Opgør med Obama over JASTA-loven og Glass-Steagall.
LaRouchePAC Internationale Fredags-webcast, 16. sept. 2016
Med indgangen til denne weekend har vi set en dramatisk række udviklinger, inklusive det faktum, at netop på tærsklen til 15-års dagen for 11. september, vedtog Repræsentanternes Hus JASTA-loven, Loven om retsforfølgelse af sponsorer af terrorisme. Dette sker kort tid efter, at Senatet ligeledes vedtog loven for et par måneder siden. Men det blev fra Obamas Hvide Hus gjort meget klart, at han agtede at nedlægge veto imod loven. I sammenhæng med denne dramatiske optrapning af kampen, deltog Schiller Instituttet i en række meget, meget historiske koncerter, sponsoreret af Fonden for Genoplivelse af Klassisk Kultur i New York City-området og New Jersey: Fire koncertopførelser efter hinanden af Mozarts Rekviem – koncerter med stor deltagelse af publikum, inklusive en koncert, der fandt sted i sammenhæng med en messe, som biskop [Nicholas] DiMarzio fra Brooklyn-bispesædet holdt i fælleskatedralen St. Joseph i søndags, den 11. september.
Engelsk udskrift.
Showdown with Obama over JASTA & Glass-Steagall
IS CONGRESS MORE COWARDLY AND GUTLESS THAN
THE BRITISH HOUSE OF COMMONS?
LaRouche PAC International Webcast
September 16, 2016
MATTHEW OGDEN: Hello! Today is September 16th, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly broadcast
here on Friday evening with the LaRouche PAC webcast. I'm joined
in the studio today by Jeff Steinberg, from {Executive
Intelligence Review}; and via video, by Diane Sare, member of the
LaRouche PAC Policy Committee, and coordinator of activities up
in New York City.
We're meeting here in the immediate aftermath — really in
the midst — of the further developments that came out of this
past weekend. Going into this weekend we had a dramatic series of
developments, including the fact that right on the eve of the
15th Anniversary of 9/11, the House of Representatives
unanimously passed the JASTA Bill, the Justice Against Sponsors
of Terrorism Act. This is on the heels of the Senate doing the
same thing a few months ago. But it was made very clear from the
Obama White House that he was going to veto this Bill. In the
context of that dramatic escalation on this battle, the Schiller
Institute participated in a series of very, very historic
concerts sponsored by the Foundation for the Revival for
Classical Culture in the New York City area and in New Jersey:
four concerts in a row of the Mozart Requiem — very, very
well-attended concerts, including one that happened in the
context of a mass celebrated by Bishop [Nicholas] DiMarzio of the
Brooklyn Diocese at the Co-Cathedral of St. Joseph on Sunday,
September 11th.
We're going to begin our broadcast tonight with a very short
set of remarks that were delivered Terry Strada, the widow of Tom
Strada, and leader of the 9/11 Families Against State Sponsors of
Terrorism, who attended the concert in Morristown, New Jersey on
Monday, September 12th, at which she endorsed the concert and was
invited to the stage to express her views about the crime of
9/11. You'll see what Terry Strada had to say, which was
delivered before the music began, during that Monday concert. I'd
like to just begin with a quick excerpt of Terry Strada's
remarks.
LYN YEN (pre-recorded): At this point I would like to
introduce somebody very special to all of you. Many of you
probably know of her. Her name is Terry Strada. She is the
national chairwoman of the 9/11 Families United for Justice
Against Terrorism. She and her organization were instrumental in
the release of the 28 pages of the congressional report on 9/11.
Without further ado, I'm going to turn the mic over to her.
[applause]
TERRY STRADA (pre-recorded): Thank you! Thank you very much!
My name is Terry Strada, and I lost my husband on September 11th,
2001. Tom was 41 years old when he went to work that day, and
never came home again. We have three children. At the time, they
were 7 years old, 4 years old, and our youngest was only 4 days
old.
On September 12th, 2001 I woke up — well, I probably didn't
sleep that night — so when the sun came up, the questions were,
"Who did this? Why would they do this?", and "How could they
possibly do this? How could they attack our country like this,
and how could they kill so many innocent people in one day?"
Because I wanted to know the answers, I started to ask the
questions more and more. And so did more and more 9/11 families.
