-Caveat Lector-
from alt.conspiracy
-----
As always, Caveat Lector.
Om
K
-----
<A HREF="aol://5863:126/alt.conspiracy:513587">EIR on "Things to Come"</A>
-----
Subject: EIR on "Things to Come"
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, Apr 9, 1999 7:13 AM
Message-id: <7el5e2$kk2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
EIR Talks
April 7, 1999
Interviewer: Tony Papert
Guest: Nancy Spannaus, Editor-in-Chief of New Federalist
``Things to Come''
TONY PAPERT: Welcome to ``EIR Talks.'' This is Tony Papert.
It's Wednesday, April 7, 1999, and with us in the studio is {New
Federalist} editor-in-chief Nancy Spannaus. The subject of
today's broadcast is ``Things to Come.''
We have wars girdling the globe today. In the Middle East,
we've been fighting an undeclared war against Iraq for most of
the past nine years. In Africa, there are countless wars -- many
wars, the largest probably being a war taking place in the
Republic of Congo, where, among other things, the armies of five
to six neighboring countries are engaged in an effort either to
preserve or overthrow the government of Congo President Kabila.
Neighboring Angola is in deepening civil war, as it has been for
most of the past decade.
In South America, Colombia is at war within its own borders;
again, a deepening war which has been going on for years.
Now, with the unleashing of a new Balkans war by our sorry
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Vice President Al Gore,
we have a new Iraq-style war in the very heart of Europe,
neighboring five other European countries.
Now, for the characters of these wars -- and this will be a
subject throughout our show -- look at this undeclared war
against Iraq. As we sit here today, U.S. and British planes are
taking off virtually daily, for apparently aimless bombing runs
on Iraq, hitting such targets as oil-pumping stations, and other
targets of opportunity.
More serious for the Iraqis, there has been an embargo on
Iraq for the entirety of the past nine years, which has doomed
its growing young generation to malnutrition, and doomed a
substantial proportion of them to lifelong stunting and mental
underdevelopment because of the effects of malnutrition in
childhood. And these were people who hadn't yet been born when
Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, which is supposedly
somehow the reason for the whole exercise.
Now, we're repeating a similar exercise in the Balkans. This
is not war in the classic sense of Clausewitz or the American
Revolutionary War, or the American Civil War; it's not war in the
sense that the government mobilizes the citizenry on behalf of a
clear moral purpose, there is no other resort, every other resort
has been cut off, the citizenry mobilizes itself for a great
moral effort, for a moral, winnable objective, and goes to war as
we did in World War II. These are not that kind of war at all.
This is war where there is no definite meaning of victory.
They're wars which go on indefinitely. Nobody can say when
they're going to end. And they're wars which -- and you'll see
this increasingly -- they're wars which involve on the one hand
ultra-modern Tomahawk missiles and other kinds of ultra-modern
so-called intelligent weaponry, and on the other hand, they
involve a rock to the skull, a stick to the back of the head, and
not just modern armies fighting, but neighbor against neighbor
and brother against brother.
So we have the world covered by these kinds of wars, if you
could look at it this way from outer space. They're not all
small wars, by any means; they're not yet as big as World War II
or World War I. But if these wars unite themselves in one
general conflagration, it will be a kind of World War III which
we've not seen on this planet since the Seventeenth Century -- a
war of all against all, with no end.
Now, Nancy, you've been studying the British New Dark Ages
faction of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century. Is there a plan
behind all these wars and warfare?
NANCY SPANNAUS: It's quite eerie, Tony, when you go back
and you look at the grouping that were the publicists for the
British imperialists at the end of the Nineteenth Century, the
beginning of the Twentieth Century, and you look particularly at
people like in the Fabian Society, people in the Coefficients
Club, like H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell -- Lord Bertrand
Russell -- and you see that they had a plan for reorganizing the
world that would permit permanent control by their class -- by
Bertrand Russell's class. Wells was a commoner.
But that would allow them to control, through mind control,
through drugs, through culture, the entire power over the
universe. And they wrote about it, quite openly. There was a
faction around Ruskin in the late Nineteenth Century that openly
said we want to go back to a New Dark Age.
But these characters ostensibly wanted human progress, and
they talked about human progress. But they actually wrote -- and
more than wrote -- propagandized and manipulated, a whole layer
of culture and popular entertainment and drugs and all sorts of
other artifacts which have shaped our culture today, to create a
kind of situation that we're facing now at the end of the
Twentieth Century.
Lyndon LaRouche has often said in the last few years, that
you can't understand the shift that the United States in
particular has gone through since the Kennedy assassination,
without understanding H.G. Wells. He wrote an article at the end
of 1997, called ``The Wells of Doom,'' which is something that I
looked at just recently again. And it's absolutely eerie that
the ideas that were being written in 1896, 1913, 1933, are the
ideas that people think they come up with by themselves.
