All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 2, 2024 - Blood Money
01:03:43
The British Government has Always Been The Biggest Enemy of Freedom - BM Eps 261
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Music.
All right, welcome to the latest episode of Blood Money Today.
Today we have a very special guest, Tim Rush.
How are you doing, sir?
I'm doing fine.
Thank you, Vem.
Great having you on our show.
So we hung out a little while ago, a few days back.
And, you know, why don't we just dive right into it in terms of what institute you work for and what the significance of that institute is.
Great.
The institute I work with is the Schiller Institute, which is part of a series of institutions that have been set up more than 50 years ago by Lyndon LaRouche.
And his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
This includes a news service called Executive Intelligence Review, founded exactly 50 years ago now.
The Schiller Institute, founded by Helga Zepp-LaRouche 40 years ago.
And we have the LaRouche Organization, which is our arm inside the United States, involved most directly in the political life of our country.
We work internationally.
We work inside the U.S. And one of the hallmarks of LaRouche's commitments over all his life, he died five years ago at age 96, was that we in the United States have a special role not only for our own descendants,
for our posterity, as it says in the Constitution, but also that we must be a force that represents for the rest of the world A factor that people look to for improvement in their conditions.
People think of the popularity of presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, like Kennedy, like Lincoln.
These people are not Respected and loved around the world for just being American.
They represented principles embedded in the founding of our country that especially the term promote the general welfare meant a great deal whenever the United States actually lived up to those principles.
Tim, what we discussed is how most of the people in this country don't know why we've been heading into tyranny.
But as you and I discussed, the British have had a lot to do with this.
We think we kicked out the British in 1776.
But the reality and truth of really what's happened is a lot more different.
Could you kind of hold our hand and explain to us how we got to this juncture right now where we are certainly feeling the limitations of our constitutional rights, tyranny, and almost like a European-style socialism-slash-communism creeping up into our way of life, into our country?
There are a number of very remarkable facets to your question.
It's an extremely fruitful, in fact, vital question to ask.
It's hidden behind so much.
But if people just reflect on how often the phrase, the special relationship Between the US and Britain comes up all the time.
When Keith Starmer, the new Labour Prime Minister of Britain, came over to try to arm twist Biden into allowing British and US guided long-range missiles to be handed over to Ukraine to then launch attacks on strategic facilities deep inside Russia.
That kind of brought to the surface the phrase special relationship, but also the reality that, and there's a phrase that encapsulates this that some people may have heard them, which is that we have British brains and American brawn.
And this is certainly not what the case, this had not been the case up through Kennedy, but increasingly over the last 50 years we have been leeched.
The quality of the United States defined in its earlier days as the great first anti-colonial revolution experienced in the world.
And the depth of the conception of a republic contained in things like the Federalist Papers, economically, the initial program of Alexander Hamilton, what became in the 19th century known as the American system of economics against what?
Not socialism, not anything else, but the British system.
All through the 19th century, this was a prominent feature of just general knowledge in the country.
But it's been successively leached out by Anglophile forces, deeply embedded in Wall Street, increasingly embedded in the permanent bureaucracy of our government, what some people call a deep state, that basically took the United States back to the British system.
Both in economics, in terms of free trade, globalization, outsourcing, huge piles of garbage, speculative debts, unregulated offshore markets in the Caribbean, etc.
That's in drugs.
That's the British system.
And so increasingly, over the last 50 years, we've embraced exactly what we fought against.
From 1776 until 1783, and then we had to give it a foundation with the Constitution and the launching of our full Republic.
We've gone back to that British system.
So just to answer your question, and we can pick up features of it as you want to steer it, I see three key features of this nefarious British role.
One is just the current horizon, how visibly The British are egging on maximum confrontation between NATO and Russia in ways that increasingly converge on nuclear chicken game dynamics.
And when you get into that, Anything could happen.
I mean, it could be an accident.
It could be somebody who's fanatic enough to think you can win a nuclear war and launch a preemptive strike.
It could be something where the Russian doctrine will respond because they see the Russian nation through these long-range attacks that could go after their—and already have— Through drones gone after their early warning systems for their nuclear forces.
In other words, if you start attacking the other nations' ability to withstand an initial nuclear attack and launch a retaliatory one, you're in a territory of absolutely terrifying calculations of when you would want to preempt a strike one way or the other.
We've got to get out of that whole dynamic.
The British are out front demanding at every turn That we do launch these kinds of deep attacks and similar things, maybe attacks on nuclear plants.
I mean, just horrendous things to be huge provocations.
People should remember that it was British Prime Minister Boris Johnson who flew into Kiev in the beginning of April 2022 after the Ukrainians and Russians had successfully negotiated the framework of a peace agreement at that point One month after the launch of the Russian Special Military Operation that would have ended the war right then.
It was the British Prime Minister on behalf of NATO in certain circles in Washington who came in and said, no, nothing doing.
We'll back you.
Whatever you need militarily, cover diplomatically, we're going to back you up and we're going to destroy Russia.
It was the British who led that.
People should reflect back on how we got involved in the Iraq War.
In 2003, under the idea that somehow Saddam Hussein was a front for bin Laden and al-Qaeda, when in fact they were mortal enemies.
But what triggered the final push?
A report from the British, through Tony Blair, that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
A complete lie.
Completely concocted piece of fiction.
