Vi må gå frem med vores
kampagne for de Fire Love!
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast,
3. marts, 2017; Leder

Vi må gå frem med vores
kampagne for de Fire Love!
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast,
3. marts, 2017; Leder
image_pdfimage_print

Dette er en aktiv, igangværende kamp; og efter en række diskussioner med hr. og fr. LaRouche i løbet af de seneste par dage, har vi nu gen-optrappet og gen-understreget en ny kampagne for dette initiativ. Dette vil omfatte en ny appel; den forrige havde fokus på denne tale til Kongressen. Denne nye appel er lidt mere åben og skal være et nyt samlingspunkt for en national, og international, kampagne for at få USA til at vedtage dette program.

Benjamin Deniston: Vi skriver i dag den 3. marts, 2017, og dette er vores ugentlige fredags-webcast på larouchepac.com. Med mig her i studiet har jeg Paul Gallagher, økonomiredaktør for Executive Intelligence Review; og via video, Bill Roberts, medlem af LaRouchePAC Policy Committee.

I dag annoncerer vi lanceringen af nogle nye initiativer, der er direkte affødt af den meget succesrige kampagne, vi har ført i januar og februar for vores appel for Glass-Steagall. Over 3.000 underskrifter, inklusive både online appeller og skrevne underskrifter, er blevet overgivet til præsident Trump og mange kongresmedlemmer. Andre organisationer, der støtter et lignende initiativ, har også indsamlet tusinder af underskrifter. Antallet af underskrevne appeller lyder måske ikke af så meget, sammenlignet med andre appeller, men dette reflekterede en meget effektiv og vigtig kampagne. Blot i år har 14 delstatskongresser introduceret resolutioner, der enten kræver, at USA’s Kongres støtter Glass-Steagall alene, eller også Glass-Steagall og en eller anden variant af Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love. Vi så spørgsmålet om Glass-Steagall komme i front og centrum under senatshøringen for godkendelse af den person, der blev finansminister, Mnuchin; hvor han blev konfronteret direkte med spørgsmålet om Glass-Steagall. Vi har set en række mediedækninger, der har indikeret, at Wall Street har holdt vejret for at se, om dette bliver spørgsmålet eller ej. Så enhver med forstand indser, at dette er blevet til en central kamp. Wall Street er rædselsslagen over dette spørgsmål; de ved, at der stadig er seriøs støtte til det. Alt imens Trump ikke støttede det i sin tale om unionens tilstand (28. feb.), så er tiden ikke til, at vi klapper hinanden på ryggen over den effekt, vi har haft, eller læner os tilbage og opgiver; tiden er for en optrapning.

Dette er en aktiv, igangværende kamp; og efter en række diskussioner med hr. og fr. LaRouche i løbet af de seneste par dage, har vi nu gen-optrappet og gen-understreget en ny kampagne for dette initiativ. Dette vil omfatte en ny appel; den forrige havde fokus på denne tale til Kongressen. Denne nye appel er lidt mere åben og skal være et nyt samlingspunkt for en national og international kampagne for at få USA til at vedtage dette program. Jeg vil gerne oplæse denne appel. Den vil snarest blive udlagt på hjemmesiden; og alle, der underskrev den aktuelle appel (som var stilet til Donald Trump, -red.), vil omgående modtage den. Så hvis man endnu ikke har underskrevet appellen, så sørg for at gøre det nu. Så vil man være med i vores kampagne og vil modtage opdaterede rapporter – dagligt, ugentligt eller når som helst, der er nye udviklinger i dette spørgsmål, vil man modtage opdateringer. Man vil vide, hvad der foregår, og man vil blive en del af vores orientering for handling.

Vi beder ikke om, at folk bare efterlader et navn og et nummer, og det er så det; vi beder folk om at gå med i kampen. Som man kan se her på skærmen, kan man tilmelde sig; man kan få informationerne via sms på sin telefon, ved simpelt hen at skrive bogstaverne »GSACT« til nummeret 52886. Alene denne handling vil indlede den proces, hvor man kan læse og underskrive appellen og gå med i kampagnen. Hvis man har underskrevet (den tidligere appel, -red.), vil man omgående modtage udgivelsen af vores nye appel, som jeg nu vil oplæse en kopi af, og som meget snart vil blive udgivet. Det nye udkast lyder:

»Præsident Trump og den 115. Kongres: USA har brug for win-win-udvikling; vedtag LaRouches Fire Love og gå med i Kinas Nye Silkevej.

