1

Galskab pulserer igennem USA

8. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Præsident Obama holdt i mandags et møde i Det Hvide Hus for at fejre Dodd/Frank-lovens succesfulde forhindring af et nyt kollaps, som det i 2008. Eneste problem er, at hele det transatlantiske finanssystem er i frit fald, suget ned af værdiløs spillegæld til en ’værdi’ af omtrent 2 billiarder dollar, og som Dodd-Frank intet har gjort for at forhindre – men tværtimod har fremmet. De vestlige økonomier står og vipper på randen, mens befolkningerne bliver ødelagt af den værste narkoepidemi i Vestens historie, og af selvmord, der begås af desperate, midaldrende, arbejdsløse arbejdere.

I mellemtiden gør Obama og hans kontrollers i London alt, hvad der står i deres magt, for at bringe den eneste del af verden, der fungerer – Rusland og Kina – til fald. Øverst på deres »dødsliste« står BRIKS, der repræsenterer podekrystallen til et nyt verdensparadigme, baseret på udvikling, rumforskning og »win-win«-samarbejde nationerne imellem, som Xi Jinping beskriver det. Den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yi sagde i dag: »Bæltet-og-vejen er et projekt, som Kina lancerede, men mulighederne tilhører hele verden.«

Men Wang Yi måtte også advare USA om, at USA’s indsats for at »forplumre vandene« ved at anstifte konflikt i Korea og i det Sydkinesiske Hav kunne »støde Asien ud i kaos«, og at Kina i så tilfælde ikke kunne se passivt til.

I Europa fortsætter NATO-ledere med at deployere større og større militære styrker op til den russiske grænse, som forberedelse til krig.

Alligevel har Putin flankeret dette krigsfremstød ved at intervenere i Syrien og knuse Obamas støtteapparat for terroristernes netværk, og ved at danne en arbejdende militær og politisk relation med de fornuftige elementer i det amerikanske militær for at gennemføre en våbenstilstand og tilintetgøre ISIS og al-Nusra. Putin viser nu, at han kan arbejde for fred såvel som at føre krig, og får hver dag flere og flere oppositionsgrupper til at gå med i våbenstilstanden og fokusere deres beskydning på ISIS’ sidste tilbageværende bastioner.

Men, uden at vende USA omkring og tage kampen op med forbryderne i Det Hvide Hus og på Wall Street, vil den fremstormende, globale krig ikke kunne forhindres. De eksisterende institutioner er døde, som det bevises af den klovneforestilling, der kaldes præsidentvalgkampen 2016. For at skabe de krævede, nye institutioner, må den dræbende kultur rives ned gennem skønhed, en tilbagevenden til klassisk kultur og kreativitet, inden for musik, såvel som inden for videnskab.

I USA udgør LaRouche-bevægelsens ’Manhattan-projekt’ og genrejsningen af NASA, med base i Texas, og den »Udenjordiske forpligtelse« (Krafft Ehricke) de uomgængelige startpunkter for en mobilisering af befolkningen til denne store opgave.




Gå ud i rummet med Kina, ikke ad Helvede til med Obama

6. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Da Barack Obama annullerede USA’s planer om udforskning af rummet, begik han den største af sine forbrydelser, selv i sin egenskab af en »Vinder af Nobels Fredspris«, der udartede til en krigspræsident og massedræber. Rumprogrammet var Amerikas kultur, dets mission og fremtid, og Obamas handlinger vendte i realiteten den historiske kurs omkring og drev USA tilbage.

Tilstanden for økonomien i USA – for ikke at tale om Europa – er i en håbløs spiral for nedadgående og dræber millioner af mennesker gennem håbløshed, narko- og medikamentafhængighed og krig, som truer hele den amerikanske befolkning.

En total genoplivelse af udfordringerne i forbindelse med udforskning af rummet kan ændre alt. NASA’s rumprogrammer, der nu er skåret væk og suspenderet, er Amerikas eneste potentielle center for økonomisk håb.

For at vende degenerationen af USA og dets befolkning omkring, er den totale genoplivelse af rumprogrammet, på et højere niveau, den eneste farbare vej.

LaRouche-demokraten Kesha Rogers fra Texas fører an på denne vej, med den mobilisering, hun har genlanceret sammen med veteraner fra NASA, for at bringe rumprogrammet tilbage. EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche kalder dette for videnskabeligt arbejde af højeste rang; det er den eneste, videnskabelige aktivitet i USA, der har ægte betydning for menneskehedens fremtid.

Og Amerika vil stå foran et samfundsmæssigt kollaps, hvis vi ikke meget snart gør dette.

De eksempler, som USA må samarbejde med om enhver bestræbelse inden for rumfartsvidenskab, som der gives mulighed for, er Kina og Rusland.

Dér, hvor den amerikanske »fremskridtskultur« engang blomstrede – i udforskningen af rummet – dér er Kina nu den drivende kraft. Kinas plan for de næste fem år er centreret omkring rumforskning. Med målet om at undersøge galaksen fra Månens bagside inden for de næste to år, inkluderer Kinas nye plan for økonomisk og samfundsmæssig udvikling »en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

­Under en diskussion om det økonomiske program den 5. marts sagde chefen for Kinas største rumforskningslaboratorie: »Rumforskning er uadskilleligt fra Kinas innovationsdrevne udvikling. Hvis Kina ønsker at være en stærk, global nation, bør det ikke kun varetage sine umiddelbare interesser, men også bidrage til menneskeheden. Kun dette kan vinde Kina verdens respekt.«

USA har mistet verdens respekt under Bush, og især under Barack Obama. Obama må fjernes fra embedet, omgående, og hans onde »værk« må omstødes. Og mere presserende end alt andet må hans mord på Amerikas rumforskningsprogram vendes omkring i en total genoplivelse af rumforskning – »for en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

 

Titelfoto: NASA’s adm. dir. Griffin præsenterer en billedmontage for formand og adm. dir. ved Kinas Akademi for Rumteknologi, dr. Yuan Jiajun, i 2006, under det første besøg i Kina af en NASA-direktør.    




Mulighed for fred i Syrien.
EIR’s Jeffrey Steinberg forklarer,
hvordan våbenhvilen kom i stand,
og hvad der må til for at den bliver varig

LPAC fredags-webcast 26. februar 2016, dansk oversættelse.

Hvis man derfor sluttelig ønsker, at den syriske fredsaftale skal blive en succes, altså holde, så må man, ud over det presserende nødvendige behov for en Marshallplan/Landbro-hjørnesten for at sikre, at freden er varig, også fjerne Obama. Og man må bringe det britiske imperiesystem til fald.

Der findes muligheder for en erstatning, men disse erstatninger vil kun ske, når Obama er blevet fjernet af reelle forfatningsmæssige grunde, og på det tidspunkt, hvor Det britiske Imperium har fået en reglementeret begravelse.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Putin går frem med fredsinitiativ for Syrien;
Det haster med at få Obama og briterne smidt ud

24. februar 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin går frem i denne uge med det nye initiativ for en våbenhvile i Syrien, med dens fulde implikationer for at standse krigsmagerne. Elementer i denne proces i perioden 22.-23. feb. tøjrer Obama og hans London-kontrollers med flere og flere begrænsninger. Det geopolitiske slæng finder det stadig vanskeligere at gennemføre deres sædvanlige, beskidte tricks. Dette skaber en ny mulighed for os til at handle for at få Obama væk, og virkelig bryde med det britiske imperieparadigme, der er den oprindelig ansvarlige for ødelæggelsen i Mellemøsten/Nordafrika og Europa. De aktuelle omstændigheder udgør de perfekte betingelser for fornuftige kræfter i hele USA – og i hele verden – for at komme frem og præstere dette.

»Der er ingen mulighed«, sagde Lyndon LaRouche i dag og understregede det som en presserende hastesag. »Med mindre der gøres noget særligt for at få Obama smidt ud af embedet«, er der ingen chance for succes. Det er vigtigt, sagde han, at »bryde det britiske overtag. Det er menneskehedens eneste chance. Obama må fjernes, på den ene eller anden måde. Det er den eneste mulighed.«

Den 22. feb. nåede de fælles formænd for ISSG (Den Internationale Støttegruppe for Syrien) – Rusland og USA – frem til en formel aftale om »Betingelser for Ophør af Fjendtligheder i Syrien«, efter en telefonsamtale mellem Putin og Obama, efter anmodning fra Kreml. Dernæst udstedte Putin en fuld og officiel »Særlig Erklæring« http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/51376

om den nye aftales betydning, der omfatter en gentagelse af principperne og en specifikation af deres gennemførelse. Med hensyn til overholdelse af kravene siger Putins erklæring: »For at opnå dette mål vil vi etablere en kommunikations-hotline og, om nødvendigt, en arbejdsgruppe til udveksling af relevant information … «

Putin understregede yderligere, at der må skabes betingelser »for lancering af en politisk proces på lang sigt gennem en bred, inter-syrisk dialog i Geneve, under FN’s regi«.

Moskva annoncerede dernæst, inden for 24 timer, mere implementering. Generalmajor Igor Konashenkov, talsmand for Forsvarsministeriet, udstedte i dag en erklæring, der sagde, at Rusland har forberedt logistikken for den ’varme linje’ mellem USA og Rusland og overgivet det til USA til at blive igangsat. For det andet har Rusland etableret et »koordinationscenter til forsoning« af de krigsførende parter, på Kheimin-flybasen nær Latakia idet vestlige Syrien. Dets funktioner vil være at »yde maksimum assistance« til alle, der beder om det. Der vil blive oprettet hotlines for at overvåge våbenstilstanden. Centeret vil assistere indsatser for humanitær hjælp.

I modsætning hertil fulgte Obama op på telefonsamtalen og aftalen med Putin ved ikke at komme med en erklæring og blot frigive et udskrift på to afsnit, der blev udlagt på Det Hvide Hus’ nyhedsside. Første afsnit bekræftede blot telefonsamtalen og aftalen; alt imens det andet afsnit rapporterede, at Obama revsede Putin for forseelser i Ukraine. Den britiske udenrigsminister Philip Hammond fulgte trop ved at rave om, at den nye aftale »kun vil holde, hvis der finder et betydeligt sindelagsskift sted i det syriske regimes og dets støtters opførsel. Især må Rusland honorere denne aftale ved at afslutte sine angreb på syriske civile … « osv.

I realiteten udgør Putins fredsinitiativer i Syrien rammerne for den Silkevej/Marshallplan, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche og Schiller Instituttets mobilisering har foreslået, og som er indbefattet i præsident Xis nylige besøg til regionen. Dette er midlet til at afslutte striden og genoprette en fremtid i hele regionen.

Det, der blokerer for dette, er, at amerikanere stadig finder sig i, at Obama sidder i embedet, og i den britiske imperiebesættelse. Tiden til at komme af med dette er for længst overskredet.

 

Foto: Vladimir Putins tale efter Ruslands og USA’s vedtagelse af en fælles erklæring om Syrien. (en.kremlin.ru)

 




Historien udvikler sig til Ruslands og Kinas fordel, ikke Obamas

17. februar 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Efter endnu et fejlslagent »topmøde«-forsøg på at vende ASEAN-landene imod Kina, brugte Barack Obama sin pressekonference den 16. februar på at fordømme og forsøge at nedgøre Rusland, og i særdeleshed den russiske præsident Putins succesrige forandring af situationen i Mellemøsten.

Obamaregeringen forsøger, gennem medierne, at hævde, at våbenhvilen i Syrien, som den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry forhandlede igennem med den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov, vil mislykkes! Dette, fordi Obama ikke kan tolerere de succesrige økonomiske og politiske roller, som Rusland og Kina nu spiller i verden, og sine egne fiaskoer.

Det, som Putins succesrige rolle repræsenterer, er overførslen af indflydelse over menneskelige anliggender fra det britiske imperiesystem – for hvilket Obama har været en villig faktor – og over til de fremvoksende eurasiske nationer.

Det repræsenterer også en næsten 20 år lang succesrig kamp imod al jihadistisk terrorisme, både i Rusland og internationalt – et samarbejde, der uafbrudt er blevet tilbudt USA siden 11. september [2001], og som altid er blevet afvist af Bush og Obama.

Kina og Rusland og Indien er blevet de primære agenter for en ændring af civilisationens fremtid. De europæiske nationer og USA er for en nedadgående kurs, og de vil gå ned, med mindre de radikalt ændrer deres politik for den krise, der omslutter deres banksystemer.

Siden præsident Franklin Roosevelts død har USA befundet sig i en lang nedgangsperiode for økonomisk produktivitet; og siden mordene på JFK og RFK, for et accelererende tab af videnskabeligt og teknologisk fremskridt, og for de fleste af sine borgeres livsbetingelser.

Spørgsmålet drejer sig ikke om, hvad Obama siger; det drejer sig om, hvad man skal gøre med ham. Vil USA være intelligent nok til at gå sammen med Rusland og Kina om samarbejde om rumprogrammer, i internationale kreditbanker, i store infrastrukturprojekter, i overvindelsen af terrorisme, der er fostret af briterne og saudierne? Hvis ikke, vil USA blive ødelagt som magt.

Præsident Putin udøver ikke stor magt, men effektiv magt, og han udøver den med intelligens. Rusland, Kina og Indien styrer i stigende grad planetens fremtidige historie.

Og USA har – Obama! Hvis han blev dumpet nu, så har USA en historisk afprøvet politik for økonomisk genrejsning, der kunne genoprette dets fremtid: FDR’s politik. Luk Wall Streets kasino-banksystem, der er ved at få fallit, ned, og skab dernæst statslig kredit til genindførelse af produktivitet og produktiv beskæftigelse. Det er det eneste alternativ, og det vil ikke ske med Obama i embedet.

 

Foto: Præsidenterne Xi Jinping og Vladimir Putin mødes under G20-mødet i Tyrkiet i 2015.

 




En løsning på Wall Streets panik – uden Obamas Verdenskrig

15. februar 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Den transatlantiske finansielle panik, der nu er ved at udvikle sig, er værre en den i 2008; den har bragt os helt ud på randen af et sammenbrud i økonomi og civilisation.

Selv om Wall Street insisterer voldsomt på, at »det kun er de europæiske banker«, så er dette en løgn, der afsløres af deres eget bjerg af dårlige værdipapirer, der løber op i billioner af dollar, og med deres derivater, der nu begynder at nedsmelte. Vi afventer det første krak af en storbank, måske så tidligt som i denne måned, eller i denne uge. Men den virkelige panik bliver det, der følger efter. En billiard dollar stor derivatmængde binder alle disse storbanker sammen, siden man afskaffede Glass-Steagall. De har allerede reduceret de transatlantiske og japanske økonomier til under nulvækst; deres kollaps vil tilintetgøre disse økonomier.

Vi kan redde USA fra bankerot og kollaps. Kongressen kan vedtage nødforholdsregler. Med en Glass/Steagall-reform kan Kongressen lukke Wall Street ned, og dernæst begynde at skabe statskreditter til investeringer i reel produktivitet i den amerikanske økonomi – for første gang i et halvt århundrede. Dette vil kræve en mission med en videnskabelig drivkraft, med et fuldt ud genoplivet amerikansk NASA-program, i samarbejde med især Kinas, Indiens og Ruslands rumprogrammer.

At redde USA fra bankerot vil kræve mere end Wall Streets betingelsesløse overgivelse; det vil også kræve, at Kongressen fjerner Barack Obama fra magten, eller også kunne Wall Streets panik ende med Obamas verdenskrig.

Vi står på randen af en invasion af Syrien fra tyrkisk-saudisk hold, der handler efter planer, som er lagt med Obamas forsvarsminister Ashton Carter, og som direkte sætter en krig med Rusland på spil.

Dette træk, som nu kunne komme over os, giver ingen mening. Det er vanvittigt for et i stigende grad bankerot og miskrediteret Saudi Arabien, samt et allerede destabiliseret Tyrkiet, at iscenesætte en illegal invasion og sætte planeten på randen af verdenskrig. Den russiske præsident Putins intervention siden september 2015 skabte ikke alene alternativet til ISIS/al-Qaedas overtagelse af hele Syrien; dette alternativ har også succesfuldt bevæget krigen tæt på en våbenhvile.

Disse truende angribere er irrelevante. Krigsfaktoren er Obama, og de britiske bankierer og kongelige, der kontrollerer ham. Hvis Obama åbenlyst går ind for tyrkiske og saudiske skakbrikker, der truer med en krig, der kan ødelægge civilisationen, så kunne denne handling give bagslag i form af at forårsage hans fjernelse fra præsidentembedet ved at anvende det 25. forfatningstillæg.

Den større krigsfaktor er det nu hastigt fremadskridende kollaps af Europas og USA’s banksystemer og økonomier. Virkeligheden er Wall Streets panik. Vi skal holde os til jobbet med at lukke det ned omgående. Hvis vi gør det, har vi – sammen med Rusland og dets allierede Kina – midlerne til at forhindre Obamas verdenskrig.

 

Billede: Han venter og håber på virkelig forandring. FDR-mindesmærke, Washington, D.C. Krediteret Norman Maddeaux.

(Skulpturen henviser til præsident Franklin Roosevelts ugentlige søndags-radioudsendelser, kaldet ’Fireside Chats’, hvor han talte direkte til det amerikanske folk om den politik, han havde til hensigt at gennemføre.  

Forslag til fordybelse: et udvalg af FDR’s vigtigste ’Fireside Chats’ kan læses her: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/fireside.php -red.)  




LaRouchePAC Internationale Fredags-webcast, 12. februar 2016:
Genopliv USA’s rumprogram! Genopliv en vision for fremtiden!

Dette fredags-webcast vil fokusere på LaRouches nødmobilisering for at genoprette det amerikanske rumprogram og gøre Barack Obamas ødelæggelse af rumprogrammet til det mest fremtrædende tema i spørgsmålet om nødvendigheden af at stille ham for en rigsret som præsident for USA. Engelsk udskrift.

This Friday’s LaRouchePAC webcast will focus on LaRouche’s emergency mobilization to restore the American space program and make its destruction by Barack Obama the most prominent feature of his necessary impeachment as President of the United States.

Transcript-MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening! My name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us for our weekly Friday evening broadcast, here, from larouchepac.com. This is our webcast for February 12, 2016. Today is Abraham Lincoln’s birthday. I’m joined in the studio today by Jeffrey Steinberg from Executive Intelligence Review magazine, as well as Megan Beets and Ben Deniston from the LaRouche PAC science team. I’m also joined, via video, by a special guest again this week — Kesha Rogers, joining us from Houston, Texas.

We have all just come from a discussion that we had with both Mr. LaRouche and Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche. I think the content of the presentation that you’ll hear tonight is directly informed by the tenor of that discussion. It’s very clear that there are immediate problems, an immediate crisis, which must be addressed and must be resolved, that are right in front of us as we speak. However, that will be the subject of the answer to our institutional question, which we have decided to leave to the end of tonight’s broadcast.