And when Colin Powell was obligated to get up at the United Nations and say, you know, we're going to war, he said, I'm holding in my hand this British report.
That proves that there were weapons of mass destruction.
I throw these out just as a sample of how the British are doing, and we can get into it, and I think it's useful, and you may have some ways that you want to phrase some questions on this.
Why would the British be doing this?
The second key area is going back to those economics in terms of the American system, 19th century versus the British system.
Fundamental, it's been written out of our current economic textbooks.
You've been robbed.
You've been robbed of one of the great precious jewels of the quality of this nation.
And then the third area, which I can tell you, Vim, I'm very happy with my colleague, Dave Christie, who's done a lot of work on this, can come back on your show at another time to go into the way.
The British are in the lead right now on creating a surveillance state on steroids and packaging it and shipping it out.
Through NATO, so-called counter-disinformation centers, into the United States.
I think it's called CISA. You might remember the acronym, what it stands for.
Something counter-intelligence or counter-disinformation and information warfare or whatever.
Jan Easterly runs it.
Anyway, the mother of all this is coming out of British Psi War operations, and these have a history going back almost 100 years.
So I'm very happy to be able to tell you that my colleague, Dave Christie, who has done tremendous work on this, he'll be able to get on a subsequent show.
That's amazing.
I mean, when we were talking, it's funny because I turned to you and I said, you know, based upon my research and knowledge and these documentaries we've done and personal experiences, British are by far our greatest enemy yesterday and today.
Now, how do you respond to that?
Absolutely.
That's all I can say.
Wow.
All right.
Let's dissect.
I mean, you've talked about the oppression of rights.
You know, I'll tell you a little bit about my personal experiences, and then I want you to riff on that.
So the first episode of this Blood Money podcast was actually with an individual who had his children stolen from him by the UK government, and the children were sold off in a forced adoption.
And this individual talked about how essentially he had PTSD because he was the victim of domestic violence, a male, by the way, and there's her horrible pictures in that episode with this guy getting punched in the face because he had a lot of blood.
I think she stuck a knife in his throat and there was, you know, blood coming out.
So clearly somebody that was abused.
So the price he paid for that is he lost his three children forever.
And I don't even know if the guy is still alive because he was so distraught that he decided to go fight in the Ukrainian war.
So he might have died by now.
Right.
He talked about how when he was protesting the family law corruption, the kidnapping and trafficking institution of family law in the United Kingdom.
July 5, the intelligence, I guess, unit or of the United Kingdom came to his door, kicked his door down, dragged him out, accused him of domestic terrorism, tried to bribe him and say, we'll bring your children back if you actually spy on the other family law we'll bring your children back if you actually spy on the other family law advocates and kept him in captivity for 48 hours without any due process because he was being And he later found out that the entire thing was nonsense.
They were really doing that because you're allowed no due process.
And all he was was a grieving father that whose children were literally kidnapped, trafficked and sold into forced adoption to a gay couple, by the way, which is kind of interesting as well, because there's a history with Tony Blair essentially doing that with good parents and stealing children and coming up with laws that allow for this kidnapping and trafficking to occur.
And the whole thing horrified me.
And then I started seeing similar things happening here as if an echo from what was happening in the United Kingdom.
And I thought to myself, you know, wow, like we're literally importing their criminal syndicate over here into this country and destroying our own children.
That was my assessment.
I would love to get your thoughts on that.
Well, I think that's a very useful lens to the broader picture, and I look forward to when my colleague Dave Christie can go into more on that.
I want to just qualify what we said before when you asked about past and present in Britain as our greatest enemy.
Obviously not the British people.
They suffer from the British system as much or more than anybody.
We're talking about an old...
I can add one detail on that topic.
So what I also found out, and just riffing off of what you just said in terms of the British people suffering, until the 1980s, the British courts would take children from single moms...
That got pregnant and do the exact same thing I just talked about with this gentleman.
And now they're saying sorry because, hey, they always say sorry 50 years later.
Doesn't matter that that individual, that mom, the multiple single moms, now were distraught, their lives destroyed, suffering for the rest of their lives.
They just come and they say sorry and they think it's all over.
And then they repeat the same nonsense using father's.
Yeah, so no, the British people definitely are the victims of this as much as anybody.
The oligarchical elite embedded especially around the British monarchy, the institution of the monarchy, is sort of the center of the oligarchical factions that exist in other countries.
But Britain, because of its long history of the British Empire, because of the fact that it still has that monarchy, which has a lot more power than most people realize, because it has in the city of London, And I think many people may know this, but not necessarily everybody.
When you say the city of London, it's not simply like saying New York City or the city of Washington.
It's talking about a one square mile section of London in which the financial power of the empire has been concentrated for 250 years or so.
This city of London set up and is really the principal operator of the globalist financial system, which eliminates sovereignty of nations, puts financiers in charge of or their press conduits and they're bought and paid for political figures.
In charge, clearly joined at the hip with Wall Street.
But people might be surprised to know that all of these fantastically speculative nanosecond transactions, these derivative bets and the rest of what pumps up the Wall Street bubbles, the procedures to do that all originate in London.
And in fact, today, London has a greater percentage of the world derivative markets and related currency trades and so forth than Wall Street.
Wall Street is by no means a piker in this.
But people should look to London as the mother of it and still the dominant force.
And that's what oppresses the British people, obviously.