»Underskriverne af dette erkender, at det transatlantiske finanssystem er på randen af en ny nedsmeltning, der er værre end den fra 2007-08. Livsbetingelserne for det store flertal af amerikanere er støt og roligt brudt sammen i løbet af de seneste to årtier. USA’s økonomiske politik har fokuseret på at beskytte Wall Streets spekulative boble i stedet for at beskytte det almene vel og det amerikanske folks fremtidige velfærd. Vi erkender, at der nu må træffes nødforanstaltninger for at komme en ny finanskrise i forkøbet, og for atter at sætte amerikanere i arbejde for at genopbygge vores nation og vores fremtid.

For at opnå dette, anmoder vi præsident Donald Trump og den 115. Kongres om at vedtage og implementere programmet for LaRouches Fire Love for Økonomisk Genrejsning, som en hasteforanstaltning; og at tilslutte sig Kinas program for en Ny Silkevej for globalt samarbejde og storstilede infrastrukturprojekter og økonomisk udvikling.

De Fire Love definerer et sammenhængende program for økonomisk genrejsning, der har sine rødder i det Amerikanske System for økonomi:

  1. Genindfør Franklin Roosevelts oprindelige Glass/Steagall-lov; som adskiller kommercielle udlånsaktiviteter fra Wall Street spekulation.
  2. Vend tilbage til et nationalt banksystem i Hamiltons tradition.
  3. Direkte statslig kredit til projekter og initiativer, der skaber stigende niveauer af produktivitet og indkomster.
  4. Lancér et forceret program for udvikling af fusionskraft og en hurtig udvidelse af vores rumprogram.

USA’s økonomiske genrejsning vil blive meget optrappet, hvis USA tilslutter sig den globale udvikling af infrastruktur og den økonomiske renæssance, der strømmer fra Kinas Nye Silkevejsprogram.«

Dette vil altså blive offentliggjort snarest; dette vil være det nye samlingspunkt omkring en appel, men er i virkeligheden en national mobiliseringskampagne om dette spørgsmål. Vi vil gå mere i detaljer med dette, men jeg vil også annoncere, at vi er i gang med at opdatere LaRouchePACs brochure/rapport om præcis dette spørgsmål – LaRouches Fire Love og USA’s tilslutning til den Nye Silkevej. Så i løbet af de næste par dage kan I se frem til udgivelsen af denne nye rapport; den er faktisk et supplement og en støtte til indholdet af denne appel. Og som sagt, hvis man allerede er indtegnet som en del af vores kampagne for appellen, vil man også modtage en annoncering, så snart dette ligger klart.

Vi vil diskutere lidt mere i dybden det nye indhold af denne rapport; men før vi kommer til det, mener jeg, at vi må diskutere modreaktionerne og kampen imod denne politik. Som det er blevet nævnt i noget af dækningen af kampen om Glass-Steagall i de seneste måneder, så indser Wall Street, London og det internationale finansapparat, der faktisk har kørt USA og Obama-administrationen, at Trump er tilbøjelig til at gå i denne retning; og de er rædselsslagne over, at USA skal vælte de seneste 16 års politiske skakbræt og rent faktisk arbejde sammen med Rusland, Kina og andre nationer på basis af gensidig udvikling og gensidigt samarbejde. Dette ville betyde enden på Det britiske Imperium; noget, vi alle ser frem til at fejre. Men de opgiver ikke; der køres en massiv operation imod USA’s præsidentskab, imod Donald Trumps administration; og dette må være et spørgsmål, som vi må yde modstand overfor, hvis vi skal have noget af dette gennemført.