To begin with, we have the responsibility to take a step back and look at the much bigger picture. We have a responsibility of leadership, as an organization, and as a movement which involves the viewers of this webcast tonight. That responsibility of leadership requires us to go far beyond these immediate challenges, to look into the future, and to imagine what mankind can be, what mankind must be, and to take the necessary action to bring that future into being.

The recent attention to the incomparable genius of Albert Einstein that has been forced upon us by a very interesting outcome of an experimental investigation that has just had results that were reported yesterday, forces us to consider, however, not just the outcome of that experiment, but forces us to consider what mankind as a species is capable of, and what the identity of mankind as a species must become in a self-conscious way.

This is something that we’re going to take up in much more detail a little bit later in the broadcast tonight, but what we begin to consider, is that the space program as we knew it from President John F. Kennedy and others, is the necessary ingredient of a mission of any civilization which is worthy of representing mankind as a species on this planet. Mankind must not be a creature of the Earth. Man is not an Earthling. Mankind must be a creature of the stars! He must learn, both physically and mentally, how to navigate that wide ocean which is outer space. He must come to know what he does not know. He must come to understand the inner workings of the galaxy which he is an integral part of, and also other galactic systems. And, he must come to know his role as a species within that complex of galactic systems which comprise the Universe as we know it today.

In doing so, man affirms his nature as a species completely unique from all other species. Mr. LaRouche was emphatic that the insights of Vladimir Vernadsky and his understanding of the noösphere, and the uniqueness of the human mind and the human species as a whole, setting mankind apart from the animals, is something which very few people understand today, but was a very crucial investigation into the nature of the human race. Coincidentally, Vladimir Vernadsky and Albert Einstein were direct contemporaries.

We made great leaps, giant leaps, in this direction of man as a galactic species, not an earthbound species, with our landing of men on the Moon during the Apollo project of the 1960s and 1970s, and other great accomplishments of that era. To a certain extent, the legacy of that era has continued along certain trajectories. But since that time, when the mission of man leaving this planet was a professed mission of the United States government itself under the figure of John F. Kennedy, since that time, our progress in that direction has been moving backwards, compared to where we should have been, where we should have come by now, had we continued that directionality, and especially compared to what other countries, most notably China, have now accomplished and are committed to accomplishing further in the very near future ahead.

As President John F. Kennedy was wont to say in several speeches that he made, where he quoted Scripture: “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” And that is absolutely true today. That is what the last 50 years of a “backwards progress” has brought us, as an American people — as we’ve presented repeatedly over the past several weeks in this webcast — and as a trans-Atlantic system, where face an absolutely dire crisis — economic, social, and military crisis today.

Our job here this evening, is to take the necessary steps to restoring that vision, and there’s nobody more qualified to that, in my opinion, than my good friend Kesha Rogers. Following the remarks that Kesha makes, we will have follow-up remarks from Megan Beets, who will elaborate much more on what China is doing in their ambitious space program and where that’s come from in the recent years, and where that’s going towards. Ben Deniston will follow up immediately after her, to elaborate a little bit more of what the necessary insight into the genius of Albert Einstein and Vladimir Vernadsky must be, from the perspective of this recent experiment that affirmed many of Einstein’s hypotheses that he made nearly a century ago.

For those of you who may not know, or may need to be reminded, Kesha Rogers was the Democratic nominee for Congress in Texas’s 22nd District two years in a row — the 2010 elections and the elections in 2012, which, I’m sure, was a real thorn in the side of the political hacks in that area. She established her campaign based on the idea that we must revive NASA, restore NASA, despite the attempts by the Obama administration to destroy what NASA was committed to doing.

In 2014, Kesha expanded on her successes as an electoral candidate in the previous two elections, and declared a state-wide race for United States Senate, which, despite the fact that she was massively outspent by the Democratic Party establishment and by their chosen candidate, she came so close in the preliminary primary elections, that she forced those primaries into a runoff election, and received not just national prominence, but international prominence as a very significant political figure.

So, without more said about Kesha’s unique role in this mission to restore the vision to the American people, I’d like to introduce to you, Kesha Rogers.

KESHA ROGERS: Thank you, Matthew! Well, I think what you’ve laid out, and also in the discussions we had from Mr. LaRouche, one thing that’s important to point out is, this is the level of discussion which is absolutely critical to revive the educational and human commitment that has been lost in our society. The real question is, when we’re dealing with the space program — and this is what’s not being discussed in any of the political debates or amongst the space community itself — is this question of what is the nature of man; what is the responsibility to the understanding of the mind of man as different from any other species, animal species, out there.

I’ve gone to a number of events in the NASA community with certain representatives of the space community. You have this discussion where people want to talk about innovation or something of that nature; but what’s missing right now, is that there’s no real discussion on the principle of true discovery, on the principle of true creativity. If you’re going to get back to the foundation of what our space program truly represents, then that has to be the focal point of what is understood and what we’re fighting for. Looking at the space program, one of the things that is extremely important right now, is that what has been a dividing line, is this very question of what is the nature of man. It’s not about money, or it’s not about what projects are more reasonable or will actually work better; but more so it is what is the destiny of mankind to discover and to do what has never been done before.

I love the remarks from Mike Griffin, former NASA Administrator, who I believe made them in 2006, working under the [George W.] Bush Administration, who demonstrated the idea that mankind has always committed itself to doing that which is going to leave something behind for the children, grand-children, next generations — the building of great cathedrals. We think about Brunelleschi or Charlemagne, those individuals who played a significant role in creating something that they weren’t going to be able to see themselves, that they may not be able to participate in; but knew that their responsibility was to actually create for the future. I think that’s the ultimate question right now. What has been done in the progress of the society of mankind has been with the intention of creating for the future.

When you take the conception of the future out, and that human beings have no ability to actually determine or act upon that future, that was the understanding of the fight between Zeus and Prometheus, [where] Prometheus had a higher conception that mankind can know, and not only know, can actually act on and create the future.

How do we do this? We do this through the basis of discovery. We do this through the basis of understanding that human beings don’t have to live like their fathers and grandfathers before them, like the beavers, before them. We can create new discoveries! And that’s what we’re finding and which has been essential in understanding what the space program brings us, and the understanding of the new principles that were put forth in development of what you see in terms of the beautiful ideas that foster the creation of such wonderful and beautiful cathedrals; that mankind not only just enjoys, in terms of aesthetic beauty, but also which has created the ability for a mastery of science that had never been known before.

That’s what the space program represents! The same idea is actually recognized, when you look at music, what great Classical composition truly represents. The fostering of our society has been, always, to take the discoveries of mankind to the next level, to a higher conception, to a higher principle of mankind. The space program represents not just a program itself, but is what is the destiny of mankind.

I want to reiterate the beautiful example, again, of Krafft-Ehricke, because I think this gets at the truly beautiful and fundamental idea of that conception, as to why we have to have a space program. It is only for those very reasons, on the conception of what is the destiny of mankind, what is our responsibility. This is what we should be addressing in our education systems; that, as [krafft-]Ehricke explained, “The concept of space travel carries with it enormous impact, because it challenges man on practically all fronts of his physical and spiritual existence. The idea of traveling to other celestial bodies reflects the highest degree, the independence and agility of the human mind. It lends ultimate dignity to man’s technical and scientific endeavors. Above all, it touches on the philosophy of his very existence.”

And what we have to address in terms of looking at what has been lost in the space program, is that very conception of touching on that which is human. And identifying that which only mankind has the ability, based on our creative powers based on the image of the Creator, to be able to actually participate in. And we have taken that away. We’ve taken it away through the actions of the last two administrations through a policy of capitulation to Wall Street and a bankrupt financial system. The idea that our mission, as China has clearly set forward, and the paradox in that is the fact that we have been denied access through the insanity of certain Congress members and people who have taken away the collaboration, for human beings to collaborate on discoveries that are going to impact all of mankind. By denying the access of NASA per se to work with China, this was known as a clear understanding that nations had to work together if we were going to actually address the problems on Earth facing mankind, that were going to be addressed through discoveries that were going to benefit all mankind.

So that’s what we have to address right now. Can we get back to that understanding once again? What is going to be our direction? What type of future are we going to see — are we going to create, I should say, on the progress of where society and civilization are going. And I think what we are seeing coming down the pike in terms of a continued escalation toward war and chaos, we have a clear dividing line in front of us. And this is extremely important that the space program has — what it represents gives us a commitment again toward restoring a new direction for mankind. And doing what it is that is our responsibility and intention to do.

OGDEN: Thank you, Kesha. Now let me ask Megan Beets to come to the podium.

MEGAN BEETS: So Kesha referenced German space pioneer Krafft-Ehricke. I’d like to reference another German space pioneer, who lived at the beginning of the 1600s — Johannes Kepler. And Kepler also identified the Moon as a very unique place, and a unique destination for mankind. In 1608, he authored a really beautiful, fanciful document called “The Dream”; in which he imagined a journey to the Moon, and described and unfolded in his imagination what astronomical observation would be like from the vantage point of the Moon. Taking man off of Earth, taking man’s mind off of Earth and reconstructing the structure of the Solar System as seen from the vantage point of the Moon.

Now, very interestingly, he also discussed and imagined what the unique differences might be between the near side of the Moon — which we see every night when we look up into the sky and see the Moon — and what the differences would be with the far side of the Moon, and what those unique characteristics might be.

Now, 400 years after Kepler wrote this, man for the first time is finally planning to land on that far side of the Moon. Just a little over two years from today, China plans to send its Chang’e 4 lunar mission to go to the Moon, and for the first time in mankind’s history, to perform a soft landing on the far side of the Moon. The far side of the Moon is a very unique place; it’s unique in terms of the Moon itself. It presents geological characteristics which we believe to be quite different from the near side. It presents resources such as Helium-3, which might be in higher quantities than on the near side of the Moon. But it’s also a very unique vantage point in terms of the Solar System itself; allowing us to perform astronomical observations in wavelengths which we just simply can’t see from anyplace near Earth or Earth’s orbit.

So, as Kepler foresaw in a sense, the far side of the Moon is a beginning point for us to begin to exercise our creative play; and to begin to peer out into the Solar System and the galaxy beyond and reconsider the processes of that Solar System as something that might be different than anything we’ve known before. So this landing on the far side of the Moon will come precisely one year after China does something else; which is sending their Chang’e 5 mission as a sample return mission, to land on the surface of the Moon, sample lunar material, rendezvous with an orbiter, and sen this lunar sample back to Earth. This is the first time this has occurred in over 40 years, and using entirely new and different technology. Now that 2017 sample return mission is coming roughly after three years after something which happened just one year ago; which was China’s Chang’e5T — for test — mission. Which sent an orbiter to the Moon which went around the back side of the Moon, sent back some beautiful images from its orbit around the Moon; sent a capsule from lunar orbit back to Earth orbit, which was able to make a successful re-entry onto Earth and be recovered by Chinese space scientists. Again, this is the first time anything like this has happened in over 40 years.

Now, an important element for China’s space program is its quest for a very rare isotope for helium. Helium-3, which, as has been said by the father of the Chinese lunar program, Ouyang Ziyuan, is a unique fusion fuel which could power the Earth as far into the future as we could think. This is a fusion fuel which is very, very rare on Earth; but which exists in abundance on the Moon. Another promise of the Moon drawing mankind in to a higher level of power and a higher level of existence.

Those are the very recent and also immediate future plans and accomplishments of China in space. Going back to 2007, just prior to the launch of the very first phase of their lunar program, the Chang’e 1, China’s newspaper interviewed 10,000 Chinese youth. And of those 10,000 young Chinese, 99% were following the developments of the lunar mission; another 90% believed that they one day would travel to the Moon. This remarkable progress of China in their Moon program has been complemented by a very robust, in terms of the success of the accomplishments, manned space program — the Shenzhou program; which began in 1992, and is coupled with the Tiangong program, the space station program. So, it was in 2003 that China put its first man into space. It was five years after that that China put the first man into space to perform the first space walk of China; which was beamed back down to Earth in a live broadcast. In 2012, China sent a Shenzhou mission up into space to rendezvous and dock with the first component of their space station; the Tiangong I. The crew rendezvoused with the space station, opened the portal and entered the space station to beam photographs and video back down to Earth. Only one year after that, the next Shenzhou mission rendezvoused with the same component of the space station; the astronauts entered the space station, and one of the astronauts taught a simple physics class, performing simple physics experiments live to 60 million Chinese students in classrooms on Earth.

This year, 2016, the second phase of the space station, the Tiangong 2, will be sent up; shortly followed by the next manned mission to rendezvous with the space capsule. Now this is progress towards a full-size space station, which is expected to be launched in the early 2020s; which will permit long-term habitation and scientific work in space. Which is expected to be completed roughly at the same time as the International Space Station is decommissioned.

So, that’s a very brief overview, but I want to make two points on this. Number one, the entire Chang’e lunar exploration program and the manned space program, including the space station, is vectored toward establishing mankind on the Moon; not simply a mission to plant a flag and go home. The idea of China is to begin folding the Moon into mankind’s sphere of influence; fold the Moon into the noösphere in the sense of Vladimir Vernadsky. But also, to allow the Moon to transform mankind; to allow the discoveries that we make and the secrets of the Moon to change and upgrade man’s power in and over the universe. They also plan to use the Moon, very clearly, as a launch pad, a base for further expansion into deep space.

The second point to be made is, that while this progress is being made by China, these missions are being launched by China, this is an international program. This is not for the Chinese; and they’ve been very clear about that. China has nearly 100 agreements for space cooperation with over two dozen countries, which is part and parcel of their win-win cooperation vision for collaboration among all mankind.

Having said all of this, I think it’s important to back up and look down on the whole thing. It’s not the specifics of what China is doing here which are really the most important thing. What is important is the modality which China has committed itself to. The fact that the minds and the lives of the Chinese people are being engaged in the kind of creative play which we see in the manned space program, and the joy in the accomplishments of that. In the space station program. In their plans for the exploration of Mars and further out into deep space. And especially in their lunar program. This kind of creative play and progress is moving mankind as a species closer to what the German space pioneer Krafft-Ehricke called not homo sapiens, but “homo extraterrestris”. Mankind becoming a new species which is not based on Earth, but which is based in the Solar System as a whole. It’s in that sense that China today, with their commitment to their space program, with their commitment to involving people around to the world to participate in these kinds of accomplishments. It is in this sense that China today is leading the cause of humanity.

BENJAMIN DENISTON: Thanks, Megan and Kesha. Maybe just to pick up off directly what we were just presented with China’s focus, I just wanted to highlight some of what Mr. LaRouche was emphasizing today on the importance of this for uplifting mankind to a new level. And as we discussed last week, we have some very important elements with the lunar far side, which Megan referenced. This is a unique capability mankind will have when accessing the far side of the Moon, to give us a completely new perspective on the universe. But I want to just — coming off of Mr. LaRouche’s emphasis earlier today, and what Kesha was just bringing up, I want to emphasize that this is not just the ability to discover the currently unseen. We’ll see new things, but the point is, this will give us the ability to discover what is currently unknown. What does that mean? What does the unknown mean? This requires a fundamental return to real science, is what Mr. LaRouche was emphasizing earlier today. A real, true scientific conception of mankind as a creative force in collaboration with a creative universe. And today, as was mentioned, we have the excellent standard of Einstein brought to us again today, with the confirmation of something he had forecast a century ago; which was the existence of so-called “gravitational waves”, or waves in the space-time characteristics of the universe. This is getting all kinds of media headlines, media attention, coverage all over the place. I think it’s a pretty remarkable thing to reflect upon; just the very conception of waves, changes in the structure of the very space-time fabric of the universe; which Einstein had forecast, and expected to be there. And we’re finally with our technology, catching up to where Einstein had said we would be, over a century earlier; confirming what he had expected with his conception of gravity.

You can read plenty of media coverage about this particular confirmation of Einstein all over the place now. But take a look at Einstein himself; look at Einstein’s conception of gravity as a curved space-time. And Einstein, as a scientific thinker coming out of very specific scientific tradition, explicitly referencing back to the work of Riemann and Gauss. Riemann, somebody who overturned the entire chessboard of science, so to speak, with his calling for the ending of a priori notions of science, of geometry. Including conceptions about space and time, for example, which Einstein demonstrated. You see a direct reflection of orientation of this in Riemann’s work, in Gauss’ work earlier, who Riemann picked up on.

Look at this another way; what were they overturning? They were saying science, the process of mankind’s understanding of the relation of the universe, that must completely rid itself of these a priori notions about space, time, geometry, or what became even worse, the mathematical approach pushed by Russell and his followers. That science must rid itself of these a priori conceptions The kind of a priori sense perception, that type of a priori geometry of absolute space, absolute time, for example; which are really just a reflection of a sense perceptual reflection of the universe. That real science must rid itself of these conceptions.

What does that leave us with? If we are not going to base, premise science on these a priori notions — or I would say, sense perceptual notions, or you could maybe even say a kind of an animalistic notion, a biological notion of your interaction with the universe. Then what’s the basis, what’s the substance of mankind’s ability to have science, to change his relationship with the fundamental nature of the universe? It’s in human creativity; the human mind. The process of human discovery, is the substance of the ability of mankind to change his relationship to the universe; become a more powerful creative force in the universe. And that’s what’s primary; human creative thought is what tells something about the fundamental nature of the universe, because that’s the basis of the ability of mankind to come into a higher degree of coherence with the fundamental organizing principles of that universe. That it doesn’t come from sense perception; it doesn’t come from sense perceptual notions. It comes from a specific quality of the human mind, which we can define as human creativity; which is a non-logical, non-deductive process, a uniquely creative process which can’t be explained away as a phenomenon of something else. It’s its own capability, that Einstein knew; that Riemann knew. That this competent true current of scientific thought has been premised on the knowledge, the recognition, that this is the basis of science; this is the basis of our ability to understand the nature of the universe. This is the basis of the nature of the universe itself, if you invert it and understand it that way; that human creative thought is the key issue. Which means that mankind is a creative force in a creative universe. We’re in a very real scientific sense, a co-creator in a process of creation.

And I think it’s worth just highlighting another of Einstein’s insights into this reality of the true nature of science, the true nature of mankind. Interestingly, this takes us away from the very large, as Riemann had discussed, into the very small. And if you look at Einstein’s work on the very small, on the nature of atomic processes, sub-atomic processes; the activity in the very, very small, so-called quantum processes. And this was, as most people are familiar, this was the subject of a major scientific debate and fight at the time about what is the nature of causality? What is happening on these very small quantum scales? And Einstein was adamantly fighting against this hardcore reductionist approach that tried to just say everything on this level is purely statistical; there’s no cause that can be known, it’s just a statistical random process with no causality and no ability to know causality.