United to Bankrupt Terrorism was our first title, and now we're
United Together for Justice Against Terrorism. Of course it was
the 28 pages that we focused on in the beginning that needed to
be released. And when they were released, there were two key
things that we learned. One is that Saudi Arabia has never been
fully investigated for the role that they played in 9/11; and
two, that it is indisputable that the Saudis played a very
important role in 9/11.
The second piece of legislation that I've been working on
for over four years now is called the Justice Against Sponsors
of Terrorism Act. This bill is intended to fix a minor problem in
our current Foreign Sovereignty Immunity Act of 1976. So, it's a
40-year-old law that has stood for 40 years, until we looked
further into the Saudi's role in 9/11, found the evidence, and
tried to hold them accountable.
What happened next was that the courts decided to
misinterpret the law and dismiss them on sovereign immunity. Make
no mistake. No country, no entity, no individual is entitled to
immunity — sovereign immunity, any type of immunity — in the
case of a terrorist act. This bill is intended to hold {any
nation} accountable for a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that
kills United States citizens.
We've chosen this path because it's a peaceful way to fight
terrorism. We don't want to see more bloodshed; we don't ever
want to see more people die over 9/11. And we also want to
protect our borders; we want to protect our country; we want to
protect {you}; I want to protect my children. And the way that we
do this, is by holding the nations accountable that fund known
terrorist organizations, like al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram.
People say, "You can't fight the lone wolf." I say, "Yes, we
can!" If we cut off the funding, and we destroy their
capabilities to recruit and incite, and bring on more terror and
to brainwash people, we can eliminate ISIS. And that is our
long-term goal. The short-term goal, right now, is to get Saudi
Arabia off of this crazy [situation] that they're not held
accountable.
In May, the Senate passed unanimously this Bill, and on
Friday, September 9th, it went to the U.S. House of
Representatives. I was in the gallery and was honored and proud
to see each and every one of our 435 Members in the House vote
"Yes" for JASTA. [applause] Thank you, thank you. I don't really
know how many times this has ever happened on our history, that
we have both Chambers of Congress voting "Yes" unanimously. What
this means for the President: as of 4:00 today, he was still
threatening to veto the Bill. The Bill will be sent over to his
office for signature later on tonight, at the latest tomorrow.
We're doing everything we can to convince him to not do this.
You probably hear things in the news — and I'll kind of
wrap this up, because I want to hear the music as badly as you do
— but you may hear in the news, things about the Bill. They're
simply not true, if they're coming from the Administration.
Unfortunately, they are the mouthpiece for the Saudis at this
point. We just need to point out to them how important this is,
to hold them accountable — any nation, going forward — would be
held accountable, and how important it is for our country to have
that type of security net.
If the President does decide to veto this Bill, it will be
our last hurdle; it may be our biggest. But we plan to overcome
it, and override the veto. Hopefully the Senate and the House
will fall into line and do that for us.
If there's anything that you'd like to do to help, going
forward, it's passtjasta.org. That's our website. It's updated as
often as I can get to a computer and update it. There are usually
just simple instructions of how you can reach out to the White
House, your Representative, or a co-sponsor of the bill. This is
very important legislation. I thank you very much for taking the
time to listen to me, and now I'm so honored to have these
wonderful musicians. I have heard them practice. You are in for a
treat. This is going to be a very wonderful time now for us to
just transcend ourselves from the evil, to a higher place — to a
place where Good is. I believe Good will win, and I thank you for
coming. [applause]
OGDEN: So, as you can see, we're right in the midst of a
{very} active battle on the JASTA front, as Terry Strada had to
say, right there. It's all dependent on action that is taken in
the next coming days and hours, in order to create the conditions
where Obama is boxed in, and to create the kind of upsurge that
is necessary around this. I know there are actions being planned
to be taken in Washington, D.C. in the coming days. I'll let Jeff
talk about some of that, and also mention some of the activities
that {you} were involved in, Jeff, up in New York City, at the
same time, this past weekend, as these events were taking place.
So…
JEFFREY STEINBERG: Yes, there will be a series of demonstrations
on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., which is when the House and the
Senate will be back in town. There'll be a demonstration in front
of the White House. And then, also, another demonstration, I
believe, on the Senate side of the Capitol grounds.
