BREXIT-afstemning er langt alvorligere og mere
dødbringende end blot en reaktion. Vi må levere det
nødvendige lederskab for at undgå krig. LaRouchePAC
Internationale Fredags-webcast, 24. juni 2016. Video, engelsk
Det er i dag den 24. juni, 2016 – en særdeles lovende dato. Det er en meget, meget farlig periode, og vi står med ekstraordinære udviklinger på hånden. Det kunne vel næppe være tydeligere netop nu, forskellen mellem sammenstillingen med det døde-og-døende transatlantiske system, centreret omkring den Europæiske Union; og så fremtiden med det Eurasiske System. På den ene side, med det totale sammenbrud og den bogstavelige disintegration af det europæiske system – briternes exit af den Europæiske Union, samt det transatlantiske finansielle systems totale bankerot, der nu afsløres. Og, på den anden side, Vladimir Putins og Xi Jinpings igangværende indsats for en konsolidering og sammensmeltning af den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union, den Nye Silkevej, og hele verden centreret omkring Stillehavet, som Lyndon LaRouche i mange årtier har arbejdet hen imod, i form af samarbejde mellem de store nationer Rusland, Kina, Indien og andre. Valget er meget, meget klart.
Engelsk udskrift.
(En oversættelse af første del af webcastet følger snarest. Bliv på kanalen! -red.)
BREXIT VOTE IS MUCH MORE SERIOUS AND DEADLY THAN MERELY A REACTION. WE MUST PROVIDE THE LEADERSHIP TO AVOID WAR.
LaRouche PAC Webcast, June 24, 2016
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon! It's June 24th, 2016. My
name is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly
LaRouchePAC Friday evening webcast. I'm joined in the studio by
Ben Deniston from the LaRouchePAC Science Team; and via video, by
three members of our Policy Committee: Diane Sare, from New York
City; Kesha Rogers, from Houston, TX; and Rachel Brinkley, from
Boston, MA.
Today is June 24th, 2016 — a very auspicious date. It's a
very, very dangerous period, and we have extraordinary
developments on our hands. I think it could not be more clear
right now the distinction between the juxtaposition of the
dead-and-dying trans-Atlantic system, centered in the European
Union; and the future, of the Eurasian system. On one hand, with
the complete breakdown and {literal} disintegration of the
European system — the exit by the British from the European
Union, and the complete bankruptcy which is now being exposed of
the trans-Atlantic financial system. And on the other hand, the
ongoing efforts by Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping to consolidate
and coalesce the Eurasian Economic Union, the New Silk Road, and
the entire Pacific-centered world that Lyndon LaRouche has been
working towards for many decades in the form of the collaboration
between the great nations of Russia, China, India, and others.
The choice is very, very clear.
Earlier today we had a discussion with Mr. LaRouche. He was
very emphatic to emphasize that the crash that we're now seeing
in the trans-Atlantic financial system must be blamed on Obama.
This is not something which can be construed as a reaction to an
event, but in fact the bankruptcy of the trans-Atlantic financial
system was already a reality before this [Brexit] vote even
occurred. This is not a reaction, he said. This is something
that's much more dangerous, and much more serious, and much more
deadly, especially when you consider the fact that Obama is
continuing to push the world towards the brink of thermonuclear
war with the emerging Eurasian system of Russia and China.
Mr. LaRouche said we're experiencing a complete change in
the whole fundamental situation. Everything is now going towards
a crash. And it's not because of a reaction to an event, but it
was already pre-determined. Mr. LaRouche said, "We're on the edge
of thermonuclear war, which under the current circumstances Putin
would probably win; but Obama is insane enough to continue to
push the world in that direction." He said, "Putin is currently
in charge, in terms of his role being hegemonic. That was very
clear by the recently concluded events in the St. Petersburg
International Economic Forum, and then the bilateral meetings
that are going to happen this weekend between Putin and Xi
Jinping."
Mr. LaRouche said, "We're on the edge of something very big.