And people are probably more familiar with Einstein’s famous quote that he doesn’t think God plays dice; he doesn’t think the universe is, in its essence, just organized around completely random randomness. That’s the more well-known quote. He clearly had more developed thoughts than just that. In another discussion, he had said, if we want to actually understand causality on this level, understand the nature of quantum processes, perhaps it’s our own notion of causality which is what needs to be overthrown. It’s not, is the quantum world, the very small, deterministic in the way we were thinking about deterministic causality before, vs. just statistically random; or is it that our idea of causality is too simple, is wrong? And he used the example of a Bach fugue, a musical composition; and he said, our current notion of causality is equivalent to a very beginner trying to play a Bach fugue on the piano by just going one note to one note to the next note to the next note, in a linear fashion. And he says, you ruin the piece that way; the conception doesn’t come across, because a Bach fugue is not organized as a linear sequence of notes. There’s a certain conception and intention governing the piece as a whole; and all of the individual components, the keys are organized in a completely different fashion than a linear causality.

So if you want to understand quantum processes, if you want to understand what’s happening in the very small, we should reflect upon the ignorance of our own notions of causality; and look to insights to causality and organization which are coherent with the characteristics of human creative thought. That human creative thought and human creative discovery are what we know are the things that enable mankind to create higher states of organization; to make new fundamental scientific discoveries. And that is what therefore tells us something about the nature, the fundamental organization of the universe as a whole.

So, I think we look to the Moon, we look to mankind going into space; but we need to look to this prospective future from this proper standpoint of mankind having an obligation to be a fundamentally creative driving force in a fundamentally creative universe. That the only real science is a science of mankind as a co-creator in a creative universe. And Einstein certainly understood that from his own perspective, and the future development of mankind requires the Einstein standard today to be applied.

OGDEN: Thank you very much. What we’re going to do next is, I will read our institutional question for this evening; and Jeff Steinberg will deliver a more elaborated answer encapsulating some of Mr. LaRouche’s responses to it. It reads as follows: “Mr. LaRouche: The World Health Organization has declared the Zika virus a global public health emergency. The National Institute of Health calls it ‘a pandemic in progress’. The infection is suspected of leading to thousands of babies being born with under-developed brains. Some areas have declared a state of emergency; doctors have described it as a pandemic in process, and some are even advising women in affected countries to delay getting pregnant.

“Mr. LaRouche, in your view, could the Zika virus become a major global pandemic; and in your opinion, how can the spread of the virus be stopped?”

STEINBERG: Thanks, Matt. I’ll refer people to an article that’s published in the current issue of Executive Intelligence Review, the issue dated February 12, 2016, which takes up some technical questions which I’m not going to get into here. There are serious questions about whether or not a British company produced a genetically modified mosquito, ostensibly aimed at curbing the spread of Zika virus and other mosquito-borne viruses; and that there were poor controls over it. There were other factors that may have contributed to this now becoming a very dangerous global pandemic.

But I think we’ve got to step back and take a different perspective on this. As early as 1975, Lyndon LaRouche directed a biological holocaust task force with the question on the table of whether or not the conscious policies of the British monarchy and other allied institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, were creating the conditions willfully for a new biological holocaust by virtue of austerity policies. Literally genocide policies that would have the effect of breaking down the systems that had been built up over centuries for dealing with and avoiding the spread of the kinds of diseases than can create mass-kill pandemics of the sort that we saw in Europe in the 14th Century, where one-third of the population and half of the parishes of continental Europe were wiped out in a relatively small period of time. In other words, the question is, are we dealing with the consequences of what can justifiably and fairly be called a Satanic policy coming from certain leading British oligarchical circles with their co-thinkers and allies around the world?

That biological holocaust project, that was directed by Mr. LaRouche, came as the result of the ending of the Bretton Woods system, and the shift of the IMF and World Bank towards policies of promoting population reduction, the fraudulent concept which you should understand as the result of what we’ve discussed here this evening, of limits to growth. And in particular, from that period of early 1970s moment onward, the advent of a fundamental assault against basic science, taking the form of various Green policies that repudiate the very nature of man as a creative species; whose very existence is based on the idea that mankind will make discoveries that will give mankind a greater understanding of how the universe works. Knowing that those discoveries will lead future generations to make even greater discoveries.

And that basically, within that possibility, every child born on this planet, should have the ability — through proper nurturing, proper education — to be able to make the kinds of discoveries that were made by people like Einstein, like Kepler, and others. This is the nature of mankind. And to the extent that there are polices that are put forward that deter mankind from realizing its true nature as the only known creative being in the universe; this is, in fact, indeed, a Satanic policy.

So, we’re dealing with a situation where there will be concrete initiatives taken to come up with an understanding of how the Zika virus has been spread; an understanding of what emergency measures can be taken; plus, the development of protective measures like vaccines and things like that. But on a much larger scale, we’ve got to look at the massive crimes against humanity that are being committed by virtue of the conscious assault against the kind of scientific education that leads to more and more people being actually able to participate in what it means to be truly human.

So, if you want to talk about a deadly virus that has to be stopped, let’s talk about President Obama’s policy; which has been to systematically shut down the entire NASA space program. Remember that at the beginning of the Obama administration, there were plans under way to replace the Shuttle program with the Constellation, which was to be a new rocket system for delivering man into space exploration. In his very first budget, President Obama canceled the Constellation program; knowing full well that with the cancellation and ending of the Shuttle program and the ending of Constellation, that there would be wide gap in the ability of the United States to even engage in any kind of manned space activity without hitching a ride from China or Russia, or one of the other nations that was going ahead with these programs.

Now we find that the rationale that President Obama used for canceling Constellation was that there was another rocket program called the Orion, which offered better prospects than Constellation. Well, what’s happened systematically over the course of the Obama Presidency, is once Constellation was canceled and literally shut down, you had the cancellation through attrition of budgeting, to where now the Orion program has been canceled as well. Major projects for the kind of exploration that Megan described; developing windows into the universe through the back side of the Moon have been shut down, and stripped or greatly reduced from the NASA budget in favor of “Earth science”. Which means the spreading of the false propaganda about the causes of global warming.

These are the policies that kill. That’s why the term “Satanic” can be appropriately used. If you take what’s happened under the last 15 years, particularly under the last 7 years of the Obama administration; the take down and destruction of America’s ability to participate as a qualified partner with nations like China, like Russia, like India in exploring mankind’s next discoveries of the universe; you realize that the United States has been done a terrible injustice — it is literally a crime against every citizen of this nation, both current and future citizens — that this has been done, that these programs have been shut down. We know that President Obama, every Tuesday, relishes the idea that he holds a kill session, and comes up with a target list of people to be executed during that next 60-day period; but when you consider the killing of the space program, you’ve got to consider that this is an act of mass genocide, not just against the present generation, but against future as yet unborn generations that will be dependent on making these kinds of discoveries, branching out deeper into the universe.

And if you take that idea, that understanding of what has been done to us, particularly over this last 7-year period under Obama, and go back and remember; have a clear image in your mind of President John F Kennedy announcing the Apollo program, and announcing that we are going to do this because it represents the challenge to mankind to make great leaps of discovery and to better understand man’s position in the universe. And if you consider that his brother, Robert Kennedy, would have revived and continued exactly that program; had Robert Kennedy not been assassinated, had John Kennedy not been assassinated, where would the United States be today? Would there have been anyone who dared to shut down our space program, our scientific research?

So, this is where we are. Remember the image of John and Robert Kennedy; and remember that we can once again resume that quest for mankind’s role in the universe, and to create future generations of geniuses. Because that’s the nature of mankind; and it’s a sin every time an individual child is denied the capacity to be that kind of creative individual who makes a discovery that impacts on mankind as a whole.

OGDEN: Thank you very much to everybody who participated tonight: Jeff, Megan, Ben, and especially Kesha. Mr. LaRouche, of course, has been very emphatic, as many of you heard him even in the discussion last night during the national activists’ call — the Fireside Chat — that Kesha has a very special role to play in her ability to mobilize the American people to restore that vision of the future once again. So, I’d like thank Kesha very much for joining us here tonight. Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com, and good night.




Genialitet er i universet, og det er stærkere end det onde, vi er oppe imod

Det tilkommer jer, det amerikanske folk, at forstå og handle på den moralske fordel, der nu er blevet fremlagt gennem Kinas og Ruslands handlinger, især Kinas, og som repræsenterer en ny fremtid for menneskehedens fremskridt i rummet og gennem en »win-win«-strategi om samarbejde mellem alle nationer. Den vision, som Kina og dets rumprogram har fremlagt, om at udforske Månens bagside, blive de første til at lande der og gøre, hvad ingen nation hidtil har gjort, vil ikke alene være en stor sejr for Kina, men for hele menneskeheden.

Det var den samme vision, som USA repræsenterede gennem præsident John F. Kennedys vision og lederskab, da han i 1961 for nationen og hele verden fremlagde forpligtelsen til at landsætte en mand på Månen og bringe ham sikkert tilbage til Jorden.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Kan vi forhindre Obamas og Det britiske Imperiums fremstød for atomkrig?

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 31. januar 2016 – Lyndon LaRouche kom søndag aften med en skarp advarsel om, at »verden står på randen af generel atomkrig, og det kommer først og fremmest fra Storbritannien og Obama. Obama er, og har altid været, agent for det britiske imperiesystem, og de satser nu på at lancere generel atomkrig. De står nu på den yderste rand for at skubbe det ud over kanten, lige nu, især i Europa.«

LaRouche sagde, at han har fulgt udviklingen på den internationale scene tæt, og det er i løbet af de seneste uger blevet åbenbart, at det døende, britiske imperiesystem gør fremstød for krig, nu, udvirket af deres agent Obama som et opgør mellem USA og NATO, imod Rusland og Kina. Vi har nået et sammenbrudspunkt i historien, hvor der omgående må gribes ind med handling for at forhindre dette mareridt i at udspille sig.

»Det er det budskab, der bør præsenteres for alle, der ikke er dumme«, sagde LaRouche. »Og vi bør handle for at standse og forhindre, at en sådan krig lanceres. Med mindre de afskrækkes fra at gennemføre det, som de nu åbenlyst signalerer, at de vil gøre hurtigt, har vi kurs mod atomkrig og massedød over hele planeten. Pointen er: Kan vi forhindre dette her, der allerede er sat i værk? Kan vi forhindre, at det gennemføres? Det er det eneste spørgsmål af betydning i øjeblikket.«

I dag introducerede LaRouche-bevægelsen (i USA) et betydningsfuldt skift i den strategiske situation med Kesha Rogers, medlem af LaRouche Komite for Politisk Strategi (LPAC) og tidligere to gange demokratisk kandidat til Kongressen for delstaten Texas, der kaldte til politisk kamp med en genoplivning af NASA fra det helvede, som Obamas politik har dømt det til, for at få USA tilbage i rummet og gå ind i et win-win-samarbejde med Rusland og Kina, i særdeleshed om Kinas plan om at landsætte en mission på Månens bagside i 2020.

Se: LPAC-medlem og to gange demokratisk nomineret til Texas-22, Kesha Rogers, uden for Johnson Space Center i Houston, Texas. 

Denne kampagne kan også spille en afgørende rolle i at genindføre fornuften i institutionen Det amerikanske Præsidentskab, der i øjeblikket befinder sig i hænderne på en afsindig morder, der synes at mene, at han kan få Rusland og Kina til at bøje sig under trusler om en atomar konfrontation, eller med en decideret atomkrig.

Dette skifte kan ikke vente til november 2016. Obama må fjernes fra magten nu. Dette kan gøres, og en fungerende præsidentiel institution genoplives, ved at afsløre det, der nu er et manipuleret demokratisk væddeløb til præsidentvalget. Sænk Hillary Clintons og Bernie Sanders’ pro-Obama-kandidaturer, og lancer en levedygtig politisk diskussion omkring Martin O’Malleys kampagne – den eneste kandidat, der offentligt har udtalt sig seriøst om at vende tilbage til Glass-Steagall-standarden for bankopdeling for at stoppe Wall Streets dødbringende politik, og som på anden vis har demonstreret egenskaber, der kvalificerer ham til præsidentskabet.[1]

På samme tid er det nødvendigt omgående at lukke Wall Street og hele det spekulative, transatlantiske finanssystem ned, eftersom det er dette systems bankerot, der står bag fremstødet for krig. Hele det transatlantiske system var et hårs bredde fra at kollapse i sidste uge med bankkrisen i Italien, og det kunne eksplodere, hvad øjeblik, det skal være – og stort set hvor som helst. Dette system må begraves, så USA kan vende tilbage til den politik for økonomisk vækst, vi havde under Franklin Roosevelt, og som også reflekteredes af Kennedys rumprogram.

»Rumprogrammet er hemmeligheden bag den mekanisme, gennem hvilken vi kan bringe USA, og andre dele af verden, ind i et økonomisk genrejsningsforløb«, udtalte Lyndon LaRouche den 30. jan. Når denne politik først træder i kraft, »vi vil se begyndelsen til en virkelig revolution i rummet. Så lad os komme i gang!«  

[1] Se: Fredags-webcast fra LPAC, 29. jan., dansk oversættelse, uddrag, om LaRouche-bevægelsens støtte til O’Malley-kampagnen og Glass-Steagall, o.a.:




Amerikanere står over for ødelæggelse,
med mindre Obama og hans britiske herrer bringes til fald nu

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 21. januar 2016:  

Onsdag, den 20. jan. 2016 fortsatte New York Times sin serie om den død og ødelæggelse i det amerikanske folk, der er frembragt af præsident Obama og hans britiske, royale herrer, med en lang rapport med et kort, der kommune for kommune viser den skyhøje stigning i dødsfald som følge af overdosis af heroin. Der er ikke en eneste kommune i USA, der har været upåvirket af heroinepidemien, som Centret for Kontrol og Forebyggelse af Sygdom sammenligner med det oprindelige HIV-udbrud. I den forgangne måned har Times registreret de stigende dødsrater blandt midaldrende og unge voksne pga. en voldsom stigning af narko- og alkoholmisbrug og det voksende mønster af selvmord.

Eksplosionen i heroinmisbrug kan direkte henføres til Obamas politik med legalisering af narkotiske midler og den strenge overholdelse af »for store til at sætte i fængsel«-behandlingen af Wall Street-bankerne. Under Obama har Justitsministeriet givet Citibank, Wells Fargo/Wachovia og HSBC et rap over fingrene, i form af en aftale om »udskudt retsforfølgelse«. Alle disse banker har erkendt at have hvidvasket narkopenge for milliarder af dollars gennem det amerikanske banksystem. Ikke en eneste Wall Street-direktør er blevet fængslet, og ingen af dem er så meget som blevet sagsøgt og retsforfulgt for kriminel aktivitet. Dette har til dels betydet et spring i heroindødsfald (47.000 i 2014, det sidste år, hvor registreringer er tilgængelige), siden Obama tiltrådte embedet og honorerede sit løfte til George Soros, det britiske instrument og tilhænger af legalisering af narko, og USA er således blevet oversvømmet af ulovlige narkotiske stoffer.

Disse seneste rædselshistorier sætter fokus på pointen: Præcis, som Lyndon LaRouche har advaret om, så har hele det 20. århundrede og de første årtier af det 21. århundrede været en periode med gennemgribende kulturel og videnskabelig degeneration, og briterne er ansvarlige. Fra de britisk-udtænkte to verdenskrige i det 20. århundrede, til Lord Bertrand Russels angreb på videnskab og grundlæggende uddannelse, og gennemtvingelsen, orkestreret gennem den britiske Fabian/Frankfurtskole, af kulturen med politisk korrekthed, der direkte afviser alle sande, videnskabelige principper, er USA blevet frarøvet sin historiske sjæl.

Ved de få lejligheder, hvor ægte, politiske leder fremkom, som Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy og endda Ronald Reagan, blev de mål for mord – altid gennem agenter for den Britiske Krone og deres ’Dope, Inc.’ og ’Mord, Inc.’

Dette er den sande historie om, hvad der er blevet gjort imod det amerikanske folk. Vi er nu ved et punkt, hvor hele det globale, britiske system er klar til at eksplodere. Det kunne ske hvert øjeblik, og hver dag, det skal være. Situationen er overmoden.

Der er solide forholdsregler, der med lethed kunne tages for at forhindre den totale disintegration. FDR’s Første Hundrede Dage viser vejen.[1] Men, som LaRouche advarede om onsdag under diskussioner med medarbejdere, så kræver dette handlinger fra præsidentens side – og den britiske agent Obama vil aldrig tage skridt til at gennemføre de nødvendige handlinger. Dette bringer os tilbage til det fundamentale punkt: Med mindre Obama fjernes fra embedet, og med mindre det Britiske Imperiums magt, og det Britiske Imperiums gren Wall Streets magt, knuses, er der ingen udsigt til, at USA, som vi kendte det, kan overleve.

Det er det budskab, som vi må videreformidle, for det er det nuværende øjebliks afgørende sandhed. Fjern Obama ved forfatningsmæssige midler, udslet City of London og Wall Street, med begyndelse i genindførelsen af Glass-Steagall, og så kan vi komme i gang med at indføre forholdsregler efter Franklin Roosevelts model med det samme. Buk under for den nuværende fejhed, korruption og pragmatisme, der florerer i Kongressen og i de fleste andre institutioner i landets valgkredse, og nationen vil være dømt til undergang. Afslutningen kunne komme gennem den umiddelbart forestående, finansielle nedsmeltning, eller den kunne komme i form af atomkrig, der ville udslette det store flertal af menneskeheden i processen.

 

 

[1] Se Tema-artikel: »Glass-Steagall 1933: Franklin Roosevelts Første Hundrede Dage – Med hans egne ord« 




Lyndon LaRouche: Vi kan genopbygge USA’s økonomi:
Udskift regeringen! Vi behøver ikke at acceptere elendigheden!

15. januar, 2016 – Følgende er et uddrag af ’Samtale med Lyndon LaRouche’, om nedgangen i befolkningstallet i staten West Virginia, USA:

Deltager: Hej, det er T– fra Virginia. Lyn, jeg ville gerne fortsætte derfra, hvor vi slap i forhold til Wall Street, og få din respons på og dele min egen personlige udlægning og efterforskning om den virkelige trussel, som Wall Street udgør. Jeg mener nemlig, at folks slaphed, når det kommer til afsættelsen af Obama eller afskaffelsen af Wall Street, bunder i et manglende førstehåndskendskab til, hvor mange dødsofre disse to kræftsvulster har krævet.

Når folk, som jeg plejede at bruge tid sammen med, eller den gennemsnitlige person hører om investeringsfondene, der går ned, eller om aktierne, der falder i værdi, eller hvor slemt, det generelt set står til med økonomien, så giver det ganske enkelt ikke genklang i dem som værende noget, der både kan og vil koste menneskeliv og også allerede har gjort det, for de tænker kun på penge, som du siger. Og derfor tror de, at de bare kan komme over det.