The point is very obvious. I think Mr. LaRouche put it
succinctly: everything that Obama has done as President has been
a reflection of the fact that he's an agent of the British
System, the British Monarchy. Therefore, it should be presumed
that, even though he will make himself an avowed enemy of the
American people — and especially the 9/11 families — if he does
go ahead with this veto, we should assume that that's exactly
what he will do, because that's what the British want him to do.
They don't care about justice for the 2,997 people who perished
on 9/11, or the perhaps-by-now tens of thousands of people —
first responders, others who were at the scene at the World Trade
towers, at the Pentagon, in Pennsylvania — who suffered
tremendously, and have developed diseases, illnesses related to
9/11. There's one estimate that 40,000 people have been afflicted
with serious illnesses because of their heroic actions
immediately following the 9/11 attacks.
Obama is on the other side. These are impeachable crimes.
Being an agent of a foreign power, while serving in the Executive
Branch of the U.S. government — I mean, that is treachery. The
fact of the matter is that Obama can be forced by an enormous
amount of public mobilization, to go forward and actually sign
the Bill into law, or simply let it pass into law without his
signature. But that's going to be only on the basis that he is
convinced that there will be an overwhelming, bipartisan,
near-unanimous voice vote, if he attempts to veto the Bill.
This is an existential issue, not just for the Saudis, but
for the British as well. Remember, a month or so back, at the
height of the mobilization after the Senate unanimously passed
JASTA, a British Tory Member of Parliament wrote in the {Daily
Telegraph} that if the Saudis can be sued by the families, then
the British can be sued also. Now, he claimed it was because of
failure to crack down on the jihadist networks that were given
safe haven in Britain, but we know that the reality is, that
Prince Bandar was the central figure organizing the support for
the 9/11 hijackers. We know it through the 28 pages, and that
barely scratches the surface of the evidence. Bandar's another
British agent. Bandar and Margaret Thatcher, in 1985, created the
Al-Yamamah program, and it was funds from that Al-Yamamah program
that were probably going into the hands of the 9/11 hijackers.
So this is a {very big deal}. And it's going to come down to
a head-to-head political battle. Everyone listening to this
broadcast should contact your senators, contact your
representatives. Deliver a very blunt message to the White House,
that this will be considered an act of treachery, perhaps an act
of treason, on the part of President Obama, if he fails to sign
JASTA into law and allow the 9/11 families, at last, their day in
court. No matter where the evidence goes, no matter what's proven
or not proven, they have every right under our Constitutional
system to take appropriate legal action in a court against the
Saudis, and the JASTA Bill removes what in this case was an
illegitimate sovereign immunity.
So, I think that's where we stand.
This past weekend of 9/11 in New York, the Schiller
Institute had an extraordinary event. And the full video of that
is up on this website; and I would urge everybody to watch it.
There was another event that took place at the historic Cooper
Union campus in lower Manhattan; and I was honored to speak on a
panel on the 28 pages at that conference. There were a number of
other speakers: Judge Imposimato from Italy, who was the judge
who went after the Gladio apparatus around the strategy of
tension attempted coups in Italy in the 1970s and '80s, the Moro
assassination. He was one of the keynote speakers. Dan Sheehan,
the lawyer who broke open the Iran/Contra affair spoke. But
everybody was laser focused on the implications of the 28 pages
and JASTA; and the importance now of making sure — as Senator
Bob Graham said at a recent event in Washington, DC, the release
of the 28 pages just simply pops the cork. Now we go after the
full content of the bottle. There are millions of pages of
classified material that are yet to come out that deal with
Sarasota, Florida, San Diego, California, Paterson, New Jersey,
Herndon, Virginia, and other locations unknown. And of course in
Europe, Hamburg, Germany. The point I made both at the Schiller
Institute event and at the Cooper Union event, is that there is
no statute of limitation on the truth; and we've got to drive
that point forward.