You must get Obama out! It's very dangerous to have him in office
under these circumstances. Our job is to calmly bring a solution
to this crisis from inside of our role here in the United States,
with Putin playing a key leadership role internationally. We are
in a position," Mr. LaRouche said, "to enter into a phase in
which a solution is possible."
Now, I want to open up the discussion; I want to invite
Diane to elaborate a little bit more on the role that Obama,
together with David Cameron, played in creating the circumstances
that we are now observing in terms of the aftermath of the
Brexit.
DIANE SARE: Well, everyone has heard of the famous
expression "the kiss of death"; and Obama delivered this in
London on April 22nd when he went there for two purposes. One
was to express his firm support for Great Britain remaining in
the EU; and I'm going to read his exact comments, so that there's
no question on that. And then also, to celebrate the birthday of
Her Majesty the Queen, whom he says is one of his favorite people
— I'm reading from his remarks; and he said, "And we should be
fortunate enough to reach 90, may we be as vibrant as she is. She
is an astonishing person and a real jewel to the world; not just
to the United Kingdom." And in fact, that has been Mr.
LaRouche's point — that the Queen of England does not see her
realm as the United Kingdom; she's been trying to run a global
dictatorship, and Barack Obama is one of her tools. And like a
typical malignant narcissist, Obama either intended to crash the
entire system; or is blithely unaware of how despised he is. So,
at a joint press conference at 10 Downing Street with a British
Prime Minister who is now resigning, David Cameron, Obama admits
he said, "Yes, the Prime Minister and I discussed the upcoming
referendum here on whether or not the UK should remain part of
the European Union. Let me be clear: Ultimately, this is
something that the British voters have to decide for themselves;
but as part of our special relationship, part of being friends is
to be honest and to let you know what I think. And speaking
honestly, the outcome of that decision is a matter of deep
interest to the United States; because it affects our prospects
as well. The United States wants a strong United Kingdom as a
partner, and the United Kingdom is at its best when it's helping
to lead a strong Europe. It leverages UK power to be part of the
European Union." And then he adds: "Let me be clear. As I
wrote in the op-ed here today, I don't believe the EU moderates
British influence in the world, it magnifies it. The EU has
helped to spread British values and practices across the
continent. The single market brings extraordinary benefits to
the United Kingdom; and that ends up being good for America,
because we're more prosperous when one of our best friends and
closest allies has a strong, stable, and growing economy."
So presumably, the time between April and this referendum
was enough for people to stop vomiting and make it to the polls,
and vote to get out of the European Union as quickly as possible;
which is what many of them did.
OGDEN: Well, I think also, according to what Mr. LaRouche
said — and this is absolutely the case — the crash was already
happening. It's a faulty view of history to say, "Well, an event
happened, and therefore there was a reaction." And Mr. LaRouche
is saying, the problem is that people think in terms of
reactions; one thing happens and then another thing happens. In
fact, Europe was already bankrupt. Think about what was already
happening. You had major European banks refusing to put their
money into the ECB; you had negative interest rates at the ECB,
which is an unprecedented, never-before-happened event in the
history of that system. And you had a complete breakdown of the
ability of both the European and the American workforce to be
able to have productive jobs or anything of that means. So, we
already were in a complete bankruptcy of this entire
trans-Atlantic financial system; and now today, it is more clear
than ever that the New Paradigm — which is represented by
Vladimir Putin's and Xi Jinping's collaboration; the combination
between the Eurasian Economic Union and the New Silk Road policy
of China, which is based not on an idea of rival blocs or
economic competition or something like that. It's based on the
idea of a win-win collaboration. Now's the time for the European
countries and for the United States to finally reject this Obama
paradigm; and say we are going to join this New Paradigm. And
many other nations in Europe could follow very closely behind
Britain and leave the European Union, since it's now clear that
it's a completely bankrupt institution.
KESHA ROGERS: And Obama can follow behind Cameron and leave the
United States immediately. What you're seeing right now, as Mr.