 

(Fortsat engelsk udskrift):

        PAUL GALLAGHER:  Well, we're right now in the middle of a
fight in which it's become very well exposed that the past
President of the United States, Barack Obama, is trying to
overthrow the President who has just gotten elected.  This is the
situation.  He is not alone in this, quite obviously.  We've put
out a dossier recently on the collaboration between George Soros,
his money, his foundations, his forces around Europe in
particular, and the Ukraine revolution — which they pulled off
— and the attempt to do the same thing to Trump here in the
United States.  This is now becoming more exposed.  On the one
hand, the {New York Times} has just run an article today making
clear that the Obama administration took extraordinary actions in
its last days in order to disseminate what had been classified
information and make sure that it was widely spread throughout
the government; that its classification was lowered, and that the
National Security Agency's limitations on distributing its
intercepts against communications of all kinds, that the barriers
against its distributing this throughout other parts of the
government, other parts of the intelligence community were pulled
down so that — as some people called it — the "breadcrumbs"
which supposed represented Trump campaign team collaboration with
Russia would be everywhere.
        The {Daily Mail} in London today runs a story with an
unnamed source who they say is an Obama family friend, which says
that they have been told that Obama personally intends to lead
the drive until it's successful to get Trump removed from office,
either by impeachment or by resignation.  And that this is
something to which he was persuaded by a number of people,
including Valerie Jarrett; who stayed in Washington and set up
with Obama in that Kalorama mansion in Washington DC for that
purpose.  Obviously, the one other country in the United States
and Europe where this kind of furor to attempt to undo the
election has been in Britain; a furor both to try and undo the
Brexit vote and to try to undo the Trump election, although in
the rest of Europe as well, a lot of the elites are hysterical
against the Trump Presidency and are even calling for his
assassination.  This has gone even to the chief editor of {Die
Zeit}, one of the leading "liberal" newspapers in Europe, who —
on national television in Germany — suggested that Trump might
be assassinated.  What he said has been quite typical of exactly
that liberal elite.
        Now, what we're dealing with here is that voters around the
world, the public in nations around Europe, including Eastern
Europe and the United States, to a certain extent in southern
Asia, have been voting to reject the entire era of globalization
and deindustrialization of the last 30 years.  They've been doing
that for good reason, because it has lowered their living
standards, lowered their productivity, and has emasculated
government which otherwise would have been investing in their
manufacturing sectors and investing in their infrastructure; it's
prevented them from doing that.  It's produced a truly dismal era
of economy in which there was a crash unlike any since 1929-1931.
Why?  Because this era of industrialization produced tremendous
levels of debt, tremendous build-ups of debt relative to economic
product; and the securitization of that debt in order to try to
wave hands and say that that total debt build-up was not a
problem, securitizing it all.  When it reached the point of
securitizing unpayable debt in the US real estate household
mortgage sector, it blew up the entire global banking system as I
said, in a way not seen since 1929-31.

        DENISTON:  It's something we've never actually recovered
from.

        GALLAGHER:  Since that time, we have not recovered; we have
been characterized by rates of economic growth to 1% to 1.5%
throughout the Obama administration in the United States; 0% to
0.5% and in some cases negative growth for the entire period
throughout Europe.  The only way in which this globalization
elite in the United States, Britain, and Europe has kept itself
together, has been by trying to assert military dominance and the
right to overthrow governments anywhere in the world, and by
declaring virtual war against Russia in order to maintain a
situation of extreme hostility both to Russia and to China.  Why?
Because in China, in Asia more generally but in China in
particular, the alternative to this terrible stagnation which
voters have been rejecting in all these countries; that
alternative has been clearly emerging in the rates of investment,
overcoming of poverty, real progress, technological and
scientific leadership coming from China, and other Asian nations
to a significant extent as well. So that if we see now, all of a
sudden, the Democratic Party in the United States has become,
apparently, a McCarthyite policy, where…

        DENISTON: The Red Scare's back.

        GALLAGHER: … Yeah, where Schumer sits up there and says,
"Let me ask you, sir, have you ever, in any time in your past
life, known a Russian? Have you ever been in a room where a
Russian was present?" Where the Minority Leader of the Senate and
Leader of the Democrats in the Congress has turned into Joe
McCarthy, this is the reason. It's not his background as a
McCarthyite. It's this absolute refusal to accept the rejection
of this 30-year period of globalization, de-industrialization,
impoverishment of populations in the United States and Europe,
and throughout Eastern Europe.
        Just so that people understand what's going on here. In
every Eastern European government which has recently rejected,
or, the voters have elected it, to reject the bankers' socialism
of the European Union — in every one of those countries, the
same kinds of efforts with demonstrations, protests, funded by
George Soros, the same kind of effort to overthrow those
governments which have just been elected, is going on in
Macedonia, in Romania. Obviously it happened in Ukraine. In