OGDEN: At the Schiller Institute event in New York on
Saturday, September 10th, not only did Jeff speak, not only did
Virginia State Senator Dick Black deliver a very dramatic and
sharp speech. But also, the Ambassador from Syria to the United
Nations was the featured guest, and delivered a very strong
speech in which he denounced the Obama administration and the
Bush administration campaign of regime change that has taken
place in the region over the course of the last 15 years since
9/11. Starting with Saddam Hussein, then with Qaddafi, and then
with the attempted regime change against Assad in Syria. I think
that the developments of this week, with the lower house of the
UK Parliament where they delivered a very strong rebuke to David
Cameron in terms of the grounds on which the Libyan invasion was
launched; which led to Cameron's resignation. This also applies
just as much to the case of Obama; and this is something which
Obama is continuing to push during his time in office. So, I
think all of these are coming together in the context of Obama's
rejection on his trip to Asia, during the ASEAN and G20 summits.
He is being boxed in; and his true colors are very clear as he
sides with the Saudis against the American people. I don't think
it can be taken for granted that the conjunction of all of these
events up in New York City over the weekend has set up the most
dramatic political showdown of Obama's entire career, as we go
into the coming days here in Washington.
So Diane, you probably want to give a little bit more of a
context to that.
DIANE SARE: I think what we're talking about is a certain
profound question of justice; not retribution, but the ability
for mankind to actually move forward. What distinguishes Asia and
Russia under Vladimir Putin from the United States and the
trans-Atlantic system is that these nations are actually
committed to a world in which the future is brighter than the
present or the past. That is, the leaders of these nations are
saying, my children, my grandchildren, my great-grandchildren are
going to live in a world in which their standard of living is
higher, their educational level is superior, the number of
diseases they're subjected to is fewer; the way that Americans
used to think not so long ago. Part of the significance of the
work of the chorus, which is here directed by John Sigerson and
myself, is to remind the American people what is actually a human
standard; as opposed to a bestial standard. I have to say in that
regard, I found Senator Richard Black's comments and particularly
his passion and his anguish when he was describing what was being
done in Syria by these so-called "moderate" Syrian rebels who the
US is funding; the people we are funding who are beheading
children that they're kidnapping out of hospitals, or the rebels
we are funding who are carting women around in cages. Where our
own State Department spokesman says, "Well, how can we stop
funding them? We're not going to judge what they do on one single
incident of beheading. Other than the fact that they behead
children, they might be wonderful." It is so evil! And the idea
that Americans have lost the capacity to feel outrage when you
are confronted with this kind of evil; where it's all kind of
numb, and people say, "Well, there's nothing you can do."
I think the process of the election of Hillary Clinton, who
may be suffering some serious illness, we don't know; who was
destroyed by her capitulation to Barack Obama. And Donald Trump,
who's just a pure FBI thug lunatic. What's happening is that the
population is putting up a kind of teflon veneer where they are
trying not to think about anything. Of course, that's death; we
have to think. What you have in the rest of the world is a
break-out of the human spirit, of this quality of creativity.
So, what happened this weekend, the involvement of our
chorus in this series of concerts sponsored by the Foundation for
the Revival of Classical Culture, is that you got a glimmer of
the power — I think both the fact that JASTA had passed the
Senate and then the House on that Friday going into the weekend;
and then what we were presenting musically from the
African-American spirituals to the Mozart to the Handel, in terms
of what it actually means for us to be human. And a certain
quality of human life which we hold sacred; and which is not in
our physical being. And perhaps this was most powerfully sensed
at the Catholic mass which was dedicated to the firefighters and
those who had died on September 11th. The Bishop made the point
that these are people who are giving their lives not simply for
their brothers or for their friends, but for complete strangers.
At the end of the Mass, it's not typical that people applaud and
give standing ovations; but when the Mass closed, the standing
ovation of the crowd — it was very clear it was not simply for
the musicians; but it really was in deep and profound
appreciation of what these people had done.
I have a sense that we really are in a moment in the United
States like Germany in 1989. Maybe we're in May of '89 and not
October yet; but there's a kind of awakening of the better spirit
of the American population. People are not prepared to sit back
and tolerate criminal injustice. If we will act with courage,
since about two-thirds of the world is already on the other side
of this; and China, for example, the idea of talking about
legalizing drugs? They would think you are completely insane;
being addicted to drugs, distributing drugs is not tolerated.