Faktisk vil jeg gerne begynde med at tage tråden op fra en artikel, som blev offentliggjort på LaRouchePAC-hjemmesiden for en uges tid siden. Den handlede om, hvordan USA’s befolkningstal er for nedadgående, og West Virginia blev nævnt som eksempel. Og for nyligt udgav EIR også en artikel om kulminerne, der går konkurs i West Virginia.

Først og fremmest mener jeg ikke, at de tal, der fremlægges, gengiver de faktiske, morderiske forhold, som befolkningen må lide. Jeg kommer selv fra West Virginia med de mange kulminer, og min familie kommer derfra og var selv minearbejdere. Min bedstefader arbejdede faktisk – som repræsentant for sin fagforening i West Virginia – sammen med John L. Lewis.

Så for et par måneder siden tog jeg derhen og besøgte min broder, og vi tog en køretur til McDowell kommune, hvor vi voksede op. Og da vi nærmede os, sagde min boder passende: »Velkommen til Uganda.« For beboerne dér lever under gruopvækkende betingelser, værre end de fleste amerikanere er klar over. Lad mig forklare. Skolerne er lukket ned, men ikke der, hvor der var mange skoler, hvoraf nogle så er lukket, men der, hvor de fleste af skolerne er lukket. Forældrene er faktisk afhængige af skolerne for at give deres børn mad, for de kan ikke engang give dem noget at spise derhjemme. Der er ét hospital med begrænset kapacitet, og den sygeforsikring, som tidligere blev leveret af fagforeninger og arbejdspladser, er væk, folk har ingenting.

Det gør mig meget vred: Folk lever stadig i de arbejdsskure, som mineselskaberne opstillede, da minerne blev åbnet; uden rindende vand, uden ordentlige sanitære forhold, i dag, i 2016! Vi så rent faktisk folk stå i kø med tomme flasker på steder, hvor man henter vand fra det, der løber ned ad bjergsiderne, så de kan få rent vand.

Huse med udendørs lokum er ikke bare et levn fra fortiden, men bruges faktisk her. Og man besøger disse lokalsamfund og ser, at folk ikke har tag over hovedet, de bor bogstavelig talt under presenninger. Og i denne kommune, hvor min familie plejede at bo, var befolkningen tidligere på 100.000, og nu ligger den på omkring 20.000, og over halvdelen af befolkningen lever i nedværdigende fattigdom, de lever faktisk i helvede.

Jeg tog derhen og så det med mine egne øjne. Jeg havde ikke været der i lang tid, men det er virkeligheden i Obamas USA, som vi finder os i; at vi lever under betingelser, som Franklin Roosevelt fordømte i 1936, og intet bliver gjort for at ændre det.

McDowell kommune har også landets højeste afhængighed af heroin og stoffer, og hvad var Obamas respons, da han tog til et borgermøde i Charleston, South Carolina, og tilbød flere behandlingssteder for narkomisbrug, så han bedre kan administrere folks død? I det mindste blev han fordømt af befolkningen og tvunget til at lukke mødet for offentligheden. Og ud over narkomisbruget, så må mange af disse mennesker flygte, så de går ind i militæret for at udkæmpe Bush’ og Obamas krige. Og det eneste, de har at komme tilbage til, er dette helvede, hvor krigsveteranerne begår selvmord i alarmerende mængder. Jeg har faktisk undersøgt det: Der har været 22 selvmord hver eneste dag i USA siden 2003.

Så jeg ville bare gerne gøre det klart for enhver på dette opkald: Vi behøver ikke at kigge på Italien for at finde helvede. Jeg talte med en dame, som stadig lever der, i dette helvede, og hun sagde til mig, at West Virginia er kendt som den tilbagestående del af USA, men vi er faktisk fremtiden.

Så med alt dette sagt, Lyn, tror jeg, at det er nødvendigt, at vi tværer det ud i fjæset på de amerikanere, der lader som om, at de på en eller anden måde vil overleve det, der sker, uden at forandre tingene og skille sig af med Obama og hans britiske dukkeførere. Og til alle jer andre: begå ikke den fejl at tro, at nogen vil hjælpe disse mennesker, hjælpe os, medmindre vi gør noget. Tak.

 

Lyndon LaRouche: Okay, godt. Altså, lad os gå til problemet på praktisk vis, for du har bragt en del ting på banen, som alle er sande. Men vi behøver ikke at have nogen af de problemer! Det gør vi ikke! Hvis vi skifter regeringen nu, og hvis vi går tilbage i retning af det, vi ved virker, som har virket i min livstid. Jeg blev født i 1922, og jeg har et ret godt kendskab til, hvad historien er. Jeg var der ikke i 1922, for jeg var kun lige blevet født, men jeg har et godt kendskab til, hvad det her handler om.

Det, der skete, var – vi må starte med Bertrand Russell, hvis karriere startede i begyndelsen af det 20. århundrede. Og han var det ondeste menneske, der hidtil var blevet født.

Og problemet her er, at vi stadig – i USA og andetsteds, USA’s befolkning i det hele taget, befolkningen i Sydamerika, i Centralamerika, i Europa i dag, det meste af Europa – det går f.eks. bedre for Putin, end det gør for resten af Europa – Kina er i en fremragende forfatning, sammenlignet med USA i dag – men hvis vi nu beslutter os for at smide det ud, som Bertrand Russell repræsenterer, og det er virkelig ondskabsfulde sager; hvis vi siger, at det vil vi forandre, så har vi et problem. Vi har studerende og skoleelever i alle aldre, som i det store og hele er ret dumme. Det vil sige, at de fleste studerende i dag, specielt i USA, og som er under uddannelse, eller som bliver forfremmet osv. på basis af at være uddannet, er ret dumme, de er næsten håbløst dumme.

Specielt i Californien. Californien er den delstat, hvor de har en guvernør, der er yderst problematisk, og han smadrer Californien. Vi skal af med ham! For Californien kan stadig nå at ændre kurs. Vi har en gruppe mennesker i Californien, som jeg har arbejdet tæt sammen med, som er meget effektive, men desværre har Californien en guvernør i øjeblikket, som virkelig er en satanisk faktor. Hvis man fjerner ham fra hans stilling som en satanisk faktor, bliver tingene straks bedre. Hvis man begynder at samarbejde med andre nationer, der prøver at gøre det samme, som f.eks. Kina, vil man se et pludseligt skifte væk fra det forfald, som har ramt USA særlig hårdt siden begyndelsen af det 20. århundrede.

Det skal ændres. Husk, hvad der skete. Husk rumprogrammet før Obama lukkede det ned, alle disse gode ting, som vi plejede at gøre, kan bringes tilbage. Men vi må være fast besluttet på, at de kommer tilbage. For vi kan ikke tillade det, der sker med minearbejderne i West Virginia osv., det må man ikke acceptere. Det bliver vi nødt til at ændre på.

Så hvorfor ikke bare ændre det? Hvordan gør vi det? Jeg er i hvert fald villig til at gøre mit for at få det til at lykkes. Kom af med skvadderhovederne. Kom af med dumheden, kom af med det forfald, som har ramt det meste af USA’s befolkning. Det største problem i USA er befolkningens galoperende forfald. Det skal vi ændre. Vi kan ændre det. Vi bliver nødt til at beslutte os for at ændre det. Og det er den opgave, vi må påtage os.

Man vil opdage, at Kina gerne vil samarbejde med os på det punkt. Rusland vil samarbejde. Visse andre nationer vil gerne samarbejde. Men der er to ting, vi skal af med: Først og fremmest skal vi afskaffe det britiske system. Bare fjern det fuldstændigt. Og fjern derefter råddenskaben i USA.

Og så vil man finde, at det var, hvad der skete under Franklin Roosevelts regeringstid, hvor han udførte geniale arbejder i sin embedsperiode som præsident. Alle de fantastiske ting, der blev bygget i den periode, viser os, at vi bare skal af med fjolserne og give de mennesker en chance, der har brug for hjælp og vil tage imod den. Og så kan vi genopbygge USA’s økonomi.




»Vi konfronteres med Nuets intense uopsættelighed«

»Vi står nu over for den kendsgerning, at, i morgen er i dag. Vi konfronteres med nuets intense uopsættelighed. I denne livets og historiens gåde, som udfolder sig, findes der noget, der hedder at komme for sent. Sendrægtighed er stadig tidens tyv. Livet lader os ofte stå bare, nøgne og modløse over en tabt mulighed. De menneskelige anliggenders tidevand bliver ikke ved med at være flod; der kommer også ebbe. Vel kan vi råbe desperat, at tiden skal holde pause i sin passage, men tiden er døv for hver en bøn og haster videre. Hen over de blegnede knogler og virvaret af rester af utallige civilisationer står de ynkelige ord, ’For sent’. Der er en usynlig livets bog, der skæbnesvangert optegner vor årvågenhed eller vor forsømmelse. Fingeren i bevægelse skriver, og går derefter videre.«

(Dr. Martin Luther King, 1967)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




SPØRGSMÅL OG SVAR med formand Tom Gillesberg den 14. januar 2016

1 time 28 min.:

Eller klik her




Glass-Steagall vil gøre en ende på WallStreet, City of London
og, endelig, det Britiske Imperium, og hermed faren for krig;
Et nyt paradigme med den Ny Silkevej, for genopbygning af hele verden!

LaRouchePAC Fredags-webcast 8. januar 2016, dansk udskrift. 

Vi har altså en situation lige nu, hvor tingene, over hele planeten, befinder sig på den yderste rand. På et hvilket som helst tidspunkt – mandag morgen, f.eks. – kunne vi vågne og finde, at hele det europæiske banksystem er gået ind i et kaotisk kollaps, der omgående vil spilde over til USA. Der vil være en indvirkning på Asien, men samarbejdet mellem Kina, Rusland, Indien og andre lande, i det asiatiske Stillehavsområde og i det eurasiske område, vil tage af for virkningen. Og krisens epicenter vil således være det transatlantiske område. Og det er grunden til, at briterne vil gøre fremstød for en krigsprovokation, en »bluff«-konfrontation, med Rusland og Kina for at få dem til at kapitulere og udplyndre dem, for at holde deres eget ynkelige, døende imperium gående i endnu et par dage. Der er vi kommet til i de globale anliggender.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Den britiske Krone gør fremstød for krig og folkemord

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 7. januar 2016: 

En omhyggelig undersøgelse af det britiske efterretningsvæsens operationer over hele planeten afslører et klart billede: Det britiske Monarki er i færd med at fremprovokere krig og kaos i hvert eneste hjørne af planeten i deres forfølgelse af den erklærede hensigt om at reducere verdens befolkning med 80 % eller mere på kort tid.

Den britiske hånd er mest synlig i den Persiske Golf, hvor Londons totalt ejede juniorpartner, det Saudiske Monarki, har anstiftet en ny, evindelig krig mellem sunni og shia, arabere og persere, der blev udløst af henrettelsen den 2. jan. af et ledende medlem af det shiamuslimske præsteskab fra den olierige, østlige provins, der har en majoritet af shia-muslimer. Talerør for MI6 Ambrose Evans-Pritchard sagde skadefro på Daily Telegraphs sider i denne uge, at henrettelsen af Nimr al-Nimr vil føre til voldelig gengældelse fra shia-demonstranter, der handler under ordre fra Irans Revolutionsgarde-korps, og vil inkludere angreb på de saudiske hovedolieledninger. Dette vil, erklærer Evans-Pritchard, føre til oliepriser på 200 dollar tønden og et globalt, økonomisk kollaps.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Zeus lever og hjemsøger Jorden

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 6. januar 2016:

Nedstigningen til barbarisme i dag er ikke begrænset til nationerne i Mellemøsten, hvor ISIS dræber folk, ofte ved halshugning, pga. af deres religiøse retning eller for at være modstandere af terroristernes regeringsomvæltninger. Dette sataniske, morderiske had til menneskeheden dominerer i stigende grad Europas, Sydamerikas og også USA’s daglige praksis.

Efter terroristernes angreb i San Bernardino, dækkede præsident Obama over dem, der havde orkestreret dette angreb, præcis, som han fortsat mørklægger saudiernes orkestrering af angrebet den 11. september [2001] ved at nægte at frigive de 28 sider af Kongressens rapport, der afslører saudiernes rolle i denne handling. I dag fældede Obama tårer, mens han udvidede denne mørklægning, ved at lade som om, hans foreslåede, mindre begrænsninger af våbensalg på en eller anden måde ville få indflydelse på sådanne terrorangreb, endda samtidig med, at Obama er ved at arrangere salget af massive, dødbringende våben til saudierne, for at fortsætte slagteriet af Yemens befolkning, og for at de kan fortsætte deres bevæbning af ISIS og de mange grene af al-Qaeda. Zeus ville være stolt af præsidentens drabsrate.

I Tyskland på Nytårsaften, mens befolkningen fejrede foran den storslåede Kölnerdom, omringede en bande bestående af omkring 1.000 mænd, for det meste med arabisk eller afrikansk udseende, mindst 90 kvinder og røvede dem, krænkede dem seksuelt eller voldtog dem endda, i næsten fire timer, fuldt synligt, men tilsyneladende uden, at politiet opdagede det, og hvor nyheden først nåede ud til offentligheden efter fem dage.

Lyndon LaRouche bemærkede, at, ligesom det britiske monarkis kontrol over de saudisk-sponsorerede terroroperationer i hele verden er blevet klart dokumenteret af EIR igennem mange år, må man erkende, at kun dette samme, britiske monarki har kapaciteten til, og hensigten om, at orkestrere en sådan grusomhed. Man må forvente, som det også var Dronningens hensigt, at flygtninge fra de folkemorderiske »regimeskift-krige« i Libyen og Syrien (krige, der som sådan også blev lanceret af briterne og deres skakbrik Obama) vil få skylden for grusomheden og således anstifte mere etnisk raseri og had i hele Europa.

Og Satans rolle i selve Det forenede Kongerige ligger i stigende grad åben for alle, der har deres øjne, og deres sind, åbne. Det blev i dag afsløret, at briterne har pålagt deres udenrigsministerium at tage skridt til at fordømme anvendelsen af dødstraf i de lande, hvor den stadig praktiseres – alle sådanne nationer undtagen, vel at mærke, Saudi Arabien, briternes og Obamas barbariske, »nære allierede«. Pyt med, at saudierne netop har henrettet 47 mennesker, inklusive deres lands førende shiamuslimske medlem af præsteskabet, for forbrydelsen at tilhøre den shiamuslimske trosretning, og således muligvis vil udløse en sekterisk krig uden fortilfælde i hele regionen. Den saudiske metode med at halshugge deres ofre er kun en af de wahhabi-praksisser, der deles af saudierne og deres ISIS-skabelse.

Eller bemærk, at den britiske premierminister Cameron i denne uge retfærdiggjorde den britiske aftale med saudierne i 2013 for at gøre det Saudiske Kongedømme til medlem af FN Menneskerettighedsråd. Under pres omkring denne aftale fra en interviewer, der gik i detaljer med de barbariske overgreb på menneskerettigheder i Saudi Arabien, busede det ud af Cameron: »Vi er afhængige af saudierne for afgørende efterretnings- og sikkerhedsinformation, og det er grunden.« Endnu engang, så er Zeus stolt af sine sataniske børn.

Obama, der stolt udarbejder sin ugentlige »drabsliste« for dronemord på amerikanere og andre, må omgående fjernes fra embedet, hvis verden skal overleve. Når satanisme først tager over på denne måde, kan civilisationer ikke overleve ret længe. Nu, hvor de europæiske og amerikanske banksystemer er ved at falde fra hinanden, vil død gennem økonomiske midler brede sig eksponentielt, hvis Obamas planlagte globale krig mod Rusland og Kina ikke udsletter menneskeheden først.

Løsningerne er forhånden. USA og Europa må gøre en ende på Det britiske Imperium én gang for alle, og sammen med Rusland og Kina lancere en ny, international renæssance, baseret på menneskehedens fælles mål. Afgørelsen ligger hos dig.

 

Foto: Saudi Arabiens Kong Abdullah som gæst i Det Hvide Hus, 2010.




Dansk SPECIAL LaRouchePAC webcast 30. dec. 2015:
Det er ét minut før midnat; vi må gennemtvinge handling nu!

Hvorfor tolererer man i Europas tilfælde fortsat eksistensen af en Eurozone, der idémæssigt var bankerot fra første dag, den blev skabt? Hvorfor tolererer man fortsat en Europæisk Kommission i Bruxelles, og en Europæisk Union, der er en rent destruktiv, bogstavelig talt satanisk institution? Hvorfor tolererer man, og går på kattepoter rundt om, den kendsgerning, at Paven, i sin encyklika om global opvarmning, accepterede en britisk politik for folkemord?

Download (PDF, Unknown)




SPECIAL LaRouchePAC webcast 30. december 2015:
Det er ét minut før midnat; vi
må gennemtvinge handling nu!

Engelsk Udskrift. Vi står nu på tærsklen til året 2016, og hr. LaRouche advarer om, at dette er en af de farligste perioder i nyere historisk tid. Vi står over for en umiddelbart forestående nedsmeltning af det transatlantiske finanssystem, med mindre der tages skridt til de nødvendige og presserende forholdsregler for at forhindre dette. Vi står også over for en umiddelbart, overhængende konfrontation mellem USA under Obama, og bade Rusland og Kina, der, hvis den får lov til at udløses, ville føre til en global, atomar storbrand.

Engelsk udskrift.

SPECIAL International LaRouche PAC Webcast Wednesday December 30 2015

IT’S ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT; WE MUST FORCE ACTION NOW!