It's actually the core of the problem internationally.
It's so insane.
Like, how have they managed to hold on to so much power in the United States?
I mean, we thought we'd kick these people out in 1776.
They were trying to oppress us and do similar things back then.
It seems like the British haven't changed their tune, yet it seems as though they have quite a lot of control here.
And tell me, does that relate to the bar, too?
I've heard the bar is really the British Accreditation Registry, and that's how they control our legal institutions.
You know, oppression of black people pretty much all the way up until like the last, you know, couple of decades where, you know, due to the system, they're basically thrown in jail.
Doesn't mean if they're...
And by the way, Kamala Harris was a part of that whole scheme, putting a bunch of black men in jail that were either guilty or, sorry, innocent or had served their time.
So it seems as though this oppression tactic has been used over there, has been used over here.
I mean, what do you say to all that?
Well, obviously the Assange case is relevant to that also in terms of the collaboration between the diseased parts of our Anglophile system and the British with the Belmarsh torture of him.
One of the key points that we did discuss and I'd like to bring forward for your viewers today to get a flavor of this is that in 1982 Henry Kissinger was no longer running the State Department or the National Security Council, but obviously a very, very powerful figure in the Anglophile establishment of the United States.
He went to London, June of 1982, and he gave a keynote address at the 200th anniversary of the founding of the British Foreign Office.
Now, if you go back in your mind, what is 200 years before 1982?
1782.
What is going on in 1782?
We are about to win the American Revolution.
So the British Foreign Office was set up to counter the American Revolution around the world.
They didn't want to see other nations able to follow in our footsteps.
So what does he say in his speech?
He says, when I was Secretary of State and I had other high offices, I briefed the British Ambassador of Development before I briefed my own State Department.
I worked off of documents which still had British spellings in them.
And I sided with the British against Franklin Roosevelt at the end of World War II. We needed to get back to balance of power agreements that didn't have moral character.
Roosevelt wanted to see a decolonialized third world, developing world, global south, whatever you want to call it, and see the United States able to export lots of capital goods for big industrial and infrastructure projects that were going to lift the former colonial world up to modern standards of living.
Churchill would have none of that.
He said, I didn't fight World War II to lose the British Empire.
And Kissinger came out in 1982 and said, I sided with Churchill.
So you really get an idea of the way that, this is partly answering your question, how we fell together.
You know, how we were captured by the ideas that we had fought against.
But one very, very important additional point.
Two months later, in August of 1982, Henry Kissinger wrote a letter to the head of the FBI, a fellow named Bill Webster, William Webster at the time, saying, Lyndon LaRouche is increasingly obnoxious.
Isn't there something you can do about that?
And what they did about that is create not just the FBI, but a part of the CIA, a whole element from the Department of Justice, what LaRouche later called the permanent bureaucracy, swung into action through a Wall Street banker named John Train,
They convened a whole salon, a whole group of press whores to go out and defame LaRouche, chapter and verse, calling them communist or Nazi or anti-black or anti-Semitic or anything that they thought would have particular resonance in whatever targeted part of the population they were trying to poison.
And then they went with a series of indictments on fabricated charges.
Dragged LaRouche through several trials.
They couldn't find a judge corrupt enough to put him away for about three years.
But finally, in early 1989, through Alexandria, Virginia, they got a compliant judge and they hauled LaRouche off to prison for five years.
Now, there are certain elements of this that you could point to of why the British, through Kissinger, were targeting LaRouche so hard.
And there were others that were on the British string.
And they're significant.
LaRouche had won Ronald Reagan over to the idea of using lasers and other advanced physical principles to intercept ballistic missiles in flight and end the danger of nuclear war.
That was later called the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Star Wars was dubbed popularly in the media.
That was LaRouche's program.
Similarly, LaRouche was working with Mexico, India, other nations to overthrow the dictatorship of the International Monetary Fund.
Put in place more Hamiltonian principles of credit for major development of the poor areas of the world.
Those were important factors, but the fundamental factor is that LaRouche was reviving the American system of economics in general and the American tradition of foreign policy identified particularly with John Quincy Adams.
We don't go abroad in search of monsters to destroy, but we are the shining example to inspire other people.
They want to destroy American system economics and diplomacy and LaRouche was the key guy fighting against the whole establishment which infested both parties.
He ran for president a number of times in the Democratic Party but against the Democratic Party leadership and collaborating with anybody of any stripe on this program of reviving the American system and reviving our scientific and technological productive identity.
I mentioned this is a nice lens to link what you were asking about in terms of the British style of censorship, of political persecution, of psychological warfare.
It's parallel and often directly linked elements on the US side with this fundamental fight over what kind of economics we have, whether we're in the British system or whether we're in the American system.
You know, it's interesting.
I'm going to throw you a little story.
So because we do documentaries and exposés as a part of my network, one of the threats we've gotten is actually be arrested by the British.
By the way, the Canadians are pretty much towing the same line because some of the work that we've done has exposed massive corruption in Canada, massive corruption in the United Kingdom.
Now you have the chief of police in the United Kingdom saying she's going to come arrest Americans if they do wrong speech on their Facebooks, right?
So I'm throwing those two little factoids.
I mean, this actually, in terms of them trying to have me arrested literally for exposing their corruption, those threats started about seven years ago, believe it or not.
Today, they're talking about arresting Americans for Facebook posts.