LaRouche once said, is the end of a delusion; an end of a dead
system. And the end of an era of a zero-growth paradigm; which
has dominated the culture and society for far too long. And it
actually goes against the true essence of our nature and being as
human beings. And this is exactly the strategic conception of
man and the fundamental understanding of human beings that Putin
actually understands; and those who are taking this direction of
the New Paradigm forward. Because it's based in the identity for
the future, of actually creating the future.
I just wanted to say that tomorrow, there will be several
meetings, including one I'm going to be hosting here around the
space program and the identity of the great mind of Krafft
Ehricke. The title of the event is going to be "Free Mankind
from Terrorism and War; Embrace Krafft Ehricke's Age of Reason".
I think that's where we are right now; the question is, can we
bring about an age of reason by getting the population to
understand that what they have accepted in terms of the policy of
dictatorship and backward, degenerate culture that we have been
under for the last 15 years. Namely, with the destructive and
murderous policies of 9/11, that have not to this day been
brought to justice; and 9/11 never ended. That's why Obama is
continuing to get away with the murderous policies that are
influencing the entire world right now. That we haven't brought
these crimes to the forefront; that we haven't brought the
perpetrators of these crimes — Obama, the Saudis, the British —
to justice and actually declared that we are going to join with
this New Paradigm. That's what really has to come across right
now.
The conception of Krafft Ehricke is very crucial in
understanding what has to be the turning point for the thinking
and identity of our nation, based on its foundation around being
the example of a true Renaissance culture. When you think about
the Apollo mission, and you think about what we did with the
space program; and why Obama has targetted the space program. It
wasn't a matter of opinion or a budgetary question; it was a
direct targetting on this potential for human progress and to
continue to promote this zero-growth paradigm. What we're seeing
right now is that Russia and China are saying that this is not
the direction that we will allow and have mankind to go in; we're
going to actually develop and promote the true conception of what
human destiny actually is.
So, what you see right now in terms of after this vote
indicating the further breakdown of Europe and the trans-Atlantic
system, which was already in the process on the opposite side,
you have something that is completely remarkable being brought
in. Putin and Modi — the Prime Minister of India, President Xi
Jinping in China, the SCO summit this weekend, and the signing of
massive agreements for economic cooperation and development,
including space collaboration. The question is, where is the
United States in this? The idea that the Renaissance conception
of mankind based on this identity of creating the future and
restoring a moral value to society, is seen directly in what
Russia and China are doing right now; and why this is a critical
call to the moral of the United States to change that and to join
with that direction.
RACHEL BRINKLEY: Another important aspect is what is the
solution; what are the new systems. And the question of the
space collaboration between Russia and China is not just over a
few projects; this is what they emphasized over the last few
days. They're looking at two things — space travel for one, and
space station collaboration for two; and also with an emphasis on
health and the implications [of space] on human bodies. So,
these are big questions; these are not just, let's put a rover
and test geology or something. This is looking at how the
Universe works, how the Solar System works, how the human body
works; and saying that this is going to have implications on
Earth in medicine, to give people a sense that this is how
mankind makes advances.
This has to be in the context of the question of Alexander
Hamilton, which LaRouche has emphasized, and he recently made the
point that what was it that was important about Hamilton? He
said, what he did in Philadelphia, what he did in creating the
Constitutional system of the United States. He knew that it
wasn't just the military victory that would enable the United
States to survive; the intention of the United States was to be a
system that created a better future for every single individual,
not a slave system. So, he created the inherent economics of
political economy to create that better future; and that is what
the discussion is right now. This is not just Russia and China
making some oil deals, or a new pipeline or something like that;
it's actually above nations as such. That's what LaRouche said
about this Brexit vote; it's not just business as usual, this is
not a vote on pragmatic politics. There's something bigger
acting. People did not want war; they're tired of Obama's kill
policies which have terrorized the planet through his support for
ISIS, the refugee crisis out of Syria; this is clear. So, this
is something that's being called for, there's something acting
which is coming from the future.