Bulgaria, in all of these countries. In the attempts to fix the
French election, to knock out anybody in the French election who
isn't in this bankers' socialism league, by prosecuting them in
the middle of the election campaign — everywhere this is
happening at the same time.
        That's what we're seeing in the United States, but I think,
as the President said in the tweet, which I don't remember if you
mentioned at the outset, but what he said today about this latest
crazy Sessions business. Sessions, a senior member of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, talked to the Russian Ambassador.
That's his job! And that's the Russian Ambassador's job, is to go
talk to him! And it was his job, as senior member of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, to talk to him! These are
absurdities, and, as President Trump said in responding to this
today, "The Democrats are overplaying their hand." They are so
desperate to find a way to reverse this entire movement
throughout the United States and Europe and Eastern Europe and
places like the Philippines; and, again, put Russia under the
pressure of confrontation again, develop a complete hostility and
encirclement of China. They're so desperate to get this back that
they've now, as he said, overplayed their hand, descended into
absurdity.
        What clearly was represented in the most recent speech that
he made, is that, as you said, he is open to this kind of thing.
It's ironic: the President, Trump, even before he was even
inaugurated, met with the Prime Minister of Japan. This is not
exactly an unusual thing — that an incoming President's team
would be meeting with foreign leaders. He met in New York with
the President of Japan in early January for the first time.
        In these countries, there is the obvious offer of what you
pointed to, there, that the United States can join a New Silk
Road which for three years has been the announced foreign policy
of China — the "win-win" policy of China. This economic belt
across Eurasia with rail lines of all kinds being built; and the
maritime belt going through the Indian Ocean, the Suez Canal, up
from Southern Europe into Central Europe, again, with ports, with
railroads, with power development. This all is effectively an
offer to the United States and it's an offer in the area where
President Trump and his team are clearly weakest. That is, how to
do what they're aiming for, which is to really get economic
growth and progress going in the United States for the first time
in decades. They are very weak on how to do that. This New Silk
Road policy, coming from Asia, in particular from the powers of
Asia, offers them a simple way to break through and do that. And
that's why we're seeing this hysterical apparent McCarthyism on
the part of the Democrats who made themselves into effectively a
party of war with Russia, and containment and potential war with
China. Not exactly what their voters wanted them to be at this
point either.
        I think we're in a situation now where it's become against
their wishes. It's become an extremely open political situation
for us to move with this idea of the United States joining the
New Silk Road, and using the actions that we call the Four Laws
of LaRouche, using those actions in order to do it.

        DENISTON: Bill might have more on this, but I think this
discussion is critical, because part of this whole "color
revolution" process in the U.S. is just this insane party-line
bickering. It really is surface level. If you're out there
talking to the American people, and you're out there talking to
people that voted for Trump or voted for Sanders or didn't vote
at all, there's a {clear}commonality in line for this program,
that permeates America as a whole.
        The idea of trying to get people caught up in this red vs.
blue, party-line debate on these issues, is really paper-thin on
the surface when you get to the actual substance. I know Bill's
been doing some work in the Midwest, the area where he's
centered, where you see a lot of this patriotic American
tradition coming back to ferment, in line for this kind of
program. Part of what we really have in this report that's going
to be coming out, is a further elaboration of what the United
States can do in this program. We can have all the kind of high
speed rail we need, we can have the water we need, we can the
power we need, we can have quality jobs for the American people.
Anybody who wants a quality job can get it. We have the program,
and it really is critical to organize on this level to get
support for this, to get this thing through.
        So, Bill, I don't know if you want to comment on the content
of the report, or some of the work you have been doing out there.