I would love for you to slice and dice what I just said.
Well, the key British institution going back about almost 100 years in terms of the psychological warfare effort and then orchestrating the direct police day offshoots of that is called the Tavistock Institute.
And one of the key figures here, a fellow named H.G. Wells, people know him from his late 19th century science fiction.
When worlds collide, people will remember H.G. Wells, you know.
Various forms of science fiction or whatever.
But he was a core part of the British upper elites.
And in 1929, he wrote a book I'm trying to remember the title on it right now.
But the substance of it is that if you subvert the thinking of the nation that you're trying to parasitize, trying to infiltrate, that that's the way you're going to win when you can't win militarily.
And that's a very important observation in regards to how the British have approached us.
They tried militarily in 1812.
To retake us.
They worked through the Confederacy during the Civil War to try to destroy and fragment us.
The British completely backed the Confederacy.
And in fact, the Confederate Constitution, this is very interesting, was modeled on the US Constitution except in two regards.
One, the principle of general welfare was eliminated.
In other words, the oligarchy had not even, in words, a threat of someone who defends the progress of the entire population.
Only the oligarchy has any physical comfort.
But second, they eliminated any internal improvements except having better buoys and lighthouses on the ports.
You couldn't build railroads.
You weren't going to build canals.
You weren't going to upgrade any of the other infrastructure, which was inherent in the Hamiltonian American system.
You had the buoys and the lighthouses to facilitate the cotton that was going to be written.
So, you know, you could see, you know, the way this battle was shaping.
The British, after that, they didn't succeed in fragmenting the American Republic.
So then they turned their efforts towards subverting our institutions that shape public policy.
The Council on Foreign Relations, CFR in New York City, was founded as an offshoot of the British, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, RIIA, also known popularly as Chatham House.
CFR was founded as an offshoot of Chatham House in London.
It brought in the British doctrines of geopolitics that there was no way to actually foster what today is sometimes called win-win economic and strategic relations.
You know, any rise of one country was at to the loss of another country.
It was zero sum at best.
And you wanted to keep nations or factions at loggerheads as much as possible.
Don't have any long enduring peace.
Make sure you can precipitate through a terrorist incident Or other kind of contrived spark, renewed fighting anywhere you want, and you can see that in the Middle East right now, you certainly have it over Ukraine and so forth, that are going to destabilize and keep separate parts of the world that otherwise would collaborate.
And which would be our natural allies.
The British want to sow as much mayhem and embedded hatreds that they can play on all of this for perpetual war, what today we call the forever wars.
That's British geopolitical policy.
They inserted it starting in the 1920s, 30s, and really went on steroids with it in the 1990s.
Once the Soviet Union disintegrated, it was the British policy funneled into this country through what are called the neocons to have the United States again be the British brains US brawn on the succession of wars that have so weakened our country, brought no security anywhere in the world.
And are played today by the British, as you see from what I mentioned on Keith Starmer coming in, what Boris Johnson was doing, what Tony Blair is doing.
These guys are up to their bloody necks in these horrendous policies of maximum killing.
I should add one last thing, and then I'll turn it back to you because I'm talking probably more about that.
I mean, much more dialogue should be brought in here.
But the core of the British approach is what's called Malthusianism.
And that's the doctrine of Thomas Malthus, who was an employee of the British East India Company, That we eat faster than we think.
That we always will run out of our resources.
That the population grows at an exponential rate, a geometric rate, but our ability to produce the food and the other things we need at only an arithmetic rate, in other words, linearly.
So the population growth always outstrips our resources.
So you're being a benefactor of mankind when you accelerate death rates.
And he actually wrote in his famous statement on population, by preference we should locate cities and towns next to disease-bearing swamps to deliberately induce high death rates.
He was made the leading lecturer at the college founded by the British East India Company called Haleybury to put the stock.
Now today, this is the limits to growth, zero growth.
It's at the center of the green ideology.
Mankind, too many of us, we've got to reduce human population if we're going to save the planet.
All of these pretexts for outright genocide.
This is the core axiom of the British system.
So when you say that, and then just rewinding back to COVID, right?
The first person to announce COVID to the world and lockdowns and all this ridiculous stuff, which we found out is really pretty much a death call.
Pretty much, you know, whoever took this vaccine is regretting it now.
So many cases of myocarditis, so many people that have died, so many, like, cancers 3,000% now.
And Prince Charles was the first person to put this in motion.
Is that correct, first of all, and does that relate to what you just said?
I don't know the specifics of that, but it certainly coheres with what I know of Prince Charles because he, back several decades ago, actually King Charles now, several decades ago, 1990s, was famous, and this was on more than one occasion, to say that when he died he would like to be reincarnated I'm sorry, you're absolutely right.
It is Prince Philip.
The acorn didn't fall far from the tree.
And remember, it was Charles, not his father, who in 1994 went to Rio to start these insane orgies of Malthusianism that are called the...
You know, basically the green agenda merged with the British-led crowd claiming the world's overpopulated and that we have to consciously foster conditions to restrict growth.
Bringing it back to Kissinger, by the way, in 1974, When he was, I think, National Security Advisor before he became Secretary of State, he commissioned a report called National Security Study Memorandum 200, looking at about 13 or 14 populous, poorer countries around the world, Egypt, Bangladesh, a whole string of countries.
