working hard to dig something up.

"So, in light of our combined ages, experiences and courage, I think a couple of things are worth bringing up before those young fellows meet in Dallas next week.

"One, is the interesting article that appeared in EIR magazine about some really big sinners on the Pentagon side of the Beltway—in what some people have been calling the `Robert Hanssen diocese,' sometimes known as Utopia.

"The other, is some things that Mother Teresa spoke to some of us about, which we should think about at a time like this. Among one of the useful things I did, was to have introduced one of your `female officer corps' to Mother Teresa while that saint was still walking this Earth. Many of us had recognized the difference in quality of religious vocations when the '60s rolled around. It was quite a bit different than what we had dealt with before, and we're seeing some of the fruits and nuts of it now.

"Your lieutenant talked with Mother Teresa, as she also did with me, about how at the very beginning of these roaring '60s, while these kids were still wearing beards and beads, you developed an inoculation so that they could walk through Sodom and its sister cities and not be infected or afraid. Mother Teresa spoke of what you taught these kids as being like the sign of the Cross drawn with the living ashes of repentance, which would allow these young people to spread to others your inoculation against the moral decay surrounding them. This is preparation to live in eternal reality, instead of, what they call these days, `virtual reality.' This is how these young people continue to fend off the ravages of the terrible disease `baby boomeritis' and lead their generation today.

"When Mother Teresa talked about how you did this, one could not forget it, since she was very funny, very blunt, and often very embarrassing.

"I'm bringing these things up right now, because I think we older fellows might be able to give some younger ones, who are preparing for their meeting in Dallas, some good advice. They sure could use it."

You got any advice, Lyn?

LaRouche: Well, I would just say that there is a comment on this thing, because of the problem he refers to, is: There's a movement which is centered around the British royal family, to create a world religion; to dissolve existing religious, into a world religion, as a part of an empire.

Now, recall that the way that the Romans set up their control, they set up this system of Pontifex Maximus, in which the emperor was the head of the religion. You had some people who had similar ideas in later times. You had, for example, Louis XIV of France, who made himself the Sun-King; he made himself the head of an organized religion. And the French religion was then to worship the Sun-King.

You had the case of Napoleon Bonaparte, who imitated Louis XIV, and made himself again a Sun-King. He was the first fascist, so you get the idea.

So, what is afoot today is the attempt to destroy what might be called traditional religious bodies, and to grind them up, as in a blender, and come out with a kind of soup. For example, the typical form of this, which is typical in the United States, you have a pro-fascist group, associated with the Hanssen case in Northern Virginia—Robert Hanssen, the FBI man with a funny sex life. And this group is closely affiliated around the so-called single-issuism, with the right-wing thunderboys like Robertson and Falwell.

So what you have, is you have the extreme, almost Satanic quality of fundamentalist, complete fakers and frauds and so forth, "Diamond Pat" Robertson—these guys are in bed, politically, in what originally was called the Christian Coalition (they then discreetly changed that) with these so-called Catholics, who have exactly the same fundamental politics, but they have it in a different variety. What you've got then, is a pantheonic formation. You have different religious cults, but they're all controlled by a mother cult, a world religion. And this is no good. This is the substitute for ecumenicism. And I say, sometimes I think every priest wants to dictate catechism, and not enough of them are missionaries, who want to nourish and save souls, and help people save themselves.

The missionary impulse, which I think is the recommended one, is, we should look at every human being as made in the image of the Creator, and we should try to, as a good missionary does, try to say what we have to say, to that person on that basis. And view every person as precious. And if they believe that man is made in the image of the Creator, and has certain responsibilities thereby, we already have a pretty good start. We don't need any pantheon. We don't need some world dictator, specifying what are and what are not approved religions. We simply have to have an ecumenical fraternity, of the type that Moses Mendelssohn, who was an Orthodox Jew to the day he died, represented in his time. And which actually Philo Judaeus, earlier, represented for Jews. We need that ecumenical view, of mankind, particularly Jews, Muslims, and Christians, who have to set the example, for the believers in this common principle of God and man.

And whatever differences we have, fine. But let us deal with each other only on that basis. And this kind of corruption that we're being subjected to now, would fade away. We start to get into single-issue debates, and fights over this, and agreements on this, and so forth—this is when the enemy comes in. And you'd think Mephistopheles has come in, and taken over the whole joint, the whole operation. And everybody's a Faust.

So, I think this is an important issue. I think more people should be aware of it. You saw the protests against the Middle East atrocities. Most of the basic churches, the established churches, religious bodies in the United States, protested against it. But only the nuts, who were for Sharon, were heard by the press. The honest Christians, the honest Muslims, the honest Jews, were not heard. Only the nuts were heard. And that's frightening.

And that's what I think is the message that should go to Dallas.