There's certainly a harsh crackdown on drug trafficking in the
Philippines which we're seeing now; and I don't think Duterte
appreciates Obama's accusations of human rights violations for
someone who's trying to shut down the drug trade. In other words,
there's a whole different standard in the world which, when we
find our courage and stand up, is going to resonate. There's no
reason for people to believe that what happens in this country is
going to be determined by the fraud of what's call the elections.
I would just say that what Jeff, you were saying earlier about
Obama; we have to really stick to this. There's no point in
talking about the candidates unless Obama, who is the evil who is
occupying the seat of leadership of this country right now, is
removed from office and prosecuted in a criminal court.
STEINBERG: I just wanted to add something; a footnote on what
Matt mentioned earlier, about the actions by the British House of
Commons this week. The Foreign Affairs Committee produced a
report, which was a damning indictment of Cameron, Sarkozy, and
Obama over the disastrous consequences of the overthrow and
assassination of Qaddafi in Libya. On a certain level, the
British House of Commons — with everything that we know; with
all the caveats about the power of the British monarchy and all
of that — the House of Commons puts the US Congress to shame.
They forced Cameron out of office; they forced his resignation
from the House of Commons on the grounds of his role in the Libya
disaster. Above all else, the United States, Britain, and France
lied to the world — they also lied directly to Russia and China
— when they promised at the outset that there would be no regime
change in Libya; but it was strictly a humanitarian intervention.
Well, it turns out that the House of Commons report is, if
anything, an even more stunning indictment of Obama than of
Cameron. The report makes very clear that Cameron and Sarkozy
were the drivers behind the need to intervene to prevent the
humanitarian disaster in Benghazi. In fact, they were protecting
British-created terrorist networks that were back in Libya from
having fought the wars in Afghanistan; the same wars that created
al-Qaeda. But what was made clear is that it was President Obama
who insisted that a no-fly zone was insufficient; a no-fly zone
failed in Iraq, it failed in Bosnia, and it would fail in Libya.
Therefore, the UN resolution had to have much more teeth; it had
to be a "no-drive" zone. It had to give a carte blanche to defend
the so-called victims of Qaddafi forces by all out military
action.
On the one hand, everybody swore up and down to Russia and
China that it was not about regime change. As a result, Russia
and China abstained from the vote when the Security Council
resolution was passed to create the no-fly zone and the no-drive
zone; and to use all forms of military force that were deemed
necessary to "save" the civilization population of Benghazi.
Well, the report makes clear that after the first 24 hours, they
were safe; there was no threat to them anymore. From that moment
on, the whole exercise was all about regime change. There was one
exchange where one of the ministers in the Cameron government at
the time, Liam Fox, lied and said no, this was never about regime
change; we didn't have any agenda. The questioner pointed out
that on April 14, 2011, the New York Times published a signed
op-ed by Barack Obama, David Cameron, and Sarkozy; in which the
three of them said, "Qaddafi must go, and go for good." So, they
were lying openly; and if anything, Obama did more heavy lifting
to create this disaster than either Sarkozy or Cameron. It
included a conscious decision to assassinate a foreign leader.
So, the British House of Commons has delivered a new bill of
impeachment against President Obama; and I hope that Congress
will take that seriously. Needless to say, the US media has
blacked out the story totally up to this point.
OGDEN: In a very real way, this is like a Chilcot Report 2.0
in the case of Libya and Obama's role in that. Honestly, that's
exactly what you called for, Diane, in the petition that you were
circulating about a month or a month and a half ago. Look at
what's developed since the publication of that petition: We've
won the fight on the release of the 28 pages; although there are
tens of thousands of other pages that need to be released. JASTA
has gone through — this was your point, too — JASTA has gone
through both the Senate and the House; and despite the fact that
Obama is still threatening to veto, as it stands, it could be
overridden in the first veto override of the Obama
administration. Although he's trying to delay it, and deploying
Saudi agents crawling Capitol Hill right now. We have reports
that the Saudi Foreign Minister is personally going to Capitol
Hill and meeting with members of the Senate; threatening that you
have to withdraw your support for this JASTA bill. But that is a
fight which is active; this Chilcot Report type of approach, as
you called for in your petition, Diane, this is what we now see
coming out of the UK House of Commons. Also, the overarching
question of cooperation between the United States and Russia to
actually defeat terrorism worldwide.