And they analyzed if those countries continue to have strong population growth, they're going to use their resources for themselves.
And the Anglo-American raw material cartels won't run the show.
So in order to have access to all the raw materials that we plan to steal from all these countries, we have to consciously reduce their populations.
Pretty stark genocidal statement of intent.
And then you look at what's happening in Israel, in the Palestine, Palestinian territories, whatever it is right now, and you look at the history of that.
I mean, wasn't that also based on a British deception?
What I've heard is that the British promised that land to both the Jews and also the Palestinians, and then, lo and behold, A hundred-something years later, or less than a hundred-something years, 70-something years later, America is having to deal with this continued conflict that seems to have started with the British.
Tell me about that.
Very, very apt and very important observation.
The British mucked around throughout that region, but once oil was discovered, In the 1910s, it became vital.
The British had just turned their fleet over to being oil-driven rather than coal.
And they worked with the French, which is the other great global colonial empire, To divide up the Middle East in what was called the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1917 right after the British had issued the Balfour Declaration which said that we promise a homeland for the Jews in the Middle East.
Not even the Zionist movement as a whole was in favor of that.
It split.
But the British wanted to, exactly as you said, play the Palestinians and Arab groups against the increasing number of Jews in ways that let them not only keep the blood flowing, But prevent any joint work that would be a benefit to Jews and to Arabs and Palestinians.
Today, the LaRouche movement, my movement, has picked up and is promoting something Lyndon LaRouche proposed in 1975 called the Oasis Plan, which would desalinate water from the Mediterranean and the Gulf of Aqaba, but particularly the Mediterranean, in gigantic quantities.
It can be done very effectively with nuclear power.
And then you would convey the water all across Palestine and Israel to replenish and build up the Dead Sea, build up other water resources at a scale of two to three times the size of the Jordan River.
It's all desert down there.
You have to go north into upper Lebanon before you get to the famous cedars of Lebanon and any kind of precipitation.
The Negev is the most desertified area.
You bring in water of this scale.
You have new cities, you have irrigation, you have the industries that can flow from this, etc.
And that's when you can bury the hatchet in terms of these cycles of bloodletting.
And there was some element of that thinking embedded in the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1994, the annexes, but the World Bank He sabotaged it, and in the lack of that immediate economic benefits to the Oslo Accords, the crazies around Netanyahu assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, the great Israeli statesman and prime minister who had negotiated it, and a huge change in his thinking to do it.
He was assassinated, and the room opened up for these fanatics.
That do no service to Israel and in fact betray any moral character of Israel who are running the show there now and now headlong trying to precipitate conflict with Iran and bring us in to direct conflict with Iran in ways that then would line up China and Russia With Iran,
us, with Israel, that could be nuclear World War III. But you're right about pinpointing the British role in setting up and staging this continuing capability that they're exercising right now.
So if you really want to pull back the horses before we get to nuclear war over Ukraine or over Iran or something like that, Knock out British geopolitics, put American system economics back into the United States, and then Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, and other nations, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and so forth, who are part of the BRICS nations, become our allies and friends, rather than what Wall Street and London is trying to tell us, our enemies.
Why is it that the British have been so consistently evil?
Because when I see what's happening in our society right now, and you trace this back down, and it's always the British that have planted the seeds of the current evil.
Over and over again.
And these people, after having gotten their ass kicked in 1776, were persistent enough to invade us through other methods like our legal societies.
What is up with the British?
Why is no other country like this?
Why isn't the Spanish trying to do this to us?
I would say that it's not uniquely British, but they really do concentrate because they're the latest, most intense phase in modern history of the oligarchical principles embedded in these empires.
You can go back to Babylon, you can go back to the Roman Empire, other empires, the Venetian Empire, which managed to, when it went into decline in the late 1400s, managed to metastasize itself to the Dutch.
So a couple of hundred years later, it was the Dutch which became the center of these oligarchic principles.
Then the Dutch came over to Britain with what they called the Glorious Revolution in the late 17th century, and the British The Bank of England, the founding of the British East India Company, and the development of the City of London and the whole British Empire, that became in modern times the most concentrated center of deployment of this oligarchical imperial principle.
So that's why they have a depth in modern times of subversion with their so-called ideas.
That's where they get their claws in a certain way.
Remember that even at the end of World War II, the British Empire had about one-third of the population of the whole world.
So then the decolonization came in, but they've done yeoman work to try to keep their claws in through institutions like the International Monetary Fund, through what they now call Global NATO. What they want to do, since NATO is an instrument of this oligarchic faction over the heads of all the nations, they want to have a combined political imperium, which they like to call the rules-based order, which is one of the great oxymorons of all history.
And then use NATO as their enforcement arm.
So it seems as though we had the option of basically going forward with an American system, but LaRouche seems to have been attacked, or American financial system, but LaRouche seems to have been attacked by British interests and frankly sounds as though like treasonous individuals within our own government that we're working For the British, instead of working for an American system, that we're more motivated by tyranny as opposed to the freedom-based system, the constitutional order.
Firstly, what is up with these individuals that are trying to, essentially, that sound like infiltrators, double agents, whatever you might call them, that are really trying to destroy our American system?
Second part of that question is, how do we get to that?
How do we kick this British influence out and finally, Get our constitutional order back the way it should be.