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening. It’s December 30, 2015. My name
is Matthew Ogden and you’re watching an emergency New Year’s Eve
broadcast here from larouchepac.com. I’m joined in the studio
tonight by both Jeffrey Steinberg from {Executive Intelligence
Review}, and Benjamin Deniston from the LaRouche PAC Science
Team, and this broadcast is immediately following a meeting that
the three of us had earlier this morning with both Lyndon
LaRouche and Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
Now, right off the bat, I want to emphasize that immediately
following the conclusion of this broadcast here tonight, there
will be a live question and answer session with Mr. Lyndon
LaRouche personally, which is taking place as a broadcast of the
regular weekly LaRouche PAC Fireside Chat. Many of you may have
participated in this before. It’s a national telephone
discussion, which takes place at 9 o’clock Eastern Time. If you
do not yet have the information on that, please contact the
LaRouche PAC national office.
Again, let me just emphasize: Immediately upon the
conclusion of this broadcast, we encourage you to participate in
this live Fireside Chat with Mr. Lyndon LaRouche.
Now, to begin our broadcast tonight, let me just summarize
very quickly what you’re about to hear. Obviously, we’re on the
threshold of the end of 2015, and the beginning of 2016, and Mr.
Lyndon LaRouche is warning that this is among one of the most
dangerous periods in recently recorded history. We have the
impending blow-out of the trans-Atlantic financial system, if the
necessary urgent measures to prevent that are not taken. And we
also have the impending, looming confrontation between the United
States, under Obama, and both Russia and China, which, if it were
allowed to be unleashed, would lead to a global thermonuclear
conflagration.
Now 2015, I think, can best be summarized by a series of
failures that have been taken by those who should be the
responsible leadership of the United States. Number one — the
failure to have effectively opposed and defied Obama’s unlawful
violations of the United States Constitution, which are indeed
impeachable offenses. Number two — the failure, going all the
way back to 2007-2008, to restore the Glass-Steagall Act, and to
reorganize and shut down the entire Wall Street casino
speculative system. Number three — the failure, going all the
way back to 2000-2001, to dismantle and expose the Saudi-British
apparatus that was responsible for the terrorism of September 11,
2001, and continue to exist, and continue to plague the world
with the increasing threat of this kind of terror. And number
four — perhaps most fundamentally, the failure to fundamentally
reverse the 100-year trend toward scientific and cultural
degeneration, which has reigned increasingly since the turn of
the 20th Century. This has brought the entire trans-Atlantic,
extended European system to the point of an existential breakdown
crisis, and this will not be addressed unless we address the
fundamentally failed model which has reigned over the last 100 to
120 years.
Now, this will be the subject of a much broader discussion
later in the broadcast, but I think it sets us up directly for
our first question, which was the subject of a lot of discussion
earlier today with Mr. LaRouche.
The question is our institutional question for the evening,
which addressed exactly this coming, looming failure of the
extended European system. The question reads as follows:

“Mr. LaRouche. Columnist Leo McKinstrie in an article featured by the
{Daily Telegraph} predicted that 2016 could be the year that the
EU falls apart. What are your thoughts on the EU’s immigration
and economic challenges in 2016?”

So, in order to answer that question directly, and also to
give us a broader context from the discussion earlier today with
Mr. LaRouche, I’d like to ask Jeff Steinberg to come to the
podium.

JEFF STEINBERG:

Thanks, Matt. I would say that, barring a
dramatic change in policy, really a revolutionary change in
policy, the future of the European Union is absolutely doomed,
and that what we’re looking at is the fact, as of January 1,
under the diktats of the European Union, under agreements that
were reached at the very outset of the Obama Administration
during the very first meeting of the Group of 20, a system of
bail-in has been established. It goes into effect in Europe,
European-wide, as of the 1st of January of 2016. In the United
States it has already been policy, although the overwhelming
majority of Americans have no idea of this. In fact, most members
of Congress don’t even know that Section 2 of the Dodd-Frank bill
of 2010, which was written on Wall Street, and dictated through
the likes of the Obama White House and people like Barney Frank
on Capitol Hill, already provides for bail-in.
What this means is that, as financial institutions go
through a spiralling collapse, which is already underway —
you’ve had quite a number of hedge funds, a number of European
regional banks in Italy and elsewhere, have already collapsed in
recent weeks and months. Under bail-in, depositors’ funds,
bondholders’ money, shareholders’ funds in those banks will be
looted as the first step towards trying to salvage a system that
is already hopefully and irreversibly bankrupt. In other words,
the entire trans-Atlantic region is on the very edge of
extinction. The danger of a complete catastrophic financial
collapse is imminent, as of the beginning of next week. Friday
obviously, New Year’s Day, the banks are closed; the weekend
they’re closed. But as of January 4, Monday, this coming Monday,
anything goes; and there is an increasing likelihood that the
whole trans-Atlantic system will blow up in the early days, if
not the early weeks of 2016.
Now, those are knowable and virtually irrefutable facts.
It’s been widely discussed in the trans-Atlantic financial press.
The {Daily Telegraph} article referenced in the institutional
question is but one of the recent flurry of articles that have
basically said, 2015 was a nightmare, but 2016 will be radically
worse, and could be the end of the system, the European Union,
and most trans-Atlantic nation-states as we know them.
There’s a report today in the international edition of
{Handelsblatt}, the major German financial daily newspaper, which
talks about a proliferation of zombie banks in Europe, and says,
get on with the bail-in immediately. The whole system is coming
apart. Yes, it’s Mediterranean regional banks, but it’s German
banks as well, and therefore we’ve got to take advantage of these
new laws, and literally loot the population to the point that
there’s nothing left to loot. That’s the significance of policies
that go into effect as of the first of January.
Now, the discussion that we had with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche
today took this question up from a very different standpoint.
Because the appropriate question that really must be asked right
now, well, if these facts are known, if the doom of the
trans-Atlantic financial system is widely known and understood,
then why is it that nothing is being done to stop it from
happening? Why is it that Congress did not stay in Washington to
enact Glass-Steagall, before they left for the Christmas recess?
That would have meant the doom of Wall Street. It would have
bankrupted the entire British system, and set forward at least an
initial framework for beginning an economic recovery, modelled on
the policies of Franklin Roosevelt.
Why in the case of Europe, is there toleration for the
continuing existence of a Eurozone which was bankrupt
conceptually from the day it was created? Why is there a
continuing toleration for a European Commission in Brussels, and
a European Union, that is a purely destructive, virtually a
Satanic institution? What is there toleration and a tip-toeing
around the fact that the Pope, in his encyclical on global
warming, embraced a British policy of population genocide?
Well, the simple answer comes down to the fact that the
population of the trans-Atlantic region has become generally
very, very stupid, very corrupt, very immoral, bordering on
Satanic. In fact, some leading political figures in the
trans-Atlantic — Schäuble in Germany, Blair in Britain and the
whole Blair tradition, the entire Bush-Obama succession of
presidential administrations over the last 15 years in the United
States — these could all very appropriately and scientifically
be defined as outright Satanic.
This was the point that Mr. LaRouche was making
emphatically.
But to understand why we have reached this point, you can’t
just look at explanations that date back a week, or a month, or
even a decade. You can’t look at 2008, or the end of
Glass-Steagall in 1999, and appreciate why these things happened,
unless you’re willing to take a much longer-term and deeper look
at the actual roots of this entire degeneration of the
trans-Atlantic region. It goes back to the transition from the
19th to the 20th Century.
Look at the 19th Century. You had enormous scientific
breakthroughs. You had the work of Gauss, you had the work of
Riemann. You had the revolution in Classical culture through the
likes of Beethoven, of Brahms, of Schubert, of Schumann. The 19th
Century was a period of a Renaissance in the trans-Atlantic
region. In the domain of politics, you had the emergence of
Germany as a modern and sovereign nation-state under American
System economic policies during the period of Bismarck. There was
a spreading, a proliferation, of the Hamiltonian concepts of how
to build a nation-state, and how to create truly cooperative
relationships among modern nations.
Today, most everyone alive is familiar with the fact that
China has initiated a “One Belt, One Road” policy, otherwise
known as the New Silk Road, as the Eurasian Land-Bridge, and that
this policy offers a tremendous opportunity for the integration
and economic development of not just the Eurasian region, but the
Eurasian region stretching into Africa. Through the prospect of
the Bering Straits tunnel program, which has been on the books
since the end of the 19th [Century], you could integrate the
entire Western Hemisphere into this Eurasian-African development
region.
Well, the fact of the matter is that these ideas were not
only prevalent, but were being fully implemented in the last
decades of the 19th Century. You had in 1869 the completion of
Lincoln’s great project to bind the nation together under the
Transcontinental Railroad. Although Lincoln was assassinated by
the British, precisely for those policies of saving the Union and
going on for this kind of economic development, those policies
nevertheless continued, and were realized.
President Ulysses S. Grant was the continuation in many
respects of the policies represented by President Lincoln. You
had leading American friends and advisers working closely with
Bismarck in Germany. Bismarck, in his office as Chancellor, had a
portrait of Ulysses S. Grant on the wall. They visited together
when Grant made his world tour following his Presidency. In
Russia, beginning in 1890, you had the construction of the
Trans-Siberian Railroad. Many of the American Army Corps of
Engineers participated in that project, which was completed by
the end of the 1890s. The original locomotive that was the first
to pass along the Trans-Siberian Railroad was built in
Philadelphia.
You had a flourishing of international collaboration for
great projects of development. Bismarck himself had the Berlin to
Baghdad rail project. In France, under Hanotaux and Carnot, you
had plans for a crisscrossing of the African continent with
railroads. You had the Paris to Vladivostok planned rail routes.
Czar Nicholas himself proposed in the 1890s that there should be
a bridge or tunnel across the Bering Straits, to establish the
obvious and natural links between the Western Hemisphere, and the
Eurasia. You had Sun Yat-sen in China, during the transition into
the 20th Century, and in the 1870s you had the Meiji Restoration
in Japan. Again, leading American advisers were involved in all
of these projects.
What was the response? There was a proliferation of
Classical culture, of great Classical musical composition. There
were scientific breakthroughs. The work of Riemann anticipated a
20th Century that should have been an era of man beginning to
venture out into the Solar System, and on into the Galaxy, to
make great discoveries about the nature of mankind in the
universe. Instead, the British Empire stepped in decisively.
You had the British manipulation of regional wars throughout
Eurasia. You had the Japanese wars against China, the Japanese
wars against Russia. You had wars in the Balkans. You had the
Crimean War, and ultimately the British strategy was to destroy
the American System expansion into Eurasia, by launching what
came to be known as World War I.
On a much more profound level, individuals like Lord
Bertrand Russell launched a vicious assault against the
foundations of science that had been established through people
like Kepler, like Gauss, like Riemann. Earlier, [people] like
Leibniz, and before that, Nicholas of Cusa, and back in the
Renaissance, Brunelleschi. This entire sweep of scientific
progress coming out the Renaissance was crushed and destroyed,
and a tyranny was established. Europe went through one of the
most hellacious wars in history in World War I. Atrocious crimes
were committed. Cities were destroyed. Populations were ruined.
At the end of that war, the Versailles Treaty imposed a
looting scheme on Germany that led inevitably to another world
war; in effect, the First World War never really ended. There was
an interwar period of preparation for the next phase of that war.
Science was destroyed. Education came under vicious attack
because the Classical culture tradition that had been alive in
the 19th Century, was destroyed in the sweep of cultural
pessimism that hit Europe and the United States throughout the
20th Century.
The British resorted frequently to political assassinations
of leading figures. You had the assassination of Sadi Carnot in
France; you had the assassination of William McKinley in the
United States, following off of the assassination earlier of
Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, going all the way back to Aaron
Burr’s assassination, for the British, of Alexander Hamilton.
You had the assault on science as I indicated, through the
work of Bertrand Russell and his cohorts in the Solvay
Conferences, to where you could say that the entire sweep of the
20th Century — now well into the 21st Century — the only truly
sovereign scientific genius of that entire period was Albert
Einstein.  There were engineering discoveries, but the general
course of science was a digression, not an advancement.  So, we
find ourselves today with a population in the trans-Atlantic
region that has been deprived of a competent education; with each
successive generation the degeneration has accelerated.  At one
point, it was something important to be a physicist or a
bio-chemist; now, if you study these areas, you’re told that it’s
a waste of time and that the only true science is computer
science.
So, we’ve got this process of cultural, educational,
scientific degeneration; and about the only point during the
entire 20th Century when you had any kind of significant pushback
against the trend line, was during the Presidency of Franklin
Roosevelt.  And if the truth be told, the assault against the
policies of Franklin Roosevelt had already reached the point
where his Presidency had been destroyed even before his untimely
death.  The Republican Party was used as one of the instruments
of that destruction; the FBI emerged as the literally blackmail
arm of Wall Street, deployed against Franklin Roosevelt.  So, you
had effectively only a brief period in the entire sweep of the
20th Century, where there were genuinely American System policies
being carried out here in the United States; the place of origin
of those concepts.  Now you look at the last 15 years, it makes
sense how it is that a degenerate population could vote in a
George W. Bush; could then follow that up by voting in a Barack
Obama.  And then tolerate the bail-out of Wall Street after the
2008 crash; could tolerate President Obama openly holding kill
meetings at the White House every Tuesday, to map out the latest
targets for assassination.  There is no accounting for how many
American citizens have been assassinated under Obama orders
without any due process, or without any even public
acknowledgment.
So, it’s very important today to realize that the current
generations are the fruits of 100 years or more of persistent,
cultural moral degeneration in which science has been destroyed.
Now, this is not irreversible, because human beings are
fundamentally creative; but it’s very important to recognize that
we are at a minute before midnight.  And the reality is, that we
have very few opportunities left to buy the time to turn this
situation around.  If President Obama remains in office as this
financial blow-out hits, then the prospects of being able to
avert a catastrophic destruction and a degeneration into chaos
across the entire trans-Atlantic region converge on zero.  And
that’s if we are lucky enough, through the strong leadership in
China and Russia, to avoid the kind of thermonuclear war that
Matt mentioned a few moments ago; because that is the policy of
the British Empire.  And President Obama is really not a
President of the United States; he’s a stooge of that British
Empire system.
Now, that system is, itself, bankrupt and doomed; but they
are more prepared to bring the entire population of mankind down
with them, if there’s a prospect of them genuinely losing power.
So, there are a few options:  The removal of President Obama is
absolutely existentially essential.  The immediate re-instatement
of Glass-Steagall as the concrete measure that wipes out Wall
Street’s existence; and along with it, wipes out the power of the
City of London and the power of the British Empire.  These are
the measures that have to be taken in the immediate days ahead.
As soon as the new year commences, we are already well into the
danger zone, where there is no alternative left to those critical
actions.  The question is whether or not there will be enough of
a return of reality to where the successive degeneration of
thinking among leading strata and the general population of the
trans-Atlantic region, reaches a point where the threat is so
immediate and existential that the right steps will be taken.  Up
until this moment, that has not happened; and therefore, we go
into the new year facing the greatest peril that mankind has
faced probably in history.

OGDEN:  Very quickly, I just want to address one thing, and
ask Jeff to comment on it briefly before we get to Ben Deniston.
But the bail-in law that is going into effect in Europe on
January 1st — just within a few hours — is something that as
Jeff said, is already written into the law in the United States;
in Dodd-Frank, Title II, where derivatives get priority and
people’s deposits are no longer protected as they formerly were.
Now the architect of this law is none other than Barney Frank;
who, despite the fact that he is no longer an active member of
Congress, is still playing a very active and destructive role
within the politics of the United States as an agent of the Wall
Street faction inside the Democrat Party.  And as one of the
leading proponents of the lies that are being told against
Glass-Steagall; for example, in an article which exposes the fact
that Barney Frank is one of the leading economic advisors of the
Hillary Clinton campaign.  Hillary Clinton being up to this
point, an opponent of the restoration of Glass-Steagall.  Barney
Frank says, “The Glass-Steagall debate is an artificial debate at
this point.  It’s 85 years old.  Most people can see if it had an
effect, it wouldn’t have stopped AIG; it wouldn’t have stopped
sub-prime mortgages that shouldn’t have been granted.  This is
the lie that has been used for the last five years or more
against the restoration of Glass-Steagall; and I think that I
would Jeff to address this just very quickly.  When Franklin
Roosevelt became President, he became President despite the fact
that most of the leadership of his own party were agents of the
Wall Street interests; and he had to, in order to both secure the
nomination and also in order to win the election as the United
States President, had to identify and root out exactly who were
serving the interests of Wall Street in the leadership of his own
party.
If we’re going to save the United States, Obama has to be
identified as an agent of those Wall Street interests; Barney
Frank as well, and others.  And I would just like Jeff to comment
very quickly what Mr. LaRouche’s remarks were concerning how we
can restore the Franklin Roosevelt precedent on an emergency
basis right now, in opposition to these agents of the Wall Street
interests who are dominating the Democratic Party as we see it
right now, as well as the Republican Party.

STEINBERG:  Well, I think that you’ve got to take the case
of Barney Frank as a perfect example of what I was discussing
just a few moments ago.  Long before the Glass-Steagall which
Barney Frank personally played a leading role in, and long before
the 2008 crisis, Barney Frank got in a whole lot of trouble
because his roommate, his lover was running a pedophile
prostitution ring out of his apartment.  And this was not
something that was a deep dark secret; it came out in all of the
major Washington DC and related newspapers at the time.  The fact
that there was a toleration for this kind of person, this kind of
behavior, is indicative of the deeper cultural issues that I
addressed earlier.  In effect, Barney Frank was the Roy Cohn of
the Democratic Party.
So, I think that the measures themselves are clear and
straightforward; there are bills in both houses of Congress to
re-instate Glass-Steagall.  The very first act of business when
Congress returns next week should be a debate and vote and
immediate passage of Glass-Steagall.  Time is running out; it may
even be that as of Monday of next week, we see the first
explosions, the detonations of this crash.  Glass-Steagall merely
clears the decks; it means that undercapitalized commercial banks
can be restored, and all of the zombie debt of Wall Street, all
of the derivatives, all of the other kinds of exotic financial
instruments that are un-payable and worthless, are going to be
written off the books.  And as a result of that, Wall Street will
disintegrate; the power of Wall Street to dictate terms to
Congress will disintegrate.  And I think along with the
disintegration of Wall Street, you will see an immediate meltdown
of the Obama Presidency.
But once you’ve re-instated Glass-Steagall, all you’ve done
is created a clean platform to begin a much more significant and
challenging process.  There has to be a massive emission of new
Federal credits into the commercial banking system, for
ear-marked projects of real economic development, job creation.
We’ve got to have a clear concept of reversing the last 100 years
of decline in productivity of labor power here in the United
States, in Europe.  So, we’ve got to develop, on the model of
Franklin Roosevelt, a series of initiatives that will create
jobs, that will rebuild infrastructure; but on a higher level.
We’ve got to do several other things as well.  Number one,
we’ve got to really launch a serious revival of science; we’ve
got to basically revive all of the NASA programs.  We’ve got to
conquer the final remaining steps towards having thermonuclear
fusion power.  These are big projects, and they’re more
challenging today than they were 20 or 30 years ago.  When
President Kennedy announced that we were going to put a man on
the Moon before the end of the decade, and launched the Apollo
project, there was a scientific capability still in place to have
done that.  That capability has been severely, severely eroded;
so we’re going to have to do an enormous amount of rebuilding.
In a sense, the productive powers of labor today are less than
they were on the day Franklin Roosevelt took office as President
in March of 1933.
We’ve got to launch a cultural revival.  We had a foretaste
of what can and must be done in the Handel’s {Messiah} concerts
that took place in Manhattan and Brooklyn one week ago.  They
were a shining example of how you can begin to draw out the
humanity in people, using Classical music as a medium to do that.
So, all of these things have to be done; but they will not happen
if the American people don’t immediately develop the moral
courage to face reality.  To face the fact that it’s a minute
before midnight; and take the necessary steps, starting with
removing this President from office, re-instating Glass-Steagall,
and going on from there.