They {think} that they are for denying technology to the
Third World, because something happened. It's not because of
that. It's because these ideas were put into circulation.
They've been surrounded by them in culture over this period.
TONY PAPERT: Who really was H.G. Wells? I mean, most of
our listeners I'm sure are familiar with his name.
NANCY SPANNAUS: He was a -- I think he was a middle-class
Briton who made a name for himself writing science fiction novels
in the 1890s. One of them people in the United States became
very familiar with in the late 1930s, called ``War of the
Worlds,'' when it was broadcast on radio and people thought we
were being invaded from Mars.
He wrote quite grisly science fiction movies, but then was
picked up in a more serious way, in the early part of the
Twentieth Century, and began to write more what you would call
scenarios.
What we're going to look at today -- this movie, ``Things to
Come,'' which Wells was involved personally in producing in 1933
-- came from a book that he wrote, called {Shape of Things To
Come,} which he did earlier in the thirties, and was an attempt
to rationally lay out how a one-world government would come into
being. It flopped.
I mean, one thing that Wells did, is he made his money by
writing, so he would write these long things that would be
serialized, and he would make money. So in this case, it was
very long, and it didn't work, so he hooked up with a fellow here
in the United States called Alex Korda (ph) and fortunately the
movie, which was shown in the late 1930s -- it was done in 1936
-- is in the public domain. So we are able to actually take a
look at sections of it, and people can begin to get the idea of
what was set into motion here.
Now, a couple of other things about Wells. Those who do
know him -- conspiracy buffs and so forth -- will know him as the
man who wrote a whole one-world government manifesto in the early
part of the century, {The Open Conspiracy.} And this is soup to
nuts. It's eliminate sovereign governments, population control,
and all the way down the line.
The second thing he did that is less well known, I believe,
is that in 1913, he wrote a monograph saying ``Well, mankind is
developing a new technology. It's nuclear technology. We can
foresee a time when we can bring mankind under control with
limited nuclear wars.'' And in fact, this concept, where he was
tied in to the leading edge of British science at the time, and
was aware of the fact that nuclear energy was being developed,
was something that was evolved into what people today would know
as ``Dr. Strangelove'' in the movie of the 1960s.
The man who was the model for Dr. Strangelove -- Dr. Leo
Szilard -- was actually a protege of H.G. Wells. And he didn't
come up with this idea on his own. And the idea, if people are
not familiar, is literally what's being discussed in strategic
circles today, that if this process of endless war, which you
were discussing, gets to the point where it's the United States
against the other nuclear superpower, which is Russia, still,
then we could make a deal. And the deal could be ``Well, we
knock off one of your cities with nuclear weapons, and you knock
off one of ours, and say 50 million people die. But it will blow
off steam, and we'll have a modus vivendi, and we'll be able to
proceed.''
Now, I'm not saying that it would happen that way. And this
is a {utopian} concept that the British Empire has. But you get
the idea of the maniacal willingness to see a devastation of
human life and civilization that these characters had in hopes of
being able to remain in control after the catastrophe has
actually happened.
Not that that would happen, in fact. LaRouche has often
pointed out in the recent period, too, there really -- and as we
can see by the demise of the United Nations in some respects --
this idea of having a one-world government which can contain any
kind of conflict, is really passe. You're either going to have a
total degeneration into barbarism, or you're going to have the
kind of proposals of sovereign nation cooperation that Lyndon
LaRouche has put forward in his New Bretton Woods proposals, and
which call for the alliance of China, Russia, and the United
States bringing in other sovereign nations, to actually begin to
rebuild the world.
So the only way you can really understand this war process,
is to understand that it's being orchestrated, not finger-tip
control, but in broad control of the strategic thinking of
policy-makers and of your strategic thinking, by a
British-American-Commonwealth faction -- the inheritors of H.G.
Wells' and Bertrand Russell's ideas.
Now, I want to review and we'll show a few clips of the
``Things to Come'' movie, because I think it will underscore the
point we're making, with people having to recall that this was
done in 1933. It was prior to the Second World War. And
obviously, people in Britain were aware that they were headed
toward a war with Germany, but this had not yet happened.
And none of our modern civilization -- this does not feature
nuclear war, but it does feature other aspects of what we
actually see going on right now.
So the movie opens in 1940, at which point -- right before
bombs begin to fall on a place called ``Everytown,'' which is
clearly London. And there's a little debate between the
characters who are there, and they say ``Well, is this war going
to be good for us?'', the way many stupid Americans and others
say today ``Well, gee, a war would be good, we can get our
industry started again.'' Or the British say when they want to
get their enemies fighting, ``Let's have a splendid little war in
the colonies.''
