- In a pointed warning to those pushing a near-term military
confrontation with Iran, Lyndon LaRouche declared, on Feb. 3: "An
Iran confrontation or even a more limited military strike against Syria,
would be merely a fuse. The bomb, that would be detonated by any such action,
is the blowout of the entire global financial and monetary system."
- LaRouche further warned that, while leading provocateurs
for such confrontation inside the Bush Administration, led by Vice President
Dick Cheney, are wholly ignorant of the "monetary bomb" that
they are dangerously close to detonating, "no such naïveté
is to be found among the London-centered Synarchist circles who are orchestrating
this showdown." "The same City of London-centered Synarchists
who are promoting a one-world fascist 'post-Westphalia' bankers' dictatorship,"
LaRouche added, "have been pulling the strings of certain radical
Islamists since the time of the Sykes-Picot Treaty and the 1920s British
Intelligence sponsorship of the Muslim Brotherhood.
- "We are staring at a confrontation," LaRouche
warned, "more hideous than World War I, because the global financial
and monetary system is already on the verge of vaporization, and any new
military confrontation in the world's oil patch, particularly one involving
the possible pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons, will trigger global war,
chaos, and the unleashing of a full-scale new dark age. The fools in Washington,
typified by Vice President Cheney, have no idea what they are detonating.
They just blindly follow the orders of Synarchists like George Shultz.
- "Nevertheless," LaRouche concluded, "the
actions of Cheney and company, who are pushing a military showdown with
Iran in the immediate weeks ahead, threaten to destroy the United States
as a sovereign Republic, just as their recent antics to install Samuel
Alito on the United States Supreme Court represented a large step towards
ripping up the U.S. Constitution as a living document. Such actions border
- LaRouche emphasized that London financial circles are
operating off a long-standing "Venetian modus operandi" of orchestrated
conflict. "In the history of the British Empire, which was launched
with the orchestration of the Seven Years' War (1756-1763)," he explained,
"London has persistently employed the Venetian method of orchestrating
wars across Eurasia, as a means of maintaining the British Empire against
challenges from continental rivals.
- "Study the history," LaRouche said, "and
you see the recurring pattern: The Seven Years' War, the British East India
Company-orchestrated French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean
War, the British-manipulated U.S. Civil War, the British-backed French
invasion of Mexico, then World War I and World War II, the Winston Churchill-orchestrated
Cold War, the Indochina War. The British start wars in which they induce
two parties to fight it out."
- "Sometimes, as in World War I and II, the British
participate, and suffer heavy casualties, too; but, that is the price they
pay for manipulating their rivals and others alike into the waves of ruinous
conflict in which the London-centered imperialist financier faction comes
out on top, sooner or later. Right now, in the matter of Iran, Jack Straw
and other British are playing the present government of Iran, the U.S.
institutions, even many in the Democrtic party, and others, for fools,
- "At present," LaRouche continued, "the
City of London-centered financier circles know that if the present global
financial and monetary system collapses, as the result of a new Persian
Gulf-centered confrontation, the financier crowd, through their offshore
hedge fund operations, which hold nominal ownership over much of the planet's
raw material wealth, will seize control over the world. Under the present
system of laws, these London circles will claim ownership over the raw
material and productive capacities of the planet, and we will have total
globalization, global Synarchist dictatorship."
- British Orchestration
- On Saturday, Feb. 4, the 35-member board of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted 27-3, with five abstentions, to report
Iran's nuclear program to the United Nations Security Council. The action
came after last-ditch efforts by the Non-Aligned Movement to stall the
vote were stymied by a compromise, orchestrated by the British government.
Within moments, the Iranian government announced that all diplomatic negotiations
were closed, and that Iran would resume all aspects of its nuclear reprocessing
program, which had been stalled during two years of negotiations, and had
been partially resumed on Jan. 10, 2006, thus offering the pretext for
the current showdown.