        ROBERTS: I would tend to agree with Trump that the Democrats
are really overplaying their hand on this question of demonizing
Russia, because the Democratic Party, a lot of Democrats don't
really like this idea that we're going to revive the Cold War
right now. I think this demonization of Trump on this Russia
question has tended to create, in Republican's minds, much more
of an openness to collaboration with Russia. Some of the
Republicans — they would tend to be the Heritage Foundation
types, the {Wall Street Journal} reading types — are probably
tending much and much more so to see that this is just a crazy
McCarthyite revival going on right now.
        A lot of Americans are simply going to reject {everything}.
This is what we saw in the election. People are going to tend to
reject everything that's been associated with the last 16 years
of the Obama and Bush administrations. We're seeing this develop
more clearly in terms of what Trump talked about in his address
to Congress. It was a very clear repudiation of this post-9/11
Bush "clash of civilizations" policy; that we {don't} represent
the world. We're not going to go abroad "searching for monsters
to destroy."
        I would say, one of the more interesting aspects of Trump's
address to the Congress, was this reference to Lincoln; not just
the reference to the protectionist policy — which, in its own
way, is part of the Hamilton credit system — but actually the
reference to the 1876 Centennial Celebration. He said we have the
250-Year Anniversary of the country coming up, and as they did
when the 100-Year Anniversary of the United States was being
planned, we should be thinking about the future; we should be
thinking about what kind of breakthroughs that {we} can create
that will represent real accomplishments, and work to get above
party divisions on small things. In this sense, he very much set
a kind of Lincolnesque and FDR tone in this discussion.
        But it's interesting that he referred to the 1876 Centennial
Exhibition in Philadelphia, because this was a real inflection
point of the spread of the American System to countries that the
British Empire had to later work very hard to turn against one
another. Japan, Germany, Russia — under the influence of Henry
Carey. China. The first half of the 20th Century was typified by
wars that the British, in manipulating these great nations that
had been influenced by the policies of the Lincoln American
System. And then, of course, in the second half of the 20th
Century, you had the Cold War. You had the British moving in
after the death of Roosevelt, to divide the war on the basis of
East vs. West.
        I think this reference to going beyond parties, looking at
the principle of this country, identifying a certain kind of
Promethean quality, is good; and you're going to have Americans
tend to become optimistic about returning to a space program.
You're going to have Americans obviously agree with the necessity
of building infrastructure; Glass-Steagall.
        But, there's definitely a limit there at the same time.
These potentials are obviously frightening to the Establishment
and represent something that they are clearly in a last-ditch
effort to try to destroy through this Obama/Soros/McCarthyist
revival. However, in terms of how you actually unleash a
Promethean economic environment, both culturally and in terms of
real increases of productivity, that is the principle that ties
Glass-Steagall to the issuance of credit and the way in which the
breakthroughs, the products of the human mind as a result of
those policies, bring about the upward transformations in
productivity. That's really uniquely something that no one
besides the LaRouche movement has worked through and developed a
very clear policy program for.
        I would just say that there are a number of rallies coming
up this weekend — pro-Trump rallies across the country. Keep an
eye out for notifications that we will be getting out to people
who have signed the Glass-Steagall petition. We will be
organizing a whole series of activities across the country in
support of activities to bring the Four Laws to this American
constituency, to this highly-energized American constituency that
is looking for solutions. I would urge people to find these
rallies and get on the megaphone, get on the microphone at these
events. Call up your city council, call up your state
representatives. This is a sort of unique situation in which
there is a kind of proper repudiation of the failed policies of
Obama and Bush — the geopolitics and so forth — but without a
real conception of how to replace a monetarist thinking in
economics with the kind of Promethean concept which Mr. LaRouche
has spent his life developing, this will certainly not come into
fruition. You will not see, it will not be possible for the
United States to find its place in terms of the unique role that
we have to play now in joining the New Silk Road in the future of
mankind. So, I would just urge people to be extremely active in
the next couple of days in finding ways to inject this unique
conception of LaRouche's Four Laws into the discussion process;
and I guarantee people will be in the state of mind of wanting to
work through and master these ideas, because it's really a
life-and-death question.