I thought it was very important that this was one of the
themes around these concerts with the image of the 9/11 Teardrop
Memorial in Bayonne, New Jersey; which was contributed by Russia
in support of the world's struggle against terrorism after 9/11.
And also, during this Schiller Institute seminar in New York City
on Saturday, Senator Dick Black pointed out that we're right in
the midst of this ceasefire negotiation between Kerry and Lavrov.
And according to reports, Kerry has really isolated himself from
the Obama administration; or at least there's a faction which is
trying to actively undermine these efforts to work with Lavrov.
So, these are ongoing battles; and it's all around the question
of the type of leadership that was exhibited in that petition
that you put out about a month and a half ago, Diane. Obviously,
we're now preparing for the convening of the United Nations
General Assembly this week and next week in New York City. I
think these events that were happening at the Schiller Institute
conference with the Syrian ambassador and so forth, should be
seen as preparing the way for what will be the defining questions
— hopefully — put on the table at the UN General Assembly. Both
that and the question of the new international financial
architecture, coming out of the G20 meetings; we have a big
responsibility on that as it comes to the question of
Glass-Steagall, which is something that I'd like to get to in a
moment.
But maybe, Diane, you want to say a little bit more about
the events leading up to this UN General Assembly meeting.
SARE: Sure. Actually, I'm thinking, I don't know what the
conspiracy is this time. Last year, as followers of our website
know, President Putin had gone to China for the V-J Day parade
and then come to the UN and proposed his coalition to wipe out
ISIS; and created that to great effectiveness. Now, the UN
General Assembly comes in the wake of the G20 meeting, the ASEAN
meeting, the Vladivostok conference, where all of these nations
which have been represented, signed more and more agreements with
each other on various economic projects and so on. And, I think
it's significant that, going into the G20, Xinhua ran that
interview with the Russian representative; who said that Beijing
and Moscow must work with Washington. We have to bring Washington
in on this; and Washington is a complex and unpredictable
partner, I think were the words that were used. So, clearly, I'm
sure that they're not coming into this General Assembly with no
plans. I don't know what plans they have; I think it'll be very
interesting as it unfolds. I think it's very important for
Americans to do our part to make the United States less full of
complexes; I'll put it that way, and less unpredictable by
addressing this Obama criminality problem. I think what Jeff said
about Cameron — it really is something. Tony Blair first with
the Chilcot Inquiry; now you have this whole report on Libya. Any
American, any member of Congress can get their hands on this; and
it is absolutely damning in terms of Obama's role. I think that
would be an important contribution for the United States, because
the truth of the matter is, we should be part of the Belt and
Road; we should be part of the New Paradigm. The American people
are suffering horrifically, horrendously with this economic
collapse; and I guess that brings us to the point that you were
talking about, which is the Glass-Steagall moment.
OGDEN: Right; exactly. On that subject, let me just read the text
of the institutional question we got for this week. I know Mr.
LaRouche had a direct response to this. It reads: "Mr. LaRouche,
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is marking the 8th
anniversary of Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy with a new push to
investigate and potentially jail more than two dozen individuals
and corporations who were referred to the Justice Department for
criminal prosecution in 2011 by the Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission, a government-appointed group that investigated the
roots of the 2008 financial crisis. None was ever prosecuted. In
a letter to the Justice Department's Inspector General, Warren
calls the lack of prosecutions 'outrageous and baffling', and
asks the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, to investigate why
no charges were brought. 'The DoJ record of action on these
individuals nearly six years after DoJ received the referrals, is
abysmal,' she writes.
"In your view, is Senator Elizabeth Warren's new push to
investigate and potentially jail nearly two dozen individuals and
corporations who were referred to the Justice Department for
possible criminal prosecution a step in the right direction; and
will it help the prospects of Glass-Steagall's passage?"
So, Jeff, maybe you want to say what Mr. LaRouche's response
was on this.
STEINBERG: I think the point is, again, we're looking at the
irresponsible behavior of leading government elected officials.