Well, I think if you think of institutions that became increasingly subject to the British imperial outlook, globalist outlook, think of the New England finishing schools, the Groton types, Think of much of the Ivy League, think of the Council on Foreign Relations, which has its offshoots in places like Houston and Minneapolis and San Francisco and so forth.
They cultivate regional elites.
In the United States to be brought over to Britain for the Rhodes Scholarships.
If you want to look at some very, you know, representative infiltration here, look at who gets these Rhodes Scholarships.
Which is founded, by the way, so I'm not inventing, you know, the nefarious characters written into their founding document by Rhodes that this is to recruit people to the British imperial outlook.
So they've done that over time, and then increasingly they're in academia, in the media, in the think tanks and so forth.
They've got their outposts.
So that gives you some idea on it.
The answer to your second question, I think, really, it's a wonderful opportunity that we've got to bring the American system back, because the 50 years of wholesale abandonment of the American system In favor of the British free trade, outsourcing, globalization, offshore hot money, this pile of derivatives, gambling, etc.
That has impoverished this nation.
Then you're hit with the offshoots, the collateral damage of these forever wars, as so many of our Soldiers come back with PTSD, etc., the heartache of the drug use because people don't see a future in a country that doesn't have a purpose, great missions, any industry.
If all you're going to work is in McDonald's hamburgers and try to lose yourself in sports or other distractions, pornography, for instance, You're going to have a high rate of drug use and overdose deaths.
That's a sickness.
That's a social sickness.
What we could do if we went back to the American system of directing credit into great projects that draw on the best of new technologies, we could have high-speed rail systems across the country.
China has shown in the last 20 years they built a high-speed rail system about 30,000 kilometers.
We have no high-speed rail unless you want to count the two hours every afternoon that the Acela from New York to Washington doesn't have to deal with local slower trains.
That's all we've got.
Zero.
Zilch.
Nothing otherwise.
We haven't had a significant water project since the Kennedy era.
We've sabotaged the development of fission through the Green Movement.
Nuclear fusion power, which we used to be leadership on, and LaRouche founded the Fusion Energy Foundation back in 1974, 50 years ago.
I was with him at the time.
Nuclear fusion has been picked up in other parts of the world.
That's where you join atoms rather than split them.
The amount of energy generated is vast, but it also represents the whole era of plasma physics, which is the whole sun is a gigantic pulsating ball of plasma.
The plasma is maybe 95% of the universe, of the material in the universe.
If we were developing that, there are all kinds of offshoots in terms of putting a fusion rocket engine and getting to Mars in two weeks rather than eight months.
You can take it and turn a whole landfill into its essential elements and use magnets to be able to pull out everything and put it back into the economy.
I can name many others in medicine and anywhere else.
Tremendous horizon.
We can move forward with that.
We could take water from Alaska and Canada, bring it down through the Rocky Mountain Trench and get it across the whole water-starved western part of the United States.
That was a project of the Kennedy era, killed by the senator from Washington State, Henry Jackson.
Guess where the Henry Jackson Society is located?
In London.
And it's the center of the neocon war faction.
So our ability to get back to these great projects and facilitate similar ones in the rest of the world, then things like the Chinese Belt and Road is not a rival that's somehow undermining us, but actually a component of a broader effort that we could be in the middle of.
I mean, there are 800 million people in Africa who don't have electricity.
That's a lot of work to make sure that you've got the energy for that.
The water supply is the same thing.
So what a wonderful world when we go back to the American system.
I mean, what are the tangible steps to get there?
You know, what we're talking about, nobody even knows.
You ask them who our enemies are, you know, some people will say it's like the Arabs.
Some people will say it's the Chinese.
Some people will say it's the Iranians.
But like, it seems as though, and tell me if I'm incorrect, you're correct.
Like, British seem to be our number one enemy in terms of how their influence is negatively affecting us and driving us towards a more tyrannical form of government.
How do we get rid of these people?
Well, very good point.
One is simply getting out the kind of information that unmasks this, and that's where our new service called Executive Intelligence Review, people can look it up, EIR. Just go to EIR.news.
We have a daily news feed with very, very powerful material on exactly the point that you're asking.
How do you get at the real core of this?
And what do you do to supplant it?
But the second point is to make sure people know about things like the OASIS plan, that know about this North American Water and Power Alliance from the Kennedy area, that know about the developments on fusion nuclear energy.
And once people have a positive idea that this is within reach, if we take the funnel of funds that the Federal Reserve puts into Wall Street right now, I mean, if it weren't so deadly, it's hilarious.
We don't have money for helping people in Western and North Carolina through FEMA. We don't have money to build a high-speed rail system like Maglev.
We don't have this.
We don't have that.
Suddenly, Wall Street goes off the cliff when its bets go bad, and suddenly you're talking about tens of trillions of dollars.
$23 trillion was what it added up with after 2008, made available.
And once they got the casino going and had the bets placed on the table again, they could pay back some of that.
But it basically just refloated the casino even bigger and once again drained out the funds that were needed for our physical economy.
So this argument that there isn't the money there is utterly bogus.
It's a directed credit question which repays itself because of the benefits of what you're investing in.
That's the genius of the Hamiltonian system that was embedded in the first Bank of America and which built the canals, built the initial railroads, and so forth.
And we have to reapply that.
So that's step number one.
To clear the decks of the role of the globalist banking centers in London and Wall Street of their control, put Glass-Steagall The banking law passed in 1933 back on the books.