So one side is that. The other side says ``This may not be
the same this time. This time, when we have war, is there a
concept of victory?'' as you were saying. ``What will happen?''
And what proceeds over the next good 15 minutes or so of the
movie, is a process -- you see a process of endless war. And the
war in the movie goes on from 1940 to 1965 -- 25 years, verging
in to 1970, and civilization itself is wiped out. What you see
is just constantly -- you know, tanks, planes, gas warfare, which
of course had been done in World War I and was very well-known to
people. And ultimately, the elimination of the ability to even
fix anything that was destroyed.
And at the conclusion, disease breaks out of a sort that is
clearly meant to be reminiscent of the plague of the initial Dark
Ages, wiping out one-half of the population of the planet. And
we have a clip here that will give the viewers a sense of how
Wells portrays that.
FIRST VOICE: Mary, iodine.
SECOND VOICE (Female): There's no more left, father. This
is the last drop.
FIRST VOICE: Oh, God! What is the use of trying to save
this mad world?
SECOND VOICE: Oh, father, if only you could get some sleep.
FIRST VOICE: How can I sleep. See how they wander out
to die?
SCENE OF WANDERERS, WITH WILD MUSIC, PEOPLE FLEEING.
THIRD VOICE: Why not just shoot them?! It's their lives or
ours. Let's get God to make us .... (Sound of gun being fired.)
FIRST VOICE: That's how they dealt with the pestilence in
the Dark Ages.
- [end clip] -
NANCY SPANNAUS: So we see there the sickness taking over --
the plague. They called it the ``Wandering Sickness.'' The total
elimination of the modern capability of dealing with this by
science, and a return of barbarism in the world. In fact, you
could say that's precisely -- I mean, what that reminds me of is
Iraq, as you said, where the bombing campaign has in fact
eliminated the most advanced medical capability that existed in
the Middle East, so that no longer -- and in Russia, where in
many places of Russia, it's no longer possible.
So, having done this, created this horror scene that H.G.
Wells does, he then moves to set up what might be the solution.
At first what appears is groupings of primitive national tribes,
in effect, organized around bosses, who are trying to re-set up
civilization. And this guy's called ``The Boss,'' and he's taken
over, and he's trying to mobilize the technology and get his
country back together again -- when suddenly, out of the blue,
come the high-technology alternative to this. And from here,
this is the hero, so-called, of the film, a fellow by the name of
``Cabal,'' spelled as you would expect.
And Cabal represents the challenge of the One-World Order
against these people scraping to survive as national governments.
And if you want to think of this next scene that we see as NATO
versus Milosevic, I don't think you would have a very big
stretch. So let's take a look at the essence of what Wells is
trying to get across as the phony alternatives before us in this
strategic period.
- film clip -
THE BOSS: This is an independent sovereign state at war. I
know nothing about any old order. I'm the chief here, and I'm
not taking any orders, old or new, from you.
CABAL: I suppose I've walked into trouble.
THE BOSS: Yeah, you can take that as right.
THIRD VOICE: Where have you come from?
CABAL: I flew from headquarters at Basra this morning. We
have some hundreds of new type plans, and we're building more
fast. The factories are working again. We're gradually restoring
order and trade in the whole Mediterranean area. We're scouting
this region now to see how things are.
THE BOSS: You've found out. This is an independent
sovereign state.
CABAL: Yes. We must talk about that.
THE BOSS: We don't discuss it.
CABAL: We don't approve of independent sovereign states.
THE BOSS: You don't approve?
CABAL: We mean to stop them.
THE BOSS: That's war!
CABAL: If you will.
END OF CLIP.
NANCY SPANNAUS: Now in fact, you may not see that in the
press from day to day, but that is the concept behind the
British-American Commonwealth grouping. {There is no sovereign
nation-state.} That is what the reason in the broad sense, that
President Clinton right now is blinded from seeing why these
forces and their lackeys, like Gore and Albright -- and Blair,
who is one of the most prominent -- are calling for war against
Yugoslavia.
It's not against Yugoslavia, it's against the concept of the
sovereign nation-state, and any protection against such world
government domination -- which will control all the technology,
which will decide who gets technology, and who does not get
technology.
Now we want to show just the last section of this movie,
which again poses it very, very sharply, because getting out of
the war situation per se, what happens in the movie is, of
course, these guys take over, who control the high-technology
planes. They eliminate the nation-state, and they build modern
cities, and presumably set mankind free from barbarism, and set
him up for progress.
But in the book, it's clear that this is really done with
very tight genetic controls. People are reshaped. The deformed
people, the sick people, are eliminated, the population of the
world maintains itself at two billion people over the course of
centuries, because of this kind of culling.