The fact is, that in 1933, you had the Pecora Commission, which
was a Senate investigation into the crimes of the too-big-to-fail
banks of the Depression era; and bankers did go to jail. They
were called to testify under oath before Congress; they were
forced to produce their tax records; and there was a climate that
was created through that process that led to the passage of
Glass-Steagall and a number of other critical legislative
initiatives in the first 100 days of the FDR Presidency. Where we
are today is in the midst of a financial crisis that's much
larger, that's much more global in its scope than what we were
dealing with in 1933. Yet, there's been virtually no significant
action by either the Justice Department or by Congress against
these criminal swindlers who are CEOs of major banks. Just an
illustration: The woman who was the head of the division of Wells
Fargo that was caught basically creating phony accounts for their
own customers in order to charge fees so that employees of the
bank could get special bonuses; that person resigned from the
bank, but received a $125 million golden parachute on her way out
the door. It's night and day. So, Mr. LaRouche's comment on
Glass-Steagall was, {"Do it!} It's needed right now; we can't
wait another minute."
Today, Deutsche Bank was given a $14 billion fine by the
Justice Department for their involvement in mortgage-backed
securities fraud in the run-up to 2008 and beyond. Yet, no
official of Deutsche Bank has gone to jail. In fact, Deutsche
Bank's $14 billion fine virtually bankrupts it; the entire bank
capitalization, market capitalization of the bank is $19 billion.
Were they to pay the fine out of their own deposits, they'd be
out of business tomorrow morning. So, we're at a moment where
this is all deadly serious. Yes, of course, these bankers should
be put in jail; but why is Elizabeth Warren not doing more to
push Glass-Steagall? Why is Elizabeth Warren instead tiptoeing
around the issue because she's basically been anointed by Hillary
Clinton as the attack dog against Donald Trump? Again, hold it up
to the gold standard of Franklin Roosevelt, the Pecora
Commission, and you'll see that once again — as we just
discussed with the British House of Commons actions compared to
the complete inaction on impeaching Obama or taking other
measures to deal with these problems — it's shameful; and it's
all part of a recurring pattern.
As Diane just said, there may only be four or five months
left in the Obama Presidency, but every day that he remains in
office is a threat to the survival of this country and the
survival of humanity. Libya was all about starting the process of
war provocations against Russia and China. Lyndon LaRouche warned
about that the day that Qaddafi was assassinated back in 2011;
and we're still in that trajectory towards war. So, yes, we
urgently need Glass-Steagall; it should be taken up immediately.
There are bills in both Houses. Yes, the Justice Department
should reverse its policy of no jail time for too-big-to-fail
bankers; throw them all in the slammer — they all deserve it.
All of the top executives of all of the big eight US commercial
banks — they're all involved in multiple crimes, whether it's
mortgage-backed securities fraud, LIBOR fraud; the crimes are
manifest and the actions have been pathetic.
OGDEN: As you referred to, there is a major problem with the
Democrats right now being compromised because of their defense of
Obama and Hillary; both of whom are avowed — as it stands right
now — opponents of the restoration of Glass-Steagall. As Terry
Strada said, right now the Obama White House is a spokesman for
the Saudi regime; but in the exact same way, it's a spokesman for
Wall Street. You have Glass-Steagall in both party platforms; you
have the biggest mobilization in years from some of the trade
union movements — the AFL-CIO — other activist layers around
Glass-Steagall. Getting this to a vote — preferably {before} the
elections take place, if not sooner — but the problem is, you
have an intention from the top to suppress this from within the
ranks of the Obama faction of the Democratic Party, which Hillary
Clinton finds herself in right now.
I would say that there is also a broader, a little bit of a
deeper agenda here; and this came up in the discussion we had
yesterday with Lyn and Helga. Helga pointed out that there's a
recent report that has now been put out by the Club of Rome,
which has been around for 40 years now — an avowedly
neo-Malthusian movement to reduce population; that's been their
agenda — and the title of the report in German is "One Percent
Is Enough"; explicitly saying that the kind of dramatic growth
percentages that you see year on year on year, coming out of
China and other countries that are now part of this New Silk Road
dynamic, is somehow dangerous to the planet. And that we must
enforce a zero-growth or at least very low growth agenda; which
is what is coming out of the British monarchy and is coming out
of a lot of these trans-Atlantic circles. That is really the
foundation around which this fight between the new international
economic order, this New Paradigm that you see coming out of
China, the BRICS, and the Silk Road countries, versus the Obama,
trans-Atlantic regime that's taking place. It's a longstanding,
deeply rooted, ideological opposition to the idea of the no
limits to growth, perpetual increases in productivity kind of
idea of mankind; which Mr. LaRouche has made a career out of
defending and deepening with his approach to physical economics.