OGDEN:  Now, let me just announce that, as many of the
viewers of this webcast may already know, the LaRouche Political
Action Committee has released a new very important Special
Report, which is entitled “The United States Joins the New Silk
Road; a Hamiltonian Vision for an Economic Renaissance”.  This is
a supplement to the much longer report that was published by
{Executive Intelligence Review} a number of months ago, called
“The New Silk Road Becomes the Eurasian Land-Bridge”.  And this
specifically addresses the role the United States must play in
this development perspective for the entire globe.  The
electronic version of this is available on the LaRouche PAC
website; however, we do intend to print a large number of
physical copies of this to get out across the United States,
particularly in Manhattan and elsewhere.
Now, I’m going to ask Benjamin Deniston to address some of
the crucial factors that are contained within this report, which
apply directly to what’s been discussed here tonight.  But let me
just put it into the context of the fact that if you look at over
just the last few days, there has been a concerted propaganda
effort in some of the leading United States media, in order to
slander China, and especially China’s President Xi Jinping; who
as you all probably know has made the Silk Road policy, the One
Belt-One Road policy as he calls it, the cornerstone policy of
the Chinese economic development perspective.  Now, the Chinese
Foreign Minister responded to these slanders that have been
appearing in the {New York Times} yesterday, and today in the
{Washington Post}; saying the One Belt-One Road policy, the Silk
Road policy, which was put forward two years ago, has now
attracted the interest of more than 60 countries and other
organizations along the One Belt-One Road corridor, who have
responded positively to participate in its initiative.  And he
stated, “Many countries have signed cooperation agreements or
reach consensus on aligning their strategies for development with
China.  These include multi-lateral and bilateral cooperation
projects.  Emphatically, the One Belt-One Road initiative is not
a tool for geopolitics,” the Foreign Ministry said.  “China has
not political motives to seek in so-called ‘spheres of
influence’.  The principle is that of jointly building the
initiative in order to meet the interests of all, and to deepen
cooperation in various fields of development along the One
Belt-One Road corridor in order to achieve win-win results.”
Now, it’s exactly this principle of the “win-win” policy
which serves as the principle behind the composition of this
Special Report; why the United States must join the New Silk
Road.  And if you just look over the last 8-16 years of the
United States, the period defined by the Obama Presidency, and
then preceding that, the Bush/Cheney Presidency, and compare it
to a similar period in China, you can see exactly what the effect
of these two opposite policies have been.  During Obama’s
Presidency, you’ve had a substantial increase in poverty in the
United States; where prior to Obama’s Presidency, 37 million
Americans were officially living in poverty.  Now, that’s risen
to 47 million Americans.  Prior to Obama’s Presidency, those
receiving food stamps were 28 million; now that has risen to 47
million.  And currently, one in every five children in the United
States, lives below the Federal poverty line.  And if you look at
blacks, African-Americans, that’s two out of every five children
live below the Federal poverty line.  Compare that to what
China’s done over the last decade, over the last several decades.
Over the last 30 years, China has lifted 600 million people out
of poverty; they have built 11,000 miles of high-speed rail in
scarcely a decade, and they have plans on the books to triple
that number of miles by the year 2020.  In comparison, the United
States has a grand total of just over 450 miles of so-called high
speed rail, and it barely fits the definition.
Now, as people might recall, during the APEC summit of 2014,
contrary to this being a geopolitical strategy on the part of Xi
Jinping for some sort of revival of Chinese imperialism — as is
being claimed by the {New York Times} and the {Washington Post}
— Xi Jinping actually offered to President Obama that the United
States could join this New Silk Road policy in addition to the
new Asian Infrastructure Development Bank policy.  This was an
offer to say you can participate in this win-win policy.  Now, of
course, Obama has not reciprocated that offer, but we can see the
foundations for a completely new vision of international economic
and strategic relationships among nations; based on this win-win
policy.  So, that is the substance of this new report from
LaRouche PAC, “The United States Joins the New Silk Road”; and
that’s what I want to ask Ben Deniston to elaborate on in a
little bit more depth in the conclusion of tonight’s broadcast.

BENJAMIN DENISTON:  Thanks, Matthew.  I think just picking
up off of what Matthew said, I think that’s the most —
obviously, if you believe the media today in the United States,
I’ve got some unfortunate news for you.  This is ridiculous
propaganda that’s been coming out, attacking China, attacking
Russia.  So, if you still believe that stuff, you’ve got to start
reading our website much more in depth and thoroughly.
This is ridiculous; this is an offer to the United States to
join in a new orientation for the planet.  And I think this
report we put out is — not only should you read this, you should
be circulating this to your friends, to your neighbors.  This is
a life or death issue for the United States right now; this is an
opportunity for us to actually save our nation by moving into a
new future of cooperation and development.  So, we have put out
now what’s on the site, and what we’re asking you to contribute
to support the printing of, is a life or death roadmap for the
United States to join into this new orientation led by China,
Russia and other nations.
I just want to take a couple of minutes just to emphasize
the importance of this offer.  Because as Matt said, this is
explicitly not a geopolitical move by China; this is not an
attempt to defeat the United States.  This is not an attempt by
China, or China in cooperation with Russia, to control resources
to the detriment of the United States; or to control regions of
the planet to the detriment of the United States.  This, as was
stated repeatedly, explicitly by China, is based on a conception
of win-win cooperation.  And understanding that the development
of fundamental science for mankind in cooperation with different
nations, creates a net increase in the amount of wealth and
resources available to everybody.  And we’re at the point in
mankind’s development that if we don’t rise to a level of
international relations and global cooperation premised on that
understanding, we’re not going to be able to exist as a species
on this planet.  If we continue this mode of geopolitical
conflict, we’ll destroy ourselves; as Obama is threatening to do
right now.
But as Mr. LaRouche was discussing on Monday earlier this
week, there is a true higher form of natural law that we have to
come to now organize ourselves around; to rise to.  And that is,
mankind’s fundamental nature is to progress, is to develop; this
idea of win-win cooperation.  I think you see maybe the most
stark difference between China’s orientation, the New Silk Road
orientation, premised on this idea of win-win cooperation and
development; and you compare that to what the Pope is now
supporting with this Green policy, with this British Malthusian,
global population reduction program.  Premised somehow on this
insane idea that the climate never changes unless mankind eats a
hamburger or drives his car around the corner or something
ridiculous like that.  You have this typification of the
genocidal, zero-growth imperial policy, with this Green movement,
with this climate change fraud.  And with the Pope now supporting
this entire fraud; on the one side typifying the evil of this
anti-human anti-mankind view, which needs to be eliminated,
versus this other direction that’s now available for us.
But the fundamental premise of the whole thing is that
mankind has to progress, that creative progress is not just nice;
it’s not just good, it is absolutely necessary for mankind to
exist.  If we ever stop progressing, society degenerates like
we’ve been discussing here; like the 20th Century typifies,
already shows us.  If you stop progressing, society destroys
itself.  But progress not in mathematical forms, not in logical
forms, but the type of unique, human, creative scientific
progress typified by Kepler, typified by Einstein.  That that’s
what’s been attacked by Russell; attacked by this British
imperial system, attacked throughout the 20th Century.  It’s this
understanding of human creativity as a unique principle in the
universe that is the only substance; the cause of what enables
mankind to act differently than animals, to fundamentally
increase his relationship to the universe.  As we’ve discussed,
to in effect, begin to separate himself from being just an
Earth-based species; and being able to exist in the universe by
mediating his existence through his relationship with the Solar
System as a whole.  That’s a creative act that doesn’t come from
the fraudulent type of science that Bertrand Russell had
attempted to impose on the world; that comes from a unique form
of human creative generation, unique acts of the human mind that
do not come from sense perception, do not come from your
empirical study of the world.  But come from human creativity per
se; the process of human creative development, which again, has
been attacked throughout the 20th Century.  So that I think is
the challenge we have; is not just to reverse the degeneration
that’s occurred.  But we need a new fundamental law of human
creative progress to rise as the guide stone for where mankind
must go.  Mr. LaRouche has been explicit on this; we’re not just
talking about reversing some policy.  Mankind’s survival today
depends upon a new Renaissance.  A new creation of a higher
understanding of mankind’s nature and unique purpose and mission
in this universe as a creative force going into the Solar System.
Going beyond the Solar System into the Galaxy; and understanding
that it is something unique about the human mind and its creative
potential that gives mankind the ability to do that.  So, this is
not just about reversing some bad policy; this is about
developing a positive conception, a new discovery of what it is
that enables mankind to progress.  What it is that enables
mankind to fulfill his true nature; what it is that makes mankind
a unique force on this planet.  A potential that no animal
species exhibits.  If we don’t understand that, it we don’t
premise the future on a new pursuit of those capabilities,
mankind is not going to make it.  Because that is what defines
our existence; that is what defines the future.  And if we don’t
rise to that level, as Mr. LaRouche has been warning, we’re not
going to make it through the current crisis.
So, I think that’s the challenge we have before us.  And I
would refer back to Mr. LaRouche’s remarks on Monday, in his
discussion with the Policy Committee on the LaRouche PAC website.
We have to come forward with this higher conception of the true
natural law that mankind must rise to; and I think we have to
come to it today.

OGDEN:  I would like to thank both Jeff Steinberg and Ben
Deniston very much for joining me here tonight.  Again, the full
contents of this “US Must Join the New Silk Road” report is
available on the LaRouche PAC website; but we would ask you to
donate and make sure that this can be spread as widely as
possible.  This is a crucial document for the future of the
United States.
Now, as I announced at the very beginning of this broadcast,
immediately following the conclusion of our broadcast tonight,
there will be a live question and answer session with Mr. Lyndon
LaRouche on the normal channels of the Fireside Chat.  This is a
telephone discussion; if you’ve not been a participant in these
before, please contact the LaRouche PAC office, and you can get
the information to become a participant.  And please ask Mr.
Lyndon LaRouche a question; these are crucial opportunities for
the American people to engage in a live question and answer
dialogue with Lyndon LaRouche.  So we would ask you to go
immediately from viewing this broadcast to participating in this
emergency Fireside Chat, which is taking place tonight, December
30, as part of our emergency initiatives on the threshold of the
new year.  So thank you, and please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.




Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 30. december 2015:
Genrejs princippet om fremskridt
– Bryd med Obama og sikr det nye år

I takt med, at vi nærmer os dommedag den 1. januar, står menneskeheden over for muligheden for sin egen udslettelse, hvis ikke gennem atomkrig, fremkaldt af præsident Obamas galskab, med hans trusler om krig med Rusland og Kina, så gennem økonomisk disintegration forårsaget af fejheden i Kongressen, der ikke lukker Wall Street ned gennem en Glass/Steagall-lovgivning, efter Franklin Roosevelts model.

Roden til problemet, insisterede Lyndon LaRouche under en diskussion med sine medarbejdere den 28. dec., skal findes i den kendsgerning, at menneskeheden har glemt naturlig lov – ja, i realiteten regeres de transatlantiske nationer i stigende grad af satanisk lov, der skaber såkaldt legal retfærdiggørelse af massemord, ulovlige krige, negativ økonomisk vækst og af tyveri af penge, sundhedssystemer og endda mad fra befolkningen, for i stedet at opretholde de bankerotte New York- og London-banker.

»Der er tale om et spørgsmål af en højere orden her, et spørgsmål, som jeg lejlighedsvis har rejst, men som ikke ofte rejses«, sagde LaRouche. »Problemet er, at mennesket rent faktisk ikke skaber loven! Det vil sige, at menneskeheden rent faktisk ikke, gennem sin egen myndighed som sådan, gennem individuelle medlemmer af samfundet, skaber loven. For loven er princippet om menneskeslægtens fremskridt, og hvis menneskeslægten ikke gør fremskridt i sin udvikling og opfyldelse, så er loven blevet krænket! Og det er der, problemet ligger.

Se på de forfærdelige ting, der er sket under diverse renæssancer, der er blevet knust; se på disse massemord. Vi taler nu om et massemordsproblem. Vi taler om den amerikanske regerings politik netop nu, i det mindste under den aktuelle præsident og den forudgående præsident: Massemord!

Pointen er, at mennesket adlyder en højere lov, for mennesket er ikke en Jordbo! Mennesket er baseret på et princip, som ikke er Jordboernes princip. Det er menneskehedens forpligtelse at udvikle fremtidige befolkninger, der er mere passende. Antagelsen er den, at hver generation bør gå progressivt fremad i overensstemmelse med naturlig lov, og denne naturlige lov vil sige forbedringen, selv-forbedringen, af den menneskelige art. Kun mennesket har evnen til at gøre dette … Det er loven, den virkelige lov. Tekniske love, juridiske love, love for transportveje på privat jord, det er ikke loven. Loven er, at menneskeheden ifølge sin natur må gøre fremskridt. Folk dør, det ved vi. Hvad er loven? Ja, sørgede de for at frembringe bedre mennesker i deres familie? Var deres familier i stand til at gøre fremskridt og hæve sig op til et højere præstationsniveau for menneskeheden? Er vi f.eks. ikke ansvarlige for at tage os af (take care of) Galaksen? Det er vores ansvar!«

Stedt over for den største trussel mod civilisationen i moderne historie, må vore borgere og alle verdens borgere stræbe efter denne højere standard, ikke alene for vores egen skyld, men for menneskehedens fremtidige eksistens. De, der følger en lavere lov, den sataniske lov, må omgående fjernes fra lederskabspositioner, med præsident Obama som den første, der skal fjernes.

 




Nødudsendelse fra LaRouchePAC
23. december 2015:
Til en nation (USA) på randen af en finanskatastrofe.
Dansk udskrift.

Vi er nu ved et punkt, hvor konsekvenserne af at tolerere disse handlinger og denne politik og disse politiske personer udgør USA’s undergang, såvel som også hele det transatlantiske områdes undergang og muligvis også verdens undergang, hvis vi degenererer til omstændigheder med atomkrig. Så dette er et ekstraordinært øjeblik; og det er noget, der kræver handling fra ledende borgere i denne republik. Jeres folkevalgte repræsentanter, og først og fremmest USA’s præsident, har opført sig som britiske forrædere, og ikke som de patriotiske personer, der skal forestille at gøre tjeneste i landets højeste embeder.

Blot få timer før denne udsendelse blev der udsendt en nøderklæring, der blev udlagt på LaRouchePAC’s website, og som cirkuleres via de sociale medier og som et flyveblad på Manhattans gader og andre steder i hele USA. Teksten (findes som selvstændigt Flyveblad her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=10843) lyder som følger (oplæst af Matthew Ogden):

Julebudskab: Den 1. januar 2016 er dommedag! Kun et initiativ som Franklin Roosevelts kan redde os

(23. december 2015): Præsident Barack Obama og hele den Amerikanske Kongres har forrådt jer, det amerikanske folk, ved af fejhed at nægte at tage skridt til de nødvendige nødbetingede initiativer for at forhindre det største finansielle og økonomiske krak – langt værre end dem i 1929 og 2008 – i at ske i de umiddelbart forestående dage og uger. Med mindre I, det amerikanske folk, rejser jer og kræver omgåede handling, vil nationen og en stor del af menneskeheden blive konfronteret med en katastrofe i begyndelsen af det nye år.

Hele det transatlantiske finanssystem står for at nedsmelte. Blot i løbet af de seneste uger er junk investment grade-obligationer til 15 mia. dollar blevet udslettet. Dette er blot et forvarsel om et umiddelbart forestående, totalt sammenbrud af den transatlantiske boble. Fra og med 1. januar 2016 er en gældsboble på 72 mia. dollar indstillet til at eksplodere i Puerto Rico. Kongressen havde muligheden for at tage initiativ til at forhindre dette, før de forlod byen, men tog ingen skridt til handling.

En gæld på skønsmæssigt 5 billion dollar, der er knyttet til USA’s nationale, kollapsende sektor for skiferolie og -gas, er i færd med at nedsmelte. I det vestlige Canada er denne boble allerede bristet og har udløst tabet af 100.000 arbejdspladser i 2015 – svarende til 750.000 arbejdspladser i USA – samt et kollaps i ejendomsmarkedet og et samfundsmæssigt sammenbrud. Denne samme krise er på vej i USA i accelererende tempo, men på en langt større skala.

I Europa træder der nye love i kraft fra den 1. januar 2016, som fjerner enhver beskyttelse af bankindskydere, der vil få deres sparepenge stjålet under »bail-in«-regler (ekspropriering), sådan, som det allerede er sket på Cypern. I Italien fik flere end 10.000 indskydere – bankkunder – deres opsparing eksproprieret under en delvis bail-in under fire bankers kollaps i denne måned. De samme forholdsregler findes inkluderet i Dodd/Frank-loven her i USA. Hvis ens bank kollapser, kan man få sin livsopsparing stjålet for at redde banken. Det kan og vil ske her, takket være fejhed og korruption hos jeres valgte regeringsfolk, der har holdt jer hen i uvidenhed og overtrådt den ed, de har aflagt i deres embede.

Kongressen havde, før den tog på ferie, mulighed for at forhindre denne nu fremstormende krise. De blev advaret. De kunne have vedtaget love, der allerede var blevet fremstillet i begge Kongressens huse, til genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, den af Franklin Roosevelt indførte lov, der opdelte Depressionens for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-banker, ved at adskille kommerciel bankvirksomhed fra alle hasardspilsaktiviteterne. Men Kongressen var købt af Wall Street og svigtede jer. Præsident Obama er totalt ejet af Wall Street og [City of] London, som har skabt ham. Wall Street er håbløst bankerot, og de har til hensigt at klamre sig til magten ved at stjæle jeres penge og fjerne jeres sundhedssystem samt lukke ned, hvad der måtte være tilbage af realøkonomien, den fysiske økonomi. Inden for et tidsrum af blot få dage eller uger kunne I blive konfronteret med fødevaremangel, hyperinflation og et totalt sammenbrud af alt, hvad I ellers anser for at være normale tilstande.

Præsident Obama fremprovokerer også, på vegne af Wall Street og London, en konfrontation med Rusland, der driver verden frem mod global krig, en krig, som nogle amerikanske og russiske militære topkommandører advarer om kunne blive en termonuklear udslettelseskrig.

Den 1. januar 2016 vil Ukraine, med USA’s og IMF’s godkendelse, gå i betalingsstandsning mht. sin gæld på 3 mia. dollar til Rusland, en åbenlyst provokerende handling fra Vestens side mod Moskva, der kommer oveni de allerede eksisterende sanktioner, NATO’s udvidelse mod øst og andre, direkte provokerende militære handlinger.