        GALLAGHER:  Bill, I know that you did some organizing
directly with meetings that were taking place in the course of
this contest for who would be the new chairman of the Democratic
Party.  Some of them took place out there in your area.  That's
another matter in which it has become exposed just in recent days
that the person who initially seemed to be supported by most of
the party — Rep. Ellison of Minnesota — had put up against him
by the direct solicitation of Obama and Biden, Obama's former
labor secretary; and Obama, Biden, and others then did a lot of
telephone calling in order to make sure that this former labor
secretary, Perez, would beat Ellison and take over the chair of
the Democratic National Committee.  This was another instance of
what's been going on.  But I know that you saw that this was
something which was definitely non-partisan and definitely wide
open when petitioning at those meetings to decide the leadership
of the Democratic Party.  We found at the same time that at all
sorts of meetings, from the collaboration we had with people who
had supported Bernie Sanders in Ohio, all the way to the CPAC
convention — the conservative side of the Republican Party —
that people were signing these petitions specifically to get the
Glass-Steagall introduced again.  I think the total that we had
gathered, together with that parallel effort by people in Ohio,
it was certainly in the range of no more than 6-7000 signatures
overall; and yet, they were used by the key Congressmen and
-women who introduced Glass-Steagall back on February 1st, just
about a month ago.  Marcy Kaptur, Tim Ryan, Tulsi Gabbard, and
Walter Jones; they had those petitions when they had their press
conference introducing HR709, which is the current House
Glass-Steagall bill.  It has now gotten 30-some co-sponsors.
        Also, while that petition campaign was going on — again it
may seem modest — but while it was going on, we were also
contacting state legislators and state senators, particularly in
the so-called Rust Belt, the formerly industrial part of the
country.  The result of that, just in the month of January, is
that I think Ben, it's actually 15 if you count states in which
both houses introduced this; that resolutions in support of what
we're calling an American Recovery Program, which was essentially
the outline of the Four Laws.  Glass-Steagall; Hamiltonian
national bank; credit for high-technology infrastructure; and
space and fusion development.  Those resolutions went into nine
states — and I'll just mention, in three states, they went into
both houses during January; that was Rhode Island, Minnesota, and
Washington state.  In six other states, they went into either the
House or the Senate.  I'm sorry, Illinois is the fourth state in
which they were in both houses; it has already been passed in the
Illinois House, and introduced into the Illinois Senate.  Then
there were other states in which it went into just one house: the
Alabama House, the Iowa Senate, the South Carolina House, the
Mississippi House, the New Mexico Senate.  In addition to that,
there were three other states where resolutions simply naming
Glass-Steagall and calling on Congress to pass the Glass-Steagall
Act were introduced: Delaware, Virginia, and Maryland — where
there was a hearing this afternoon actually for which I prepared
testimony on that resolution, HJ4 in Maryland, calling on its
Congressional delegation to pass Glass-Steagall.
        So, this development which has occurred during January and
February while we've been on this petition and organizing drive
on a bipartisan basis, is also wide open or open-ended; because
anyone who has been a part of that, even just to sign the
petition, even online, anyone who has been a part of that from
any of those states or any other states which have come close —
particularly Ohio, New York state — these states are still in
session.  Anyone can make it their project with their state
legislator, to make sure that he or she co-sponsors this
resolution and contacts whatever Congressmen he usually deals
with.  And these state legislators do, so that we can really make
these legislatures in these Rust Belt states in particular, make
them boil with this campaign for the Four Laws, for the actions
that have to taken to be able to join the New Silk Road
development.  If we're doing that at that level, at the same
time, it's going to have a big impact on the Congress.  So, I
just wanted to point that out.

        DENISTON:  I think that's exactly the kind of initiative
that's going to continue and grow with this new petition, this
new campaign escalation.  And I think people should have no other
priorities at this point; we have this issue which is the
economic life or death of the United States, and we have — as
Paul, you mentioned — more material coming out on this whole
colored revolution policy.  I was glad you went through some of
the details; this is, I think, at least for generations, an
unprecedented level of attack on a US Presidential administration
from within.  It reminded me of some of the treasonous actions
that were done right before Lincoln came in, to try and set up
the South and their split for the Civil War before he came in as
President; just this outright treasonous sabotage of an incoming
administration; but the way we're going to cut through it is this
kind of mobilization.  Again, I would point people to also the
upcoming release of our new report, which will have a more
in-depth presentation of the principle of this recovery program.
And going also back to what Bill was saying, this is really the
way we're going to capture the spirit, the soul of the American
people again, by this returned commitment to the future
development, the future growth of our nation.  And getting people
rallied around the fact and out of this pessimism and cynicism
that just settled in over so long with Bush and Obama
emphatically; but going back even further, we've had this
terrible zero-growth economic policy that's affected people much
more deeply than they realized.  So getting a real, true
realization that we can again return to this level of growth;
just the basic idea that every generation is going to be a
revolutionary advance in the living standards, in the
opportunities, in the growth of the science, the capabilities of
mankind.  If people really get a sense that that's possible, that
that's what's represented by China's leadership in this New Silk
Road program, this returned orientation to space; I think that
will give people the level of fight they need to get this thing
through.  The kind of things Paul was just presenting in terms of
the top-down, Federal level, local level, also municipalities,
labor organizations; all of these groups should be organized and
we should just throw this party crap out the window.  It's an
issue of what is your commitment to the principles and the
policies the nation needs at this point.  If we can continue to
rally people around that, then we'll have a basis to actually get
this thing through and give Trump the support he needs to go with
these initiatitives that he's talked about.
        So Bill, I don't know if you have anything you want to add
from some of your work there.