The problem with Americans is that they've lost the sense of
how to think about that, about the future. So, that's our job
right now, to create that discussion and that optimism about how
to do that.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: I think that's the question now. What can we
create? I was just reflecting on the discussion with Mr.
LaRouche earlier and some of his remarks throughout the week, and
I think his emphasis that you can't respond to or interpret
events is really critical at a time like this. When you're
seeing these types of developments — because the Brexit vote is
one example; these are not events causing the process. These are
events caused by the process; you have a breakdown process. This
is an explosive development in that context, but there's already
an ongoing breakdown of the trans-Atlantic system; the cultural
system as much as the monetary system, the whole political
system. Look at the British imperial ideology.
But the point is, if you're responding to the events of that
process, you are still contained by that process. How do you
break free from that process? It's a question of creativity.
What are you doing to actually bring something fundamentally new
to the world situation? I think that's why what you're seeing
out of Russia and China now is that; it's something new. It's
not just a response, crisis management or trying to handle it, or
trying to respond to the events per se. We're beyond that; the
events per se are death, that's where this thing is going. Be it
a complete breakdown of the system, or whether it's that drive to
thermonuclear war. So the question on the table now is, what can
you create? What can you do that's fundamentally new to create a
new system; to actually generate a new orientation for mankind,
for leading nations, that doesn't come from a response to current
events? That comes from a new orientation to create in the
future.
The coverage of this in the media — the markets responding
this way or that way — it's just ridiculous. The whole thing
has been going down for years; and we've known it. The question
now is, not who has the best spin on what mechanism caused what;
that doesn't matter. The question now is, who's actually got an
insight into what the necessary future has to be?
SARE: I just wanted to say along those lines, to really
caution our viewers and anyone who's thinking that the way to
think about this is not to say how do we put together this broken
system; like Humpty Dumpty has fallen off the wall. It's over;
and only recognizing that almost every fundamental axiom that
people had about economics in the trans-Atlantic was faulty. And
I do have to point out that in 1988, Mr. LaRouche called for the
reunification of Germany based on his knowledge of the collapse
of the Soviet Union's economy. And he made a proposal that the
West would provide food to Poland in return for early steps
toward an early reunification of Germany; and exactly one year
later, the Berlin Wall came down, and one year after that, Berlin
was the capital again and Germany was re-unified. And he and his
wife both said at that time, the Soviet communist system has
failed; but that does not mean that the free trade trans-Atlantic
system is a success. This, too, is finished; and it's end will
be much larger and more catastrophic than the disintegration of
the Soviet Union as we saw in '89. So now we are truly there;
and the point is for the United States to recognize what Rachel
just said about Alexander Hamilton, what's embedded in our own
Constitution. That that understanding of the intent of our
republic, combined with what Kesha represents in terms of the
space program and a true scientific orientation, is the platform
from which the United States can move to the future.
And I just want to add — because Ben had sent something out
and I think Kesha, too — there's something circulating on the
web of 30 gigantic projects that China is engaged in building
which are changing the whole planet; these are huge
infrastructure projects. One of them is a 16-mile long
suspension bridge across the Yangtze River; another is a group of
nuclear power plants; and so on. I think the most expensive any
of these projects was, was something like $3.4 billion. The
bridges might have been $1 billion or $750 million or something.
Think about that and think about the bail-out. The first
bail-out of AIG — and there was more than one; but the first
bail-out of AIG was $80 billion. Now, $80 billion is probably
more than the sum of what was spent on all of these 30 giant
projects combined. You will also argue that this is not the same
kind of dollars; just like that's the problem with the metric of
what the space program generated, but I'm just using it as an
example. Because particularly in the United States and Western
Europe, people have a totally insane view of what constitutes
value and what is money. And if you just look at something like
this, you can see that the destruction, the degradation and
collapse of the United States has absolutely nothing to with
money per se; because we could have taken that $80 billion from
the AIG bail-out and invested it into high speed rail, nuclear
power, getting back to the Moon, any of these things. And I
think we've done a number of $80 billion [bail-outs] just for
AIG, but the policy decision was not to do that. And that's the
point of the insanity; and that's what we have to change, because
money itself has no intrinsic value. Once you understand that,
you can stop panicking about all the money that's going to be
wiped out if everyone crashes and has their silly irrational
responses, or maybe it's finally rationality setting in. Money
doesn't matter per se; the question is, what is the direction of
human progress, what is the direction of humankind? From that
standpoint, we can turn on a dime; not that everything is going
to be repaired instantaneously. It'll take probably two
generations for the United States to achieve a standard of living
that would be appropriate for this nation. But nonetheless, the
direction could occur tomorrow; provided we do what Kesha said
first at the beginning, which is that Obama is no longer in
control of running the direction of this country — nor anybody
who thinks like Obama.
