The August/September 2006 issue of the Hoover Institution’s {Policy Review} features an article entitled “Sustaining Our Resolve,” penned by none other than George P. Shultz, based upon a speech he delivered at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University. Remember that it was Shultz’s Princeton Project on National Security, the Rohatyn Center for International Affairs at Middlebury College, and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton, that jointly sponsored a conference in 2004, promoting “The Privatization of National Security.”
At the precise moment when the world is on the edge of a financial blow-out and a generalized asymmetric World War III, this article exposes the mind -- or what is left of the mind -- of the enemy against whom we are fighting. As Lyndon LaRouche said, Shultz is a car with only one gear -- perverse.
In the preliminaries of the article, Shultz takes credit for the doctrine of “active prevention, preemption and retaliation.” Sounding like the Dick Cheney whom he controls, Shultz rants that “ever since the Vietnam-Watergate era, we ourselves have, piece by piece denigrated, dismantled, or impeded our intelligence capabilities to a dangerous extent.” He attacks the {New York Times} for damaging the war on terrorism by exposing President Bush’s illegal spying operations. And then, in the tradition of Bertrand Russell, the most evil man of the 20th Century, he proposes that the solution to the Middle East crisis is to commit genocide: “Countries in the Middle East have fertility rates that put their populations out of control, with huge numbers of young people who have nothing to do, and whose lives are detached from the kind of reality that the act of working imparts.”
And in case this is not explicit enough, in a final section on “Gardening,” he writes: “The idea is to get out the weeds when they are small in order to develop an agenda of work that will be helpful to both parties.” As LaRouche said, this is infanticide. Shultz is gone; this is the senile phase of degeneration.
The Synarchist circles of Shultz and Rohatyn know that the financial system is in the process of blowing out. That is why they are pushing for war. And that is why Cheney, Bush, and Blair are attempting to use the reported terror plot based in Britain as a distraction from the blow-out of the financial system.
Virtually everyone with whom we have discussed LaRouche’s analysis of the terror plot, has seen it as a complete political ploy. As LaRouche stressed, there may have been a serious threat, but there is no indication that there was an imminent danger. The investigation was initiated as long ago as July 2005. Bush and Blair discussed it on numerous occasions.
Cheney’s attempt to use the arrests after Lieberman’s defeat, to attack the Democratic voters in Connecticut for giving encouragement to the “al-Qaeda types” and Lieberman’s subsequent Cheney-like attack on Lamont, have already backfired. As LaRouche said, Lieberman is exposed as a piece of c rap.
As many contacts have told us, Cheney, et al. are not getting the results they wanted. Private polls show that rather than Bush getting a bounce after the arrests, his support has fallen further. No one trusts Bush, Cheney, and Blair. As one person said, “They couldn’t wait for October to have an October Surprise.”
Lamont himself responded to Lieberman by saying, “Wow, that comment sounds an awful lot like Vice President Cheney’s comment on Wednesday.” About Cheney’s comment, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton said: “I don’t take anything he says seriously anymore. I think that he has been a very counterproductive, even destructive force in our country, and I am very disheartened by the failure of leadership from the President and Vice President.” Harry Reid has sent an e-mail to Democrats all over the country, in which he asks about Cheney’s remarks: “Is this the type of country we’re going to live in? Where the Vice President of the United States can blatantly suggest that Connecticut voters are aiding the terorists? Even more disgraceful is that when Cheney made those comments, he had been briefed on the Britain terror plot.”
As LaRouche said yesterday, there was a shift in the Senate Democratic leadership, just before the recess, which LaRouche had a direct hand in causing to occur. We should also not underestimate the impact of LaRouche’s last webcast, in which he told the Democrats in no uncertain terms, that they would lose the upcoming elections if they did not break from Rohatyn’s grip.
In that context, on Wednesday, Aug. 16, the LaRouche Political Action Committee intends to produce a first run of 100,000 copies of the transcript of the most recent webcast. The coming days and weeks will be decisive; we are defining the issues.
And LaRouche has already defined the next critical inflection point: the historic event and presentation by LaRouche on U.S. Cooperation in Eurasian Development Over the Next 50 Years, set to occur on or around Sept. 7.