        ROBERTS:  I would just point out that state representatives
and these local and state elected officials, these are the people
that the Congress goes to.  Because the Congress is inside the
Beltway; they're the most affected by the insanity of these last
two Presidents.  But the local elected officials, the state
representatives, these are the guys living through the drug
epidemic, the violence, the mass unemployment, the 94 million
Americans who are outside the workforce that Trump referred to in
his speech this past week.  Those are the constituents; those are
the people that these local representatives live with.  So, I
think these are the types of people to get to.  Radio stations;
this is the way we can effectively now very quickly make
LaRouche's Four Laws as much of a household word as
Glass-Steagall is.

        GALLAGHER:  Well, we also have other fronts that are going
to be dealt with specifically in the pamphlet.  One is the issue
of — which again, Trump brought up in the address to Congress —
of large-scale infrastructure development.  If you look at the
ground level of it, it appears that there's no direction there;
there was a meeting of the various members of the Cabinet
yesterday — and other staff.  But it was run by a Goldman-Sachs
guy, Gary Cohen.  But there was effectively an administration
meeting on infrastructure legislation; starting to move to
introduce legislation for this idea of a trillion-dollar
infrastructure bank.  At the same time, you have on the
Democratic side, already legislation which has been submitted.
But there is a complete barricade there in terms of knowing how
to finance it, knowing what the really transformative
infrastructure developments like a national — not East and West
Coast — but a national, 25-30,000-mile network of high-speed
rail and maglev rail.   This is nothing futuristic; this is
simply China.  This is exactly what they're building.  They're
building local subway lines now, local metro lines with maglev
technology in China, and putting them into operation.  So, if
you're going from the Bronx to lower Manhattan, on your 25 or 30
stops, you'd be going in between those stops in a completely
smooth and frictionless drive at up to 60mph in between each
stop.  Having already done this on the level of intercity, and
having already gone far to linking every city in the country —
and China has a very large number of significant cities —
linking every single one of them with true high-speed rail; now
they're down to the level of the subways and maglev metro
systems.  But this is the kind of thing that produces tremendous
increases not only in productive employment, but productivity.
        This idea has to be put into the discussions of
infrastructure in the United States, and so do Japanese and
Chinese methods and investments have to be put into this idea of
rebuilding the infrastructure of the United States.  They don't
have that idea now.  What's getting underway seems hopelessly
limited by the lack of any real idea of how to do it.  On the
other hand, you have the President talking about the 2026 250th
anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence as
a horizon point to which people should look; and think about how
the economy, the infrastructure, as he said, are "footsteps on
distant worlds is not too much to hope" in that 9-year period of
time.  Giving people a horizon to look at what actually {could}
be transformed during the period of the next decade.  That's the
kind of thing that puts Americans into the right state of mind in
thinking about being more open politically, being more open in
terms of what they think is possible.  In that sense, he
definitely did contribute to defining the right solutions which
he and his team clearly don't have at this point, in order to
make this kind of trillion or multi-trillion dollar
infrastructure bank investment work.  The same is true with
space; where there is clearly discussion in the administration —
and in NASA as a result — of trying more quickly to put
astronauts in orbit around the Moon, preparatory to beginning the
re-colonization and industrialization and development of the
Moon.  Something which had been completely wiped aside during the
Obama administration, which clearly wrote this off and said, we
don't need this.  We don't need fancy energy sources like fusion
energy, he said to one backyard group of Democrats in Virginia.

        DENISTON: He said you just need to insulate your windows.