OGDEN: Well, I think it's very important that you brought
up this question of the fictitious values at the root of this
entire trans-Atlantic system; because what we're seeing in the
distinction between the bankrupt collapsing system in the
trans-Atlantic Europe-centered area, and then the growth in
China, in Russia, in India, and in that new Eurasian system.
These are not comparable types of systems; this is not one
person's loss is another person's gain or something like that.
These are completely two distinct species of outlook on the
world; and I think that's what we're getting at here. What we're
experiencing with these crashes within the span of just a few
hours, HSBC lost 10% of its stock value; Standard Charter lost
10% of its stock value; the pound was down to a 31-year low —
lower than it's been since 1985. But what is all of this? This
is just the evaporation of fictitious value.
On the other hand, you have substantial, real growth in the
form of the reconstruction of the New Silk Road, the development
of the vast interior Eurasian continent, the development of new
transport routes, these new development corridors. Diane, I
think it's appropriate that you brought up the turning point in
1989 with the crash of the Soviet Union, because what we're
experiencing now is something at least of that caliber, if not
far, far greater than the caliber of 1989. And you're right, Mr.
LaRouche was clear at that point that the Soviet system was
merely the first show to drop; now we're experiencing the second
shoe has dropped. This system is bankrupt. And at that time in
1989, is when Lyndon and Helga LaRouche planted the seeds for
what has now emerged as the New Paradigm, as the new Eurasian
economic system. At that time it was first — in its nascent
form — the Productive Triangle; then it became what was the
Eurasian Land-Bridge. This was adopted in the form of the New
Silk Road; and now this is being expanded to the World
Land-Bridge. This is a vision for a global and extraterrestrial
development policy. But Mr. LaRouche made several trips to
Russia during the 1990s; several trips to India as well. Mrs.
LaRouche has travelled now multiple times to China in the last
several years. This is the center; this is Mr. LaRouche's
emphasis on the impetus of leadership, the hegemonic influence at
this time of the creative leadership of the leaders of these
nations. President Putin, President Xi Jinping, Prime Minister
Modi, and others.
DENISTON: I think it's worth underscoring that it's still
playing out, too. We have this SCO summit going on right now, in
which the heads of these nations are going to meet. After that,
Putin is going to be travelling to China for a heads-of-state
meeting with Xi Jinping. In this whole process, you're having
these dialogues to solidify — and I think this is really big —
solidify the Eurasian Economic Union cooperation with the New
Silk Road; which I think is a huge step in these very large but
regional projects moving closer to this Eurasian Land-Bridge,
World Land-Bridge perspective that Lyn and Helga have defined.
So another point of emphasis that Mr. LaRouche has had over
the past weeks, I think is very sobering and represents a very
high level of thinking, is don't assume we know how any of this
is going to play out. This is a developing, creative process;
there's a lot more things going on right now. And we should be
orienting towards not trying to assume we know how all these
things are going to be finished, or what the results are going to
be. This is an ongoing, creative process right now, and this is
how you have to think about it. In the next days, as was
mentioned, out of the activity we're going to be engaged in over
this weekend which is very significant — both here in the United
States and in Europe — that's going to be a critical escalation.
But then over the next weeks also, we're just going to see a lot
of important developments coming.