But what you see in the movie, is an attempt to win the
minds of a certain elite to this idea of control of technology in
a demented anti-human form.
So, what we're going to see, is a splice, two parts from
the movie put together, which I think best show what this fellow
Cabal is really trying to put across for the audience.
BEGIN CLIP:
FIRST VOICE: That's what endless warfare has led to --
brigandage. What else could happen? But we, who are all that
are left of the old engineers and mechanics, have pledged
ourselves to salvage the world. We have the airways -- all
that's left of them. We have the seas. And we have ideas in
common. The Brotherhood of Efficiency, the Freemasonry of
Science.
(Music -- cut to the end of the movie)
FIRST VOICE (CABAL): There! There they go! That faint
gleam of light.
SECOND VOICE (PASSWORTHY): I feel that what we've done is
monstrous.
FIRST VOICE: What they've done is magnificent.
SECOND VOICE: Will they come back?
FIRST VOICE: Yes, and go again and again till the landing
is made and the Moon is conquered. This is only a beginning.
SECOND VOICE: But if they don't come back, my son and your
daughter -- what of that, Cabal?
FIRST VOICE: Then presently, others will go.
SECOND VOICE: Oh God, is there never to be any age of
happiness? Is there never to be any rest?
FIRST VOICE: Rest enough for the individual man -- too much
and too soon, and we call it death. But for man, no rest and no
ending. He must go on, conquest beyond conquest. First this
little planet, with its winds and waves. And then all the laws
of mind and matter that restrain us. Then the planets about it.
And then last, out across Immensity to the stars. And when he
has conquered all the deeps of space, and all the mysteries of
time, still he will be beginning.
SECOND VOICE: But we're such little creatures. Humanity is
so fragile, so weak. Little -- little animals.
FIRST VOICE: Little animals. If we're no more than
animals, we must snatch each little scrap of happiness, and live
and suffer and pass, mattering no more than all the other animals
do or have done. It is this -- or that. ALL THE UNIVERSE -- or
nothingness! Which shall it be, Passworthy?
- END OF CLIP -
NANCY SPANNAUS: Now, I hope our viewers were not so taken
in by that, that they think that they should choose between those
two. Contrary to what some of what the words say, the demented
idea of a Freemasonry of Science, which is going to control and
determine what happens to every individual on earth, in contrast
to man as a human being with a creative intellect, made in the
image of God, working through the nation-state, is dramatic.
And yet, today, I would bet that many so-called educated
people would tend to fall for choosing -- are we a worm, or are
we a superman, which is precisely what is presented here.
But the demonic nature of this vision, is what people have
to begin to understand in the mentality of the oligarchy, in the
mentality of the British-American Commonwealth grouping. And
that's what's behind this drive for war, which is effectively a
drive to try to prevent any alliance between the United States --
the premier nation-state on this planet -- and Russia and China.
It's a destructive drive, and pure destruction. Not with some
grand vision of how we're going to help mankind.
So, this is what Lyndon LaRouche has been stressing a great
deal lately. Yes, we need a war to eliminate this kind of
thinking and this kind of control over particularly President
Clinton.
What happened, as has been said on this show many times, is
that, over the course of the impeachment assault, President
Clinton was weakened. His powers of judgment have been impaired,
and he's been relying on a crew brought in by Gore in 1996-1997,
which has been tutored in this kind of approach to the world.
Gore is the quintessential technological apartheid ``we
control technology for your good'' kind of person, which does
translate into genocide. And that's what we're fighting, when
we're fighting this process of pushing forward toward war.
TONY PAPERT: Now, Madeleine Albright has been a very
prominent figure in bringing the United States into this Balkan
war. She engineered a fundamental change in the Rambouillet
negotiations last year. She tossed out the elected leader of the
Albanians of Kosova -- ethnic Albanians of Kosova, Ibrahim
Rugova. She replaced him by a terrorist organization, the KLA.
And since then, it's been all downhill in the negotiations.
That led to the shoving of the Russians out of the
negotiations, to achieving, contrary to the whole set-up, to
achieving an agreement which was rejected in advance by the
Russians, for NATO military power in Bosnia. And from there on,
it was an inevitable catapult into the war in which we find
ourselves now.
I know you've been reviewing {EIR}'s file on Zbigniew
Brzezinski, who was the teacher of Madeleine Albright. And when
we return, I'd like you to tell us how the thinking and career of
Brzezinski relates to this mad adventure we've now engaged in
the Balkans, if it does.
NANCY SPANNAUS: It certainly does. Woody Woodpecker's at
it again, and he's knocking at the foundations of civilization,
I'm afraid.
TONY PAPERT: You're watching ``EIR Talks.'' We'll be right
back.
for more information about EIR and the LaRouche movement:
http://members.aol.com/eusebius7
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