- The Iranian government had further helped fuel the British-orchestrated
showdown by repudiating its support for a compromise solution put forward
by the Russian government, through which Russia and Iran would jointly
provide enriched material for Iran's nuclear power plants on Russian soil,
thus providing assurances that Iran would not be able to develop its own
weapons-grade material for building a nuclear bomb. After Iranian Supreme
National Security Council Secretary General Ali Larijani had visited Moscow
in late January 2006, and signalled his support for the Russian offer,
that support was abruptly rescinded once Larijani returned to Tehran. And
to make matters worse, Iran intervened in a dispute between Russia and
Georgia over oil and gas supplies, by announcing, on the eve of the meetings
of the five Security Council permanent members, that they would guarantee
Georgia's energy supplies. Russian President Vladimir Putin read the Iranian
action as a slap in the face to Moscow, and as a clear signal that Iran
was not prepared to reach a deal on the nuclear enrichment and reprocessing
- These actions by the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad leadership
in Tehran merely served to demonstrate that they are nothing but half-witted
pawns in the greater British game-like the Shultz-steered Cheney crowd
- The clock is now ticking towards a March 6 IAEA session,
at which Dr. Mohammed ElBaradei will deliver his report on Iran's nuclear
program. But the Feb. 4 vote virtually assures that, regardless of the
content of the IAEA report, Iran will be referred to the Security Council
for action, including sanctions or even military strikes.
- To fully comprehend the events now unfolding and to appreciate
the Venetian intrigues being orchestrated out of London, through the Blair
government, one needs to have a grasp of history. Although in the past,
the British Foreign Office's infamous Arab Bureau pulled the strings of
Islamic potentates and radicals, through the hands-on presence of British
"advisors" and proconsuls, much of today's orchestrated "crisis"
has been managed through in-depth psychological profiling of key players
and institutions on both sides of the looming confrontation.
- According to numerous media accounts, the confrontation
over Iran's nuclear program was locked in on Jan. 31, at a private ministerial
dinner in London at the home of British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Straw
proposed to his counterparts from the United States, France, Russia, and
China-the five permanent members, along with Great Britain, of the United
Nations Security Council-that the Iranians be immediately referred to the
Council for action "backing up the IAEA."
- Public accounts of the private dinner are sparse, but
it is clear that Straw put the sanctions issue on the table, and then mediated
between the "extremes" presented by Washington, on the one side,
and Russia and China, on the other. According to news accounts, U.S. Secretary
Condoleezza Rice pressed for an immediate Security Council referral and
sanctions, while Russia and China insisted that the IAEA process be allowed
to play out through March, while continued negotiations between Russia
and Iran, with backup from Beijing, sought to head off a Security Council
- Rice had gotten her cue from longtime mentor and leading
Synarchist figure George Shultz. Shultz and R. James Woolsey, former CIA
Director and leading neo-conservative, are now co-chairs of the Committee
on the Present Danger, a notorious Cold War-era Anglo-American imperial
front group, which issued a Jan. 23, 2006 white paper, demanding regime
change in Tehran, and emergency action to shut down Iran's nuclear program.
Beyond the demand for immediate UN and American sanctions, the paper also
demanded: an embargo of petroleum products to Iran; the convening of an
international tribunal, to prosecute Iran's Grand Ayatollah Khamemei and
President Ahmadinejad; and an agressive campaign of covert and overt aid
to anti-regime "dissidents" inside Iran.
- Keep Your Eyes on London
- The recent Iranian elections, in which Ahmadinejad won
a majority of the estimated 25% of the Iranian eligible voters who turned
out, set the Iranians on a confrontation course perfectly in sync with
Britain's global game. Sources familiar with the ongoing internal power
struggle in Tehran report that the Revolutionary Guard and militia circles
behind Ahmadinejad, are out to provoke what they presume will be a "limited"
military strike against the Islamic Republic, a strike that will enable
them to consolidate power.
- The essentials of the Washington/Tehran showdown were
fully set as early as August 2005. At that time, LaRouche exposed Dick
Cheney's "Guns of August," which were already aimed for a pre-emptive
strike against Iran's purported nuclear weapons program. But the U.S. military
institutions then intervened to leak details of the Administration's plans
for a Strategic Command aerial attack on Iran, with a possible use of nuclear
weapons, to knock out "hardened" targets. LaRouche's intervention
at the time prevented such an attack while the U.S. Congress was in recess.