ROGERS: I think it's important what Diane brought up on the
point of the system of monetarism that has dominated the culture
and society, that has actually set mankind backwards from what
the intention of the foundation of our republic actually
represented under the conception of Alexander Hamilton. That's
really what you have to look at, too, when you think about the
cultural pessimism and the zero-growth paradigm that has
continued to dominate for the past several decades now. It's
interesting, because people try to say that the targetting of the
space program has to do with not having enough money; we just
have to take these budget cuts. And that's the same point. How
much bail-outs have we put on these various financial speculators
and derivatives and so forth that we could not put into the space
program? The idea was that it was never about the fact there
were not enough financial resources to put into the space
program. It was in the intention not to invest into the future.
And there were many people who promoted this zero-growth paradigm
that Krafft Ehricke took on directly, who stated that the space
program represented too much of a "false optimism" for the
population; that it actually gave the population a sense of
optimism and a sense of their identity as human beings and a
commitment to the future. The empire and those promoters of
zero-growth were adamant that they had to put a stop to that. I
was reading an article from back in 1963 in the {New Atlantic};
it was referenced in a book by Marsha Freeman — "The Conquest of
Space and Stature of Man" by Hannah Arendt. Hannah Arendt was
one of these major promoters of zero-growth and backwardness; and
she made the point that the fight against the space program is
not that of money, but a question of man being inherently corrupt
and that nothing good could come out of scientific progress.
And that's the thing right now, is that what Russia and
China and this New Paradigm are promoting that only good can come
out of the nature of mankind's creative mental process in terms
of shaping and defining the future and creating that which has
never been created before. As we're seeing with the outcome of
what China is doing with their space program. That used to be
our mission; why we went to the Moon in the first place, and why
President Kennedy made the announcement that we would send a man
to the Moon and bring them back before the decade was out. It
was our obligation to take on something that was fundamentally
new; that's our creative nature.
That just puts the question that this monetary system has to
be thrown out the window; a new system of economic value based on
the real conceptions of the creative powers of the human mind has
to be brought in. And the best conception to bring that about is
the space program.
BRINKLEY: Absolutely. And Mr. LaRouche made the point that
also what do we replace this system with? The idea has to be a
Eurasian policy; and that's what you see in space, that's what
you see in real economy is what are the mutual interests.
Europe's only chance is to join with this policy; so Obama has
explicitly prevented that. He's called for everybody on the
planet not to join with Russia and China; he tried to prevent it,
whether it was Japan, Mexico, all the coups going on in South
America right now — Argentina. Puerto Rico is being destroyed
and murdered by Obama and Wall Street. LaRouche said this is
also why the [Brexit] vote occurred; Obama's economic policies,
his defense for this doomed system is clear. Also the question
of Obama said our great ally is Great Britain, and it will be now
and forever. Well, what are we showing with the 28 pages? Saudi
Arabia did not act alone; actually this part might not be in the
28 pages, but it's in many other pages that are there to be
released. Through the BAE deal, Prince Bandar, to be found out
that Great Britain might not be our greatest ally. And Obama's
defense of Britain, of Wall Street, his continual murder policy,
the fact that somewhere 111-114 Americans commit suicide every
day; that this is Obama's policy. He is a murderer; and he has
got to be removed. That's the fact; it's an absolutely evil
intention, and he's got to be thrown out.
SARE: I'd just like to add along those lines: One is we
are having our regular Saturday meeting here in Manhattan,
although it's slightly expanded. I will be keynoting it; and we
have Jason Ross from the Science Team is here and others, to
present these two views. We also are holding a concert on Sunday
afternoon, dedicated to Sylvia Olden Lee, called "In Praise of
Sylvia Olden Lee", who was one of our very important
collaborators in the Schiller Institute in this fight for the
question of Classical beauty. And Classical music is something
which can strengthen people, which strengthens our better angels,
as Abraham Lincoln might have said, to actually insure that
justice is done. And I bring these things up, because here in
the US, you have this really diversionary, silly spectacle of
debates about gun control and Congressmen rolling around on the
floor and things like that; pretending that they're in some kind
of civil rights sit-in, when here you have the murderer-in-chief
— President Obama — presiding over a weekly kill session on
Tuesdays, deciding who he's going to kill. Then you had
September 11th, which Rachel was alluding to, where close to 3000
Americans were killed; and justice has not been done. And Obama
— as Bush before him — is covering up for the perpetrators of
othe crime and colluding with them as best we know.