So, you have this as a deeper agenda which, again, Obama has
found himself as a spokesman for, and has made it very explicit
on multiple occasions. Remember his trip to Africa, where he said
you guys aren't allowed to have access to modern technology such
as electricity; because if you do, the planet will boil over. And
on other occasions, he said, we don't need any fancy stuff like
fusion power or anything like that.
So again, I think it comes down to this much deeper idea of
what is your conception of man; and what is your scientific idea
of this perpetual progress; or the conception that there is no
limit to creative discovery, there are no limits to growth.
That's the deeper agenda that we now see also bubbling to the
surface.
STEINBERG: These guys are genocidal lunatics; they've been
that way for 40 years. The LaRouche Movement was in a certain
sense, launched as a war against the Club of Rome when they came
out with their 1972 report, "Limits to Growth". The whole history
has been a battle between those led by Mr. LaRouche and Mrs.
LaRouche, who represent the principle of real human creativity;
versus people who work for an oligarchical system that is
consciously out to suppress it. You've got Prince Philip, the
British royal consort, calling for the population reduction of
this planet by 80%. If the Club of Rome report, 1% cap on growth,
were to be put into effect, this would represent mass genocide on
an unprecedented scale in human history; and it would happen
right away.
OGDEN: Right. As was made very clear in these concerts over the
weekend, there's an element of inspiration which, when it is
unleashed in the American population, it is overwhelming. The
kind of turn-out that we saw at these concerts in New York —
full to capacity audiences in almost every single venue;
including downtown Manhattan, the cathedral in Brooklyn, a
concert that happened in Morristown, one that happened in Lehman
College in the Bronx; there's an undercurrent of desire for this
kind of beautiful celebration of the nature of mankind. I thought
it was really significant to place Mozart's Requiem, which is
an incredibly profound and has a resonance which goes deep in the
American population; including the fact that the last time it was
celebrated as part of a Mass was 50 years ago at the request of
Jackie Kennedy, at a memorial service for the slain President,
John F Kennedy, at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston.
That was the last time this was presented in the context of the
mass itself. But the conjunction of that, together with these
four African-American spirituals, which is this call for justice,
for freedom, and for the dignity of the human being; putting
these together in the counterpoint between the two, it really did
awaken something very profound and very deeply rooted in the
people who participated in this community chorus which is growing
in an exponential way, but also in the people who participated as
members of the audience. So Diane was the conductor of the first
part of these concerts, of the African-American spirituals, and I
would personally say, I think you were channeling the spirit of
Sylvia Olden Lee and her collaborators. It was very moving, and I
think it's part of something that we're going to see continue to
grow; in not just the desire for justice, but the desire for
human dignity and creativity among the American people.
So, maybe you want to say a little bit about what the plans
are for the community chorus in that context, Diane.
SARE: I hope it's going to grow, and there are a lot of
plans. But my parting words to our audience would be: One, that
people should join the actions in front of the White House on
Tuesday in support of the JASTA bill and against Obama's veto;
and a challenge to the American people and the members of the US
Congress. Which is, are you more cowardly and gutless than the
British House of Commons? If they can throw out Cameron and
expose the crimes against humanity that he has participated in,
and if they are already naming Obama; what is holding you back?
OGDEN: Good. Well, those events in front of the White House
are scheduled currently for 12:30pm on Tuesday, and apparently
there may be another rally in front of the Senate at 2pm the same
afternoon. So, if you are in the area, or you can make it into
DC, that's something to participate in. There will probably be
more information on the passJASTA.org website that Terry Strada
mentioned at the beginning of this broadcast in her remarks at
that Morristown concert. And please, circulate tonight's webcast
as widely as you can so that Terry Strada's very emphatic
statement that she made at that concert can be heard more widely.
I think this is something that needs to be heard by the American
people; and that's something that you have a responsibility to
assist in.
So, I'd like to thank both Diane and Jeff for joining me
here today. Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com; we will have
coverage of this rally next Tuesday, and you can join us for our
regularly programming as well. So thank you very much, and good
night.