Glass-Steagall separated commercial banks which lent long-term or relatively long-term for people's mortgages or for public improvements or if you wanted to start a business or invest in and build a new plant.
In industry, whatever, separate the commercial banks from the Wall Street, what are sometimes called investment banks, hedge funds.
They're now called non-bank banks.
I mean, it's wild, wild misuse of language here.
But this is the betting parlor.
And what happened in 1999...
Is that the Wall Street crowd bought the Congress, bought the President, that time Clinton, and repealed Glass-Steagall so that the protections that we had for the commercial banks were able to be commandeered by the investment banks so that when they made huge bets that went bad, they had claims on having the federal government bail them out, no questions asked.
So put Glass-Steagall back on the books, force the Wall Street bandits and jackals into bankruptcy reorganization if they can't operate without this huge spigot of Federal Reserve funds,
and restart the procedures of the directed credit And boy, this would bring such a smile to the face of Hamilton, to the group of people around John Quincy Adams, to Lincoln, etc.
I wanted to, before I know we'll probably be wrapping up fairly soon, I think a quote from the great economist of the 19th century American system economist named Henry C. Carey.
Who was Lincoln's top economist.
He was the son of Matthew Carey, who was recruited an Irish patriot fighting the British.
Matthew Carey was recruited by Franklin, Ben Franklin, to come to the United States and set up a printing press in Philadelphia that was a great source of the ideas that built our republic.
His son, Henry C. Carey, wrote a whole number of books that were renowned around the world and inspired the thinking of top people in Russia when they built the Trans-Siberian Railroad, the people who were building up in the Western Hemisphere, the idea of connecting all of our North and South American continents with great projects.
He and his faction were over in Japan.
Before the British moved in, there was a whole group in Japan trying to modernize Japan based on American system economics.
That's another story.
But this is a quote from a book of Henry C. Carey's of 1851 called The Harmony of Interests.
And he is contrasting what...
I won't give away the punchline.
Let me just read the last section of it.
He's saying two systems are before the world.
The one looks, and he goes through a whole lot of contrasts, one looks to pauperism, ignorance, depopulation and barbarism, the other to increasing wealth, comfort, intelligence, combination of action, I like that phrase, combination of action, and civilization.
One looks toward universal war, The other towards universal peace.
One is the English system.
The other we may be proud to call the American system.
For it is the only one ever devised, the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.
Such is the true mission of the people of these United States.
To raise the value of labor throughout the world, we need only raise the value of our own.
And then he says, to substitute true Christianity for the detestable system known as the Malthusian, it is needed that we prove to the world that it is population that makes the food come from rich soils, and food tends to increase more rapidly than population, thus vindicating the policy of God to man.
Boy, he is packed into that phrase, those words that I just read you, the essence of the American system and explicitly contrasting it to the Malthusian-British system.
This is not in any U.S. textbook that anybody would encounter in high school or college in the United States today.
That's our job.
Get it back in there.
Get people discussing it.
The cultural, almost spiritual side to what we're doing.
Master yourself what the American system is.
If you have time, or I don't know if I can do that, I have a link to a pamphlet that we put out from our LaRouche movement.
It's from the LaRouche organization with a 16-page section on the American system.
I'd be happy to share it with people if it would work that I would have access to that.
Wow, wow.
You know, is there any chance, I mean, is there like the presidents or the people running for president right now?
Is Trump somebody that would bring the system back?
Do you think there's anybody that is aware of this that is, you know, has the power to actually do what you are referring to?
It's a very, very important question.
We have to demand these policies.
And in certain ways, Trump is more responsive than others.
Back in the fall of 2016, in the last few weeks of the election that year, he brought up in North Carolina, I think it was North Carolina, audience, we need to go back to Glass-Steagall.
He only mentioned it once as far as I know.
It had been in the platform of both Republican and Democratic parties, but not publicized particularly.
But he mentioned it.
He backed off from that.
If you remember, he now nominated Steve Mnuchin from Wall Street to be his Secretary of the Treasury.
He was under ferocious pressure from Wall Street not to buck their system because so much was being thrown at him in terms of how they railroaded Flynn and It was just wild, you remember, the effort to destabilize things and demonize him.
He didn't feel he could take on Wall Street directly at the same time, and he retreated.
If he were half-strength, if he were reelected again, if he were reelected now, You have to have a citizen's movement that's at the front of what they're talking about.
Restore Glass-Steagall.
Restore the American system.
Ditch this British system of the globalization, the free trade, and so forth.
Work with the poor areas of the world on big projects.
Work collaboratively with Russia, China, which is, I mean, remember one of his calling cards and helped him get elected the first time was he said, look, I don't like necessarily Putin or Xi or whatever, but I can work with him.
We'll sit down.
We'll figure out something of benefit to all parties.
That's his tendency to think that way.
To give it content, we've got to do an educational process and be out of front on the dangers here.
To his credit, Trump has been saying that we are heading toward nuclear war over Ukraine if we don't dial this thing back.
That's very important.
I wish he would be saying the same thing in terms of the unleashed and unhinged Netanyahu faction, but he's not.
But nevertheless, he didn't have the strength in his first term to be able to move toward American system economics fundamentally.
There were certain secondary elements that were helpful, but not enough to change the axioms.