And I think this is a very important flank for those people
who say, "Well, it's impossible; we only have a couple more
months. In January, we have a new President anyway." Well, just
look at what's been happening in the last few weeks, to see how
quickly things can change. NATO has deployed 50,000 troops in
exercises on the border of Russia. Do you really think we should
just presume that we're going to safely avoid thermonuclear war
while we have a killer lunatic who is now more desperate than
ever as President of the United States? I think it's very
important that people stop pretending or picking other so-called
"issues" which are really non-issues; when we have a great crime
which was committed 15 years ago on September 11, 2001, which has
not been addressed. By addressing this and getting to the truth
of what was involved in this — the Saudi role, the British role,
the Wall Street role, the FBI role, the Bush role, Obama's role;
by addressing that, we have a lever by which to expel the current
President from the White House and hopefully land him safely in
jail where he belongs. And to change therefore, the direction of
the United States.
OGDEN: If Obama was so interested in Britain's staying in
the EU, perhaps as Kesha suggested, he could follow suit after
David Cameron and announce his resignation as well. To his
credit, David Cameron has announced that he is leaving his post
as Prime Minister before his term is over.
DENISTON: Obama might be too big of a narcissist; it'll
take more aggressive action for that one.
OGDEN: But I do think that absolutely, Diane, what you just said
about the events that are coming up this weekend — both in New
York and then, Kesha, what you're hosting down in Texas — the
emphasis has got to continue to be, what is the creative
intervention that can be made to uplift the American people and
to lead the American people. That was one thing that really did
stick out when we were speaking with Mr. LaRouche earlier today;
that it's never enough just to have the correct analysis of
events. Our emphasis has got to be, how do we calmly bring a
solution to the table that will be the solution to this crisis?
And that's what you were saying, Ben, that we're in completely
uncharted territory; this is an unprecedented situation in the
history of mankind. You have no idea what's going to happen
tomorrow, what's going to happen the next day. It was almost a
comedy to watch how surprised all the pundits and the investors
and the big masters of universe and everybody were, when they
thought that they were going to sleep last night with the remain
vote having come out on top. And then they wake up this morning
and lo and behold, it's the completely opposite result. That
proves to you that these guys have no idea what they're doing.
Diane, you brought this up in the webcast last week. Why
would you give anybody any credit, when they had no idea that the
Crash of 2008 was right around the corner? Why would you put
your trust in these people? So, you have a completely
unprecedented situation. The rise of the Eurasian system is not
something which is a fait accompli; this is what's driving the
directionality of the possibility of a thermonuclear war breaking
out. Granted, the support for the sanctions and for the NATO
maneuvers in Europe is now becoming increasingly less strong; but
that doesn't mean that you're by any means guaranteed that we can
avoid a fate such as that. So, it's decisive action and it's
creative leadership in the case of what we are able to provide;
and Mr. LaRouche was clear that it's the unique capability of the
members of this Policy Committee to provide that kind of
leadership within the United States.
So again, I just want to emphasize the importance of these
two events that we have coming up this weekend. So, I think with
that said, you can watch for coverage of those events as they are
broadcast. The regular Saturday meeting will be live, available
on the LaRouche PAC website tomorrow for Manhattan; and we
encourage you to participate in that in person if you are in the
area, as well as the events in Texas. And please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com as things rapidly change.
If you haven't yet, make sure you subscribe to our YouTube
channel; make sure you don't miss any of these critical
discussions. And also become a regular subscriber to our Daily
Updates which are delivered directly to your inbox via email.
So, thank you for tuning in, and please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.