        GALLAGHER:  Yeah, better insulated windows is our future by
the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence.
        So, this is a different view, but one in which we have to
drive to a certain extent from the bottom up, as we've been
doing; as well as discussions with people in Congress and in the
administration in order to crystallize the right idea.  Also, so
that they see that Glass-Steagall, if it isn't passed now, the
next major bank failure — and there are plenty of them waiting
to happen in Europe in particular at any moment — the next major
bank failure is going to take the system down again like Lehman
did and AIG did, ten years ago.  If it isn't implemented right
now, the banks are going to continue not to lend to small- and
medium-sized enterprises which tend to have the new technologies
coming on line; and only to lend to the big bond issuers and the
largest corporations.
        One thing that I pointed out in the testimony today in
Maryland, is that JP Morgan/Chase and Citigroup each only lends
out loans and leases equal to about 65% to 66% of their deposits.
Whereas in the banking system as a whole, it's 80%.  That means
that if you take all the community banks and regional banks
around the country — 6000 of them — their lending is equivalent
to 90-plus% of their deposits.  And yet, this little group of six
or ten banks who control two-thirds of all the deposits, their
lending is very low; and that's going to continue to be the case.
If a real infrastructure development bank gets going, then this
lack of lending to the contractors for all those projects by the
private banks is going to be a real problem.  So, you're going to
have that problem if you don't implement Glass-Steagall now, and
separate out the commercial banks.  And in addition, of course,
we've had now these big banks have — according a report a couple
of days ago — now accrued $321 billion worth of fines since the
crash, for illegal, immoral, and otherwise non-banking despicable
activity; which is the way they've used these deposits.

        DENISTON:  And that's without an actual Pecora Commission or
any serious investigation.

        GALLAGHER:  Without ever a prosecution of a senior banker;
$321 billion worth of fines for violating banking practice and
violating the law.

        DENISTON:  They give them the fines, but they let them keep
doing it; so it makes you wonder if it's a fine or just a cut the
government's taking on the scam or something. That's good; I
think that really ties to the necessity of the Four Laws as a
whole.  To have a functioning banking system doesn't mean
anything without what you were raising about the issue of
productivity and investment.  It really is a question of what are
you doing to facilitate the investment of creating a higher level
of net productivity for the economy as a whole?  A higher level
of scientific, technological state for mankind as a whole?  Which
is something that mankind can uniquely do; that's our character,
to create those kinds of revolutionary advances.  That's the
secret of economics, as Mr. LaRouche has kind of uniquely
developed and discovered in a higher way than I think anyone
before him.
        Anyway, just take that as another teaser for the content of
this upcoming report; because that will be material presented in
there.
        Just to conclude, I would just re-emphasize that anybody who
has not signed on to the petition yet — even the old petition —
please do so; because you'll then be ready to be updated as soon
as the new petition is released, as soon as this report is
released, and any other relevant breaking developments on our
campaign which I think we've discussed rather thoroughly as a
good launch point.  We are in the footing for a rapid escalation;
and that's what's needed right now.  So, I think this served as a
good launch point for some more material we'll have in the coming
days and weeks.
        We thank you for joining us today, and we'll be back on
larouchepac.com with more.

        GALLAGHER:  Can I just remind people, before you sign off,
everybody watching this, that this online petition is still to be
signed.  What we're going to do, we will try then to involve
everybody who's signing it, in what we're going to do immediately
in the next week to ten days.  There are going to be — as Bill
mentioned — pro-Trump rallies tomorrow in quite a number of
places; we're going to be at all the ones we can reach.  In fact,
we're speaking at one of them up in the New York City area.  Then
our own rallies and lobbying both in Washington and in New York
on Thursday, and in other parts of the country next Thursday.
We're going to have rallies before that in New York, and what we
call a Day of Action, when we'll be going after all kinds of
elected officials at the local, state, and national levels next
Thursday.  Everybody who's been involved in this petition
campaign up to now — even if it's only been just to sign — the
targets are there; that's what we indicated.  We can move, and
{must} move, elected officials up to and including those in the
Trump administration in order to break this logjam.  I just
wanted to throw that in.

        DENISTON:  Thank you.  We have a clear path of action ahead
of us.  I encourage everyone to get directly on board with that.
If you want to take more action, email us on the website, get
directly in contact, and volunteer yourself for further action.
We have an action center on the LaRouche PAC website.  If you go
to the front page, you'll see it at the very top there on the top
menu banner.  So get active; get in contact with us there and
let's make this happen.  Let's not sit on our laurels and wait
here.
        Thank you for joining us here today.  Stay tuned for more from larouchepac.com.
 

 

               

0 Kommentarer

Skriv en kommentar

Din e-mailadresse vil ikke blive publiceret.

*