Alt dette er dødsens alvorligt. Verden befinder sig på spidsen af et krak værre end under den Store Depression, og en ny verdenskrig. I må nu tage skridt til handling, for jeres valgte regeringsfolk, kongresmedlemmer osv., har overgivet jer, på grund af deres egen fejhed og fordærv. De har, sammen med præsident Obama, gjort sig fortjent til jeres foragt og vrede pga. deres feje opførsel.

Der er løsninger forhånden. Wall Street må omgående lukkes. Der skal ikke betales en øre mere for at redde disse forbrydere! Kongressen må fjerne Wall Street-marionetten Barack Obama fra embedet, gennem en rigsretssag eller ved at påkalde det 25. forfatningstillæg, der fastsætter bestemmelser for fjernelsen af en præsident fra embedet, når denne præsident er mentalt uskikket til at fortsætte sit hverv. Glass-Steagall må omgående genindføres og en række initiativer må tages, der alle er modelleret efter det, som den store, amerikanske præsident Franklin Roosevelt gjorde i løbet af de allerførste måneder af sin embedsperiode, for at skabe millioner af produktive jobs, genopbygge nationens kollapsede infrastruktur og genrejse nationens værdighed.

Kongressen kan i løbet af få timer tage skridt til disse handlinger, men de vil kun handle i tide, hvis I vågner op og kræver det.

Alternativet er Helvede på Jord, fra og med det nye år. Er I, jeres venner, jeres naboer, i besiddelse af det moralske beredskab, der skal til for at overleve? Det er det spørgsmål, der er på bordet her, denne Juleaften, 2015.

Matthew Ogden: Lad mig nu introducere Jeff Steinberg fra Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), der i større detaljer vil gennemgå diskussionen med hr. LaRouche her til morgen.

Jeffrey Steinberg: Tak, Matt. Der er et par andre [kan ikke høres; 09:33] for jeg tror, at billedet af det finansielle [kan ikke høres; 09.39] er tydeligt. Mange mennesker derude har allerede fået færten af det; men det vigtigste er, at det er en umiddelbart forestående situation. Det er en situation, der vil eksplodere på ethvert givent tidspunkt, når vi først kommer over den 1. januar; en dato, hvor vi netop har meddelt nogle af de særlige begivenheder, der vil finde sted i de første dage af det nye år. Når alt er medregnet er der en spillegæld på mere en 1,5 billiard dollar, der er akkumuleret siden vi havde krisen i 2008; og det hele er en tidsindstillet bombe. Eksplosionens epicenter er USA og Vesteuropa.

Der er yderligere et par elementer, der må med i billedet, for at I, det amerikanske folk, kan få en komplet vurdering af, hvor kritisk det øjeblik er, som vi er nået til. For det første må man stille det spørgsmål, om Islamisk Stats angreb i Paris den 13. november, og senere i San Bernardino, Californien, repræsenterer en Rigsdagsbrand-begivenhed i det tidlige 21. århundrede. Vi ved, at disse jihadistiske netværk er blevet skabt og promoveret af førende nationer i denne vestlige kombination; startende med briterne og med Saudi Arabien. Der er fraktioner her i USA, der har været udtrykkeligt indblandet – al-Qaeda, Nusra Front, Islamisk Stat – alle på vegne af et engagement for, blandt andet, at vælte Assad-regeringen i Syrien. Så det, vi i realiteten ser på, er en kapacitet, der er blevet udløst i Europa og USA under visse vestlige kredses kontrol; og hvis hensigt det er at skabe de omstændigheder, under hvilke den form for politistat kan etableres, som vil være nødvendig for at takle det sociale kaos og for at gøre fremstød for en global konfrontation, der er umiddelbart forestående.

For det andet, så afslørede de andre begivenheder omkring COP21-konferencen om global opvarmning, at Pavestolen, selve Paven, var blevet kapret af en person, som kun kan beskrives som en satanisk person – John Schellnhüber; en ridder af Det britiske Imperium, hvis politik, der nu er blevet vedtaget af Paven, ønsker at se det store flertal af menneskeheden elimineret gennem en række [kan ikke høres: 12:37] i kombination med faren for krig og i kombination med de økonomiske katastrofer, som allerede er i gang med indgangen til denne nedsmeltnings-periode, lige efter den 1. januar.

Pointen er, at man har løjet for jer, det amerikanske folk; jeres folkevalgte regeringsfolk har svigtet jer ynkeligt. Og nettoresultatet er, at der, ét minut i midnat, ikke foreligger nogen forpligtelse over for jer til at tage skridt til den form for afgørende handlinger, der nu kræves som en bydende nødvendighed. Kongressen kan vende tilbage til Washington [fra juleferie, -red.], men vil kun gøre det, hvis I skræmmer livet af dem; hvis I rejser jer i denne juleferie og kræver, at de tager skridt til at foretage den form for nødhandlinger, som er det eneste handlingsforløb i dette øjeblik, der kan afværge denne absolut katastrofale situation, der potentielt blot ligger timer eller dage ud i fremtiden. Kongressen kan vende tilbage til Washington og nægte at betale Wall Streets gæld. Der er intet at være bange for på Wall Street, for de er håbløst og uafvendeligt bankerot. Det er frygten for det ukendte, der får medlemmer af Kongressen til at kapitulere og tillade Obamas præsidentskab, som er en hån mod nationen, at fortsætte; og til at tillade Wall Street fortsat at diktere betingelserne i Washington.

Vi er nu ved et punkt, hvor konsekvenserne af at tolerere disse handlinger og denne politik og disse politiske personer udgør USA’s undergang, såvel som også hele det transatlantiske områdes undergang og muligvis også verdens undergang, hvis vi degenererer til omstændigheder med atomkrig. Så dette er et ekstraordinært øjeblik; og det er noget, der kræver handling fra ledende borgere i denne republik. Jeres folkevalgte repræsentanter, og først og fremmest USA’s præsident, har opført sig som britiske forrædere, og ikke som de patriotiske personer, der skal forestille at gøre tjeneste i landets højeste embeder.

Det påhviler således os at tage skridt til de handlinger, der i dette øjeblik kan synes at være højst upraktiske; men som i virkeligheden er de eneste praktiske forholdsregler, hvis vi ønsker at overleve og få fremgang i dette nye år, vi har for os. Løsninger ligger parat; erklær Wall Street bankerot – det er allerede gået nedenom og hjem. Lancer den form for lovgivningsmæssige initiativer; vi så, hvor effektivt det var fra Franklin Roosevelt-præsidentskabets allerførste øjeblikke. Politikken dengang tilbyder os retningslinjer for handlinger, der bør udføres i dag! Af sig selv vil Kongressen ikke gøre det; det har de vist ved at flygte ud af Washington i sidste uge. Jeg vil blot afslutte med at sige, at den dag, Washington (regeringen, Kongressen) forlod byen, var jeg i D.C. på Capitol Hill; jeg talte personligt med mindst 40 individuelle medlemmer af Kongressen. I hvert eneste tilfælde var de fuldt ud klar over nedsmeltningen af junk-obligationerne; af de andre økonomiske katastrofer; af den umiddelbart forestående nedsmeltning af sektren for skiferolie og -gas; og dog tog de benene på nakken. De ignorerede og undveg det ansvar, der påhvilede dem. Det påhviler derfor nu os, og jer, at konfrontere virkeligheden direkte; og tage skridt til den form for nødhandlinger, der kan redde dagen, selv på dette fremskredne tidspunkt.

Matthew Ogden: Mange tak, Jeff. Hvis man tager fortilfældet fra 1933 og ser på den kendsgerning, at med det, som var det hidtil største finanskrak i den transatlantiske verdens historie, og fascisme fejede hen over Europa. Og i det vakuum, der ville have eksisteret, hvis ikke Franklin Roosevelt havde været præsident og havde gennemført de nødforanstaltninger på dette tidspunkt for at lukke Wall Street og mobilisere det amerikanske folks produktive evne, kunne fascisme meget vel også være kommet til Amerika. Så med studiet af dette fortilfælde bør vi tage meget alvorligt det, som hr. LaRouche har gjort i løbet af det seneste års tid for at mobilisere det, der udgør en lederskabskerne det sted, han kalder et gearingspunkt eller et omdrejningspunkt for den mobilisering, der er nødvendig for at ændre politikken, og det sted er på Manhattan i New York City.

De af jer, der havde lejlighed til at lytte til LaRouche Policy Committee sidste mandag, vil vide, at hr. LaRouche lagde meget stor vægt på en række musikalske opførelser, der fandt sted i New York City i sidste weekend. Det var to opførelser af Händels Messias, der blev sponsoreret af Schiller Instituttet og medsponsoreret af Fonden til Genoplivelse af Klassisk Kultur. Dette vi Diane [Sare] sige mere om. Dette var programmet. Den første opførelse blev afholdt om lørdagen i Sacred Heart Kirken i Brooklyn; og den anden blev afholdt om søndagen i Manhattans Upper West Side i All Souls Unitarian Kirken. Jeg vil derfor gerne introducere Diane Sare, som vil sige noget mere om betydningen af disse begivenheder, og hvad implikationerne af det, der i øjeblikket sker på Manhattan, er for fremtiden.

Diane Sare: Hej. Jeg kan sige, at disse to musikbegivenheder var fuldstændigt ekstraordinære med hensyn til kvalitet og effekt. Denne effekt er, at hr. Larouche for lidt over et år siden, i oktober 2014, besluttede at genoplive vores organisation i New York City. Dette er meget vigtigt i USA’s historie, for det var med New York City som udgangspunkt, at Alexander Hamilton førte en afgørende kamp for at forene De forende Stater imod forkæmpere, som Thomas Jefferson og andre, for delstaternes rettigheder; sidstnævnte, som i dag er blevet nedarvet i form af Wall Street og Det britiske Imperium. Der er derfor en afgørende rolle, der skal besættes; og dette kan man se i befolkningen i New York City – Jeg kom til at tænke på det, som Jeff netop henviste til, med ISIS osv. – og man har disse 11. september-terrorangreb. Det var meningen, at det amerikanske folk skulle jages ind i regimeskift og krig med Irak, Libyen, krig overalt; og befolkningen i New York City afholdt en af de største demonstrationer i landet imod en invasion af Irak, i 2003, under Bushregeringen.

Vi befinder os nu i et lignende, farefuldt øjeblik, hvor befolkningen over hele landet er tilbøjelig til at være dybt pessimistisk. Vi har haft 15 år med Bush og Obama; levestandarden er kollapset; en halv million midaldrende amerikanere er døde, unødvendigt. Man får meget ofte en pessimistisk respons; jeg er sikker på, at alle her har oplevet at tale med deres nabo, deres venner. »Vi må smide Obama ud af embedet; vi må få Glass-Steagall; vi må organisere et transkontinentalt jernbanenet i USA; fusion.« Folk siger, »Åh, det kommer aldrig til at ske. Åh, det kan man ikke gennemføre; åh, de er alt for korrupte.« Jeg ville sige, at dette meget ligner den kamp, som George Washington i 1776 stod overfor, han, der havde tabt samtlige slag fra Uafhængighedserklæringen og frem til jul. Og den daværende befolkning i USA var ikke i overvældende grad for at bryde fri af Det britiske Imperium; de fandt, at det ikke var umagen værd. New Jersey, som var det sidste sted, hvorfra han havde trukket sig tilbage for at krydse Delaware-floden, var fuldstændig under de hessenske lejesoldaters og Toriernes kontrol; hans beslutning om at krydse Delaware-floden Juledags nat (den 25.-26. december 1776, -red.) var derfor ikke alene anti-pragmatisk, men gik også imod den daværende offentlige mening. Men han vidste, at dette måtte gøres; og det lykkedes ham at fremkalde en bestemt, inspireret respons fra de lasede, forfrosne, forarmede soldater, som han anførte.

Manhattans befolkning er måske ikke så faldefærdig som George Washingtons hær dengang var; men vi har alle været underkastet en utrolig kulturel og moralsk fordærvelse, der, som hr. LaRouche har omtalt, kan ses i ungdommen osv. Så, måden, vi arrangerede disse koncerter – den i Brooklyn fandt sted i en historisk, gammel kirke, der var tæt knyttet til kredsen omkring Moder Cabrini, hvis folk er bekendt med hende; hun organiserede de italienske immigranters ankomst til USA; hun etablerede børnehaver, skoler og hospitaler og alt sådan noget. Koncerten på Manhattan fandt sted i All Souls Unitarian Kirken, der har en bestemt arv med støtte til Unionshæren, hospitaler og genopbygning; og senere, med borgerrettighedsbevægelsen. Vi gik ind i lokalsamfundet og organiserede for en opførelse af Händels Messias i den rette, videnskabelige Verdi-tone; den blev holdt sammen af et kor, der bestod af folk fra New York City og vore Schiller Institut-aktivister fra New York, New Jersey, Virginia. Matt, du spillede basun i orkesteret; men det var en del af, at befolkningen kom sammen. Mange af folkene blandt publikum var folk, der havde været rundt om koret og besluttet, at det måske ikke var noget for dem, men at de ønskede at engagere sig i dette. Så vi havde over 1.000 mennesker, der kom til koncerterne. Og responsen – for det første skabte den sænkede tone (Verdis oprindelige tonehøjde) og det arbejde, som John Sigerson har udført mht. spørgsmålet om placering, en meget tydelig forskel. Og publikums kommentarer – vi bad folk om at give os deres kontaktinformation, fortælle os, hvordan de fandt ud af, at denne begivenhed fandt sted, og tilføje deres eventuelle kommentarer. Folk sagde ting, som »Vi hørte koret på en måde, vi aldrig før har hørt; lydens egenskaber var meget varmere, end vi havde forventet. Det var professionelt.« John [Sigerson] påpegede, at vi på en måde står over det professionelle niveau, fordi vi ikke er interesseret – det er sådan lidt en antiseptisk idé – men dette er menneskelig indgriben, der samler befolkningen. Meget lig dengang Händel skrev og opførte Messias; den første opførelse fandt sted i Dublin, Irland. Og det skete for at adressere spørgsmålet om fattigdom og for at rejse penge til et børnehjem for forældreløse og lette gældsætning.

Amerikaneren Alexander Hamilton var en del af kredsen omkring Jonathan Swift og andre; og Benjamin Franklin skulle angiveligt have deltaget i en opførelse af Messias, der blev dirigeret af Händel selv. Så selve dette musikstykke, dets idé, forbindelsen mellem mennesket som Skaber, mellem menneskeslægten og universets skabelse; og en fejring af dette, er, hvad vi har presserende behov for, for at samle befolkningen. Og [vi har behov for] at skabe en kvalitet af lederskab, der på en moralsk måde kan respondere til denne krise; i modsætning til den afskyelige opførsel hos denne stinkende flok feje personer uden mod i Kongressen, der, som Jeff netop har beskrevet, vel vidende, at kollapset stormede frem, ville storme hjem for at holde juleferie snarere end at blive og tage initiativ til de nødvendige handlinger for at beskytte den amerikanske befolkning.

Så en proces en nu blevet sat i gang, som må optrappes i tempo; vi kan ikke give den lov til at udvikle sig i det nuværende tempo, som er fint, bortset fra, at hele systemet er klar til at bryde sammen den 1. eller 2. januar. Så spørgsmålet handler om at tage denne styrke og dette princip og bruge det til at samle vore styrker i hele USA, og i hele verden, for at adressere den situation, som menneskeheden i dag står overfor.

Matthew Ogden: Mange tak. Videoen og lydbåndet fra den ene eller begge disse koncerter, der fandt sted i New York i sidste weekend, skulle være tilgængelige meget snart; og vi vil opfordre alle til, at dette må være en del af det, de foretager sig i løbet af de allernærmeste dage. En lille rettelse: Det faktum, at Benjamin Franklin skulle have været til stede under en opførelse af Messias dirigeret af Händel selv, er tilsyneladende ikke helt bekræftet; vi ved imidlertid, at han faktisk var til stede under en opførelse af Messias. Jeg mener, at Händels revolutionerende opråb til handling, »Lad os sønderbryde båndene, og kaste deres åg af os« (eng.: »Let us break the bonds asunder, and cast their yokes from upon us«), er noget, der blev aktuelt under Benjamin Franklins og George Washingtons Amerikanske Revolution. Så det er et meget passende kampråb for i dag.

Jeg vil gerne appellere til alle om at tage teksten til det flyveblad, som jeg oplæste i begyndelsen af denne udsendelse, »Nytårsbudskab: 1. januar 2016 er dommedag! Kun et initiativ som Franklin Roosevelts kan redde os« og uddele det så vidt omkring, som I kan i de kommende dage. Dette bør være samtaleemnet ved familiemiddage og andre begivenheder, der finder sted i løbet af de næste 24-48 timer. Og være en del af diskussionen, der finder sted i de næste minutter. Lige efter denne udsendelse kommer der kl. 9pm Eastern Time en live nødudsendelse af ’Fireside Chat’ med hr. LaRouche, som diskuterer med det amerikanske folk. Dette finder normalt sted torsdage, men man kan deltage, hvis man har adgangsnummeret.

Jeg mener, at vi meget klart har fremlagt billedet. Den 1. januar er i realiteten en deadline; der er betalingsstandsningen på det puertoricanske lån, der er Ukraines betalingsstandsning på deres russiske lån på 3 mia. dollar, der er blevet promoveret af IMF og USA som en direkte provokation. Og der er en deadline den 1. januar, hvor de nye bail-in-love træder i kraft i Europa; bail-in-love, der allerede har dræbt mennesker i Italien og har eksproprieret 10.000 italienske indskyderes penge i dette område. Der er sammenbruddet i sektoren for skiferolie og junk-obligationsboblerne. Der er allerede tab for hundredetusinder i Canada; dette kommer til USA. Alt dette bryder sammen nu; og de nødvendige forholdsregler og løsninger er forhånden. En omgående lukning af Wall Street, en omgående reorganisering af hele dette bankerotte finanssystem gennem Glass-Steagall; en omgående mobilisering af hele den amerikanske arbejdsstyrke, meget ligesom Franklin Roosevelt gjorde det; fjernelsen af denne krigsmager Barack Obama fra embedet, og at håndtere den kendsgerning, at hele det transatlantiske område bliver domineret af et britisk monarki, der er besat af den folkemorderiske idé, at vi må reducere verdens befolkning og kaste mennesker tilbage til en dyrisk tilstand.

Så dette er virkeligheden ved slutningen af 2015 og i de første timer af 2016. Og det påhviler jer at tage det, der er blevet fremlagt her i aften og handle på det omgående; alle redskaberne er tilgængelige for jer. Vi beder jer indtrængende om at gå direkte fra dette webcast for at deltage i live-diskussion med hr. LaRouche under ’Fireside Chat’-udsendelsen, der starter om få minutter.