If he's going to do it in an upcoming administration, it's going to be the task of everyone now to master this and make it public and demand that these are the policies we institute.
All right.
So, Tim, is there anything we didn't talk about that's important for the viewer to know in terms of this topic?
Well, I think we've covered a tremendous amount, Vim.
I really appreciate the opportunity to bring this forward.
And I think you should look forward to what my colleague, Dave Christie, can do more on the thought control, police state type of What I would like to do is just get that link up.
Let me see if I can find my, where I had it.
If you email it to us, if you make sure to email, I could put it in the description.
That way people could click on it.
Oh great!
That would be easier.
Absolutely.
I'll do that then.
Wonderful section.
It's in a pamphlet that's entitled, The Coming U.S. Economic Miracle on the New Silk Road, the LaRouche Organization.
We published it about a year, maybe two years ago now.
Let me see what the date is.
Yeah, 2021, so it's actually three years ago.
Our introduction has the wonderful title, Make America Good Again.
I like that.
And then the section that I've just described to you is called The History That Was Stolen From You.
So I warmly recommend that people look at this, really, really get their...
And by the way, I think it reflects on something that I wanted to mention to you.
There's a somewhat...
Superficial element in what a number of people talk about in terms of Kamala being socialist or whatever.
She's not.
She is another one of these British system voices.
First of all, she's a hologram.
It's very hard to persuade me that she's an actual person.
She's come up through this thing without getting a single vote in the 2020 primary, or maybe, you know, she dropped out right away in 2020.
She never contested anything.
I mean, here she is, the presidential candidate, and it's just a farce in terms of how she was selected and inserted.
But she's just the front person for this Anglophile elite.
You know, the British will play labels against each other.
There are decent factions of socialists.
Historically, like Jaurès in France was a very positive figure, assassinated the week that World War I broke out because he could have stopped a lot of the carnage of World War I. And there are other socialists who pretend they're socialists and they're just really on the string of the deep state and so forth, similarly with other groups.
The point is, once you get to the principles of the American system versus the British system, then you're on really solid ground and you're also headed toward the solutions by rebuilding and restoring the American system.
Thank you so much, Tim, for coming on to our Blood Money podcast.
This was amazing information and something that we're going to see a lot more about going forward at the America Happens Network because, like I told you, Tim, I'm curious, what do you think about what I said in terms of literally getting threats from Britain and Canada, by the way, because of the content we make here and the fact that they're very unhappy that we've exposed a lot of their corruption?
I would emphatically agree on that, but extend it also because I'm sure you remember about two years ago, a bill was proposed that would have put something called the Counter-Disinformation Directorate, something like that, into the Department of Homeland Security.
It was properly renamed by some people in the Freedom Caucus and others, the Ministry of Truth.
It was taken from George Orwell's 1984, and we were in the middle of being able to spike this along with others that fought in it, and it was dead on arrival when it actually got any consideration in Congress.
But that same summer, a group emerged out of Ukraine It's called the Center for Countering Disinformation.
It turned out it was getting money from the State Department and other parts of the U.S. government.
And it's interlocked with three other hit lists that are maintained nominally by Ukrainians.
But really, it's exactly what you're describing on a different, on another feature of this situation, which is to suppress the voices of people who are correctly warning that the current policies of NATO, the British, U.S., and so forth is heading us toward nuclear war over the British, U.S., and so forth is heading us toward nuclear war over Ukraine, People like Scott Ritter had his home raided at the beginning of August, and he was a
Dmitry Symes, a Republican, his home was raided.
You had the head of The telegram, social media, he was detained in France.
You have Tulsi Gabbard, very strong voice warning about the nuclear war danger, along with Robert Kennedy and Trump.
She turned out she was put on a watch list and U.S. Marshals under disguise would be in every airplane.
I mean, insane stuff.
So this whole operation, Farm Through Ukraine, has put Trump, Vance, Helga Zepp-LaRouche from our Schiller Institute, the first edition of the hit list put out nominally by the Center for Countering Disinformation in Kiev, the first 32 names were all people who were collaborating with the Schiller Institute.
So we're dead center on this stuff in terms of the threats.
People should remember that the background on the shooter in the second attempt at assassination of Trump, the one in Florida, he was hardwired to the neo-Nazis in Ukraine that listen and take their cues from these lists.
So that can be developed further, but I just wanted to throw that in as an extension of what you're properly calling to attention on the British-Canadian side.
Wow, wow.
So crazy, man.
So crazy.
And then you look at things like Dominion Machines and, you know, just across the border in Toronto, there seems to be a lot of nefarious forces in the same buildings as George Soros.
And, you know, you follow that, you know, rabbit hole and it's interesting.
I mean, most of the time you end up at the British, unfortunately.
Right.
These are the five I's, the British, that were the core British colonies, and then the Commonwealth, but they were all extensions of the British-centered apparatus.
Tim, thank you so much for coming on to the Blood Money Podcast.
For the viewers out there, make sure you join us for all of our future episodes, and make sure you go to AmericaHappens.com, where we have a great featured section, an amazing new documentary on the Bundy-Rant standoff as it pertains to what is happening today.
And frankly, the murder of a patriot named Mike Little.
Check out that documentary.
Make sure you also check us out on Roku, Amazon Fire, or Apple TV. We're on X, and our main channel is on Rumble.
I will see you all on the next episode of Blood Money.
▲
Export Selection