Jeg vil gerne takke alle for at være med os her i aften; og jeg vil gerne takke både Jeffrey Steinberg og Diane Sare for at være vore gæster ved denne udsendelse. Bliv på kanalen og lyt til larouchepac.com i den kommende tid.

 

 




Nytårsbudskab
Leder fra LaRouchePAC, USA:
Den 1. januar 2016 er dommedag!
Kun et initiativ som Franklin Roosevelts kan redde os

Præsident Barack Obama og hele den Amerikanske Kongres har forrådt jer, det amerikanske folk, ved af fejhed at nægte at tage skridt til de nødvendige nødbetingede initiativer for at forhindre det største finansielle og økonomiske krak – langt værre end dem i 1929 og 2008 – i at ske i de umiddelbart forestående dage og uger. Med mindre I, det amerikanske folk, rejser jer og kræver omgåede handling, vil nationen og en stor del af menneskeheden blive konfronteret med en katastrofe i begyndelsen af det nye år.

Følgende erklæring bliver i disse dage cirkuleret som flyveblad, først og fremmest i USA; men den samme problemstilling gælder for Europa.

Frem for alt har de tyske forbundsdagsmedlemmer, trods et massivt oplysningsarbejde fra BüSo (det tyske, politiske parti Borgerrettigheds-bevægelsen Solidaritet, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter af Schiller Instituttet, er formand for, -red.), afvist at takle krisen og gøre noget ved kendsgerningerne.

24. december 2015, LPAC, USA: Præsident Barack Obama og hele den Amerikanske Kongres har forrådt jer, det amerikanske folk, ved af fejhed at nægte at tage skridt til de nødvendige nødbetingede initiativer for at forhindre det største finansielle og økonomiske krak – langt værre end dem i 1929 og 2008 – i at ske i de umiddelbart forestående dage og uger. Med mindre I, det amerikanske folk, rejser jer og kræver omgåede handling, vil nationen og en stor del af menneskeheden blive konfronteret med en katastrofe i begyndelsen af det nye år.

Hele det transatlantiske finanssystem står for at nedsmelte. Blot i løbet af de seneste uger er junk investment grade-obligationer til 15 mia. dollar blevet udslettet. Dette er blot et forvarsel om et umiddelbart forestående, totalt sammenbrud af den transatlantiske boble. Fra og med 1. januar 2016 er en gældsboble på 72 mia. dollar indstillet til at eksplodere i Puerto Rico. Kongressen havde muligheden for at tage initiativ til at forhindre dette, før de forlod byen, men tog ingen skridt til handling.

En gæld på skønsmæssigt 5 billion dollar, der er knyttet til USA’s nationale, kollapsende sektor for skiferolie og -gas, er i færd med at nedsmelte. I det vestlige Canada er denne boble allerede bristet og har udløst tabet af 100.000 arbejdspladser i 2015 – svarende til 750.000 arbejdspladser i USA – samt et kollaps i ejendomsmarkedet og et samfundsmæssigt sammenbrud. Denne samme krise er på vej i USA i accelererende tempo, men på en langt større skala.

I Europa træder der nye love i kraft fra den 1. januar 2016, som fjerner enhver beskyttelse af bankindskydere, der vil få deres sparepenge stjålet under »bail-in«-regler (ekspropriering), sådan, som det allerede er sket på Cypern. I Italien fik flere end 10.000 indskydere – bankkunder – deres opsparing eksproprieret under en delvis bail-in under fire bankers kollaps i denne måned. De samme forholdsregler findes inkluderet i Dodd/Frank-loven her i USA. Hvis ens bank kollapser, kan man få sin livsopsparing stjålet for at redde banken. Det kan og vil ske her, takket være fejhed og korruption hos jeres valgte regeringsfolk, der har holdt jer hen i uvidenhed og overtrådt den ed, de har aflagt i deres embede.

Kongressen havde, før den tog på ferie, mulighed for at forhindre denne nu fremstormende krise. De blev advaret. De kunne have vedtaget love, der allerede var blevet fremstillet i begge Kongressens huse, til genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, den af Franklin Roosevelt indførte lov, der opdelte Depressionens for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-banker, ved at adskille kommerciel bankvirksomhed fra alle hasardspilsaktiviteterne. Men Kongressen var købt af Wall Street og svigtede jer. Præsident Obama er totalt ejet af Wall Street og [City of] London, som har skabt ham. Wall Street er håbløst bankerot, og de har til hensigt at klamre sig til magten ved at stjæle jeres penge og fjerne jeres sundhedssystem samt lukke ned, hvad der måtte være tilbage af realøkonomien, den fysiske økonomi. Inden for et tidsrum af blot få dage eller uger kunne I blive konfronteret med fødevaremangel, hyperinflation og et totalt sammenbrud af alt, hvad I ellers anser for at være normale tilstande.

Præsident Obama fremprovokerer også, på vegne af Wall Street og London, en konfrontation med Rusland, der driver verden frem mod global krig, en krig, som nogle amerikanske og russiske militære topkommandører advarer om kunne blive en termonuklear udslettelseskrig.

Den 1. januar 2016 vil Ukraine, med USA’s og IMF’s godkendelse, gå i betalingsstandsning mht. sin gæld på 3 mia. dollar til Rusland, en åbenlyst provokerende handling fra Vestens side mod Moskva, der kommer oveni de allerede eksisterende sanktioner, NATO’s udvidelse mod øst og andre, direkte provokerende militære handlinger.

Alt dette er dødsens alvorligt. Verden befinder sig på spidsen af et krak værre end under den Store Depression, og en ny verdenskrig. I må nu tage skridt til handling, for jeres valgte regeringsfolk – parlamentsmedlemmer, kongresmedlemmer osv. – har overgivet jer, på grund af deres egen fejhed og fordærv. De har, sammen med præsident Obama, gjort sig fortjent til jeres foragt og vrede pga. deres feje opførsel.

Der er løsninger forhånden. Wall Street må omgående lukkes. Der skal ikke betales en øre mere for at redde disse forbrydere! Kongressen må fjerne Wall Street-marionetten Barack Obama fra embedet, gennem en rigsretssag eller ved at påkalde det 25. forfatningstillæg, der fastsætter bestemmelser for fjernelsen af en præsident fra embedet, når denne præsident er mentalt uskikket til at fortsætte sit hverv. Glass-Steagall må omgående genindføres og en række initiativer må tages, der alle er modelleret efter det, som den store, amerikanske præsident Franklin Roosevelt gjorde i løbet af de allerførste måneder af sin embedsperiode, for at skabe millioner af produktive jobs, genopbygge nationens kollapsede infrastruktur og genrejse nationens værdighed.

Kongressen kan i løbet af få timer tage skridt til disse handlinger, men de vil kun handle i tide, hvis I vågner op og kræver det.

Alternativet er Helvede på Jord, fra og med det nye år. Er I, jeres venner, jeres naboer, i besiddelse af det moralske beredskab, der skal til for at overleve? Det er det spørgsmål, der er på bordet her, denne Juleaften, 2015.




RADIO SCHILLER den 28. december 2015:
Faseskifte til finanskrak i begyndelsen af januar

Med formand Tom Gillesberg




Leder, 26. december 2015:
5 onde regenter leder os til udslettelsen
– 1. januar vil udløse den

Massenedsmeltningen af finanssystemet, der nu er programsat til umiddelbart efter Nytårsdag, lover en næsten omgående nedlukning af økonomierne i USA, Vesteuropa og det meste af Mellem- og Sydamerika. Det vil blive værre end sammenbruddet i 2008 eller 1929 i en grad, der ikke kan måles.

Det seneste tilfælde, der kan sammenlignes med den katastrofe, vi står overfor i de nærmest forestående dage, er katastrofen i Europa i det 14. århundrede. Dengang som nu banede en mangeårig forrådnelse af kulturen vejen for en række brutale, anti-humane handlinger, udført af rent ud sataniske regenter, der pludseligt og hovedkulds styrtede samfundet ud i kollaps og massedød. Midt i de evindelige krige var en række tilfælde af hungersnød i århundredets begyndelse med til at bane vejen for det onde, der fulgte. I 1344 erklærede Bardi- og Peruzzibankhusene i Lombardiet sig konkurs, hvorefter det venetianske banknetværk lukkede hele det økonomiske system i Europa ned, og hermed fremtvang vilkår, der yderligere decimerede befolkningernes modstandskraft over for sygdom. Den Sorte Død (byldepest) slog til i 1347. De efterfølgende bølger af sygdomsudbrud skønnes at have aflivet 60 % af Europas befolkning.

Nu, i dag, i kølvandet på det udbredte, kulturelle forfald, der går under navnet det 20. århundrede, leder tre, sataniske regenter os mod vores umiddelbare ødelæggelse: Dronning Elizabeth af England, præsident Barack Obama af USA og Pave Frans.

Den imperiale Dronning Elizabeth II er en langt mere bevidst, ond skikkelse, end hendes forfader Georg III, der myrdede vore amerikanske patrioter for over 200 år siden. Hun repræsenterer Det britiske Imperium i det 20. århundrede, med Lord Bertrand Russel, der udstedte love til at gøre en ende på videnskab og kunst til fordel for død matematik. Ligesom Russell er hun og hendes mand, Prins Philip, fortalere for en verdensomspændende befolkningsreduktion gennem alle midler. Det var den ikke-så-hemmelige dagsorden for hendes netop afsluttede konference i Paris, om den angivelige menneskeskabte klimaforandring.

Dronning Elizabeths og hendes ligesindedes satanisme drejer sig om deres fremstød for at udslette den »guddommelige gnist« i mennesket – det, der gør mennesket til »skabt i Guds billede«. Med andre ord, at være menneskelig.

Alle katolikker – ja, alle kristne – burde føle sig skamfulde over den kendsgerning, at Pave Frans vedtog Det britiske Imperiums anti-humane credo i sin encyklika, sit pavelige brev, »Laudato Si’«. Han har kæmpet for den lige siden. Uanset motiverne, så har han diskvalificeret sig selv som Pave, ja endda som simpel præst.

Vores såkaldte præsident, Barack Obama, er denne imperiale Dronnings marionet, der kontrolleres af det britiske monarki gennem Valerie Jarrett, som var den person, der oprindeligt udpegede ham til at blive præsident, da han blot var en ukendt delstatssenator. Det var britiskkontrollerede narko-penge, der gav Obama en uhæderlig sejr over den folkelige favorit Hillary Clinton i de demokratiske primærvalg i 2008. (Desværre har Hillary ødelagt alle sine kvalifikationer, efter at hun blev Obamas marionet efter at han blev valgt.)

Obama blev opdraget til at blive en massemorder af sin indonesiske stedfader Lolo Soetero. Nu præsiderer han hver tirsdag over et møde i Det Hvide Hus, hvor han træffer beslutning om en ny liste over mennesker, der skal myrdes – inklusive amerikanske borgere. Grunden til, at de store medier giver ham fripas – såsom New York Times og Wall Street Journal – er, at de er bange for, at han også vil myrde dem. Hvad han sandsynligvis vil.

Kongresmedlemmer har den samme, berettigede frygt – men de har ingen undskyldning. Den ed, de aflagde til Forfatningen, er en soldater-ed. Hvis de ikke omgående vil fjerne Obama og lukke Wall Street, er de slet ikke ægte kongresmedlemmer.

Kort og godt, så har jeres ledere forrådt jer til Djævelen. Jeres kongresmedlemmer har i bedste fald forrådt jer af frygt. Men de løsninger, som Franklin Roosevelt tog i anvendelse i 1932-33, under en langt mildere krise, er stadig anvendelige i dag. Kun et barn ville tale om »oddsene«; vi har tydeligvis oddsene imod os. Og hvad så?




Ekstraordinær hastekonference ‘Fireside Chat’, 23. december 2015 –
Lyndon Larouche diskuterer med aktivister i hele USA

God aften. Vi har i aften en ekstraordinær konference over telefon, som vi har indkaldt til, konfronteret med den kendsgerning, at vi står på randen af et finanskollaps, den 1. eller 2. januar.

Spørgsmål 1: Hej, jeg er J. fra Columbia, Maryland. Mit spørgsmål lyder: Med alt, hvad der er sket, med krigen mod terror og de nylige angreb i Paris og nedskydningen af det russiske kampfly, hvordan er finanssammenbruddet forbundet med alt dette? Og hvad gør vi ved immigrationen af mennesker fra Syrien?

LaRouche: Det sidste spørgsmål ville jeg ikke bekymre mig om. Det er ikke et virkelig alvorligt problem. Det har eftervirkninger, men de er ikke alvorlige, og bør ikke tage vores opmærksomhed.

Det, vi må gøre, er, at vi må erkende, selvfølgelig, det transatlantiske samfund, og dets rolle med hensyn til os. Vi må grundlæggende set koncentrere os om USA som sådan, og USA er vores eget problem. For vi har kræfter i USA, der er enten feje, især blandt medlemmerne af Kongressen, der har vist deres fejhed, deres rådne fejhed i dette spørgsmål, eller de forsøger at etablere noget, der vil ødelægger retten til livet, for USA’s borgere. Hvis denne handling bliver tilladt, så vil der blive en masse døde mennesker i USA, og USA vil ikke have nogen fremtid.

Vi må derfor indtage dette standpunkt. Der er visse principper, der må indføres. Hvis vi ikke indfører disse principper i praksis, så er I udslettet; I betyder ikke længere noget.

Så pointen er, at I kæmper for jeres egen identitet, og det er jeres forpligtelse at forsøge at understøtte jeres egen identitet, gennem intelligent respons til de problemer, der umiddelbart konfronterer os, lige nu.

Engelsk udskrift.

Tune in this week for a very important live Q&A discussion with Lyndon LaRouche. Mr. LaRouche has forecast the nation is on the verge of a financial collapse come January 1 or 2. Note: This week’s call will be on Wednesday the 23rd, not Thursday.

Transcript

JOHN ASCHER:  Good evening everyone, this is John Ascher here in Virginia, and we are here for an extraordinary conference call this evening, called by LaRouche PAC, in the face of the looming financial collapse of the trans-Atlantic system.  I’d like to welcome everyone back this evening for our discussion with Lyndon LaRouche, who I hope I have on the line.

LYNDON LAROUCHE:  You do. Can you hear me?

ASCHER:  I can hear you loud and clear, Lyn.  I think many people who were on the call just watched the webcast which concluded , just a half-hour ago. Would you like me to read a little part of the emergency message that you authorized written by Jeff Steinberg, that was put up on our website?  (“Make Sure That There Is a New Year:  Dump Obama and Wall Street!”)

LAROUCHE:  I think we have it already from Jeff, which was already broadcast.  So, let’s get into this thing and if it becomes meritorious to bring more consideration on that, then you and I can do that.

ASCHER:  OK, excellent.  So, I’m turning on the Q&A queue.

Q1:  Hi, my name is A—J— from Columbia, Maryland, and I have a question:  With everything that’s been going on with the war on terror, and the recent attacks in Paris and the downing of the Russian jet, how does the financial collapse tie into all of this?  And what should we do about the immigration of people coming from Syria?

LAROUCHE:  I wouldn’t worry about that, the latter problem. That is not really a serious one.  It has effects, but it’s not one that’s a serious one and one that should occupy our attention.

What we have to do, is we have to recognize, of course, the trans-Atlantic community, and its role in dealing with us.  We have to concentrate essentially on the United States as such, and the United States is our one worry.  Because we’ve got forces in the United States who are either cowardly, especially among the members of Congress who have shown their cowardice, their stinking cowardice in this matter, or trying to set something up, which will destroy the rights of life, of the citizens of the United States.  If that action is permitted, then the United States will have a lot of dead people inside it, and there will be no future of the United States.

So therefore we have to take that view. There are certain principles which must be applied.  If we don’t apply those principles in practice, then you are wiped out; you don’t mean anything any more.

So the point is, you’re fighting for your own identity, and your obligation is to try to support your own identity, by intelligent responses, to the problems which are facing us immediately, right now.

Q2: [internet]  Lyn, I have a question from M— from Dearborn, Michigan.  He says, “Lyn, since the battle lines are being more and more openly, publicly declared with Russia, China, India, Iran on one side, and the British and Obama, and the other allies of the British Empire on the other, do you think that what some might think is a miracle, can occur soon: that is the total elimination and end of the British Empire? Do you see that could happen soon?”

LAROUCHE:  One question has to be asked:  Are the people prepared to take their own authority and use it?  The suckers will not win.

The problem we have, I think there are a lot of members of the Congress who would like, would prefer, to do what I’ve been indicating has to be done.  But there’s some forces, including Obama most particularly, and some of the other people there.

Hillary Clinton, for example, is one of the problems.  She’s one of the big sources of destruction, and I hope she’s soon thrown out of the candidacy for the Presidency.  I don’t think we want her around any more; she is actually an agent of Obama, she’s a supporter of his.  I don’t think she was originally, but he terrified her, she became a victim of his influence and since that time she has tended to be increasingly, more and more dishonest.  And actually a bit evil.

So I think we want to get her out.  We want to get Trump out of the picture, things like that.   And we want to also take the members of Congress who are gutless wonders, and get some of the people who shouldn’t be gutless wonders among the members of Congress and say, “No!  We were wrong!  We accepted you, we accepted your proposal on this campaign, and you committed a fraud.  And we’re wrong, because we didn’t turn that down.”  And what we require now, is that honest members of the United States organization, must say, “We were wrong.  Our leaders were wrong. They were a bunch of cowards and they were selling us down the river.  They were selling the United States down the river.” And that has to be stated.

Q3:  Hi John, hi Lyn:  What’s the possibility of you know, taking our rights into our own hands?  There’s a lot of like-minded individuals where I live in California that  — well, they don’t like the way that this government is, well, you know….?

LAROUCHE:   We had a meeting in California which I attended, for a number of leading representatives, historically leading members of the California popular leadership.  And that works. We have a core in California, around certain circles, who have all the credentials you need, to speak up and say, we should be in charge, of shaping the policy of California.

After all you’ve got a governor there who’s no damned good! He’s stupid, and he’s corrupt, and he’s a Satanic figure.  That is, he belongs to a cult of a Satanic belief, together with a certain member of the Pope, an agent of the Pope, who’s also a Satanic creature.  And so these are problems we have to deal with.

But the point is, we do have a crisis.  And I would say that those of us who are actually leading some of these things, particularly the two things that happened on Saturday and Sunday, were among the most successful presentation of musical performance that we’ve had in a very long time.  And what this involved, is from people of Italian background and so forth, who are highly professional; and creating an institution which builds up a base for the kind of popular organization, organization of the United States.  And we have it.

And our job is to defend that fight.  We have our rights, this is our right:  We have the right to pull the members of the Congress, who turn cowardly or stupid.  And we have a right to kick their little asses — you know, in a certain manner of speaking.  And I think that little privilege has to be applied more vigorously, right now.

Q4: Good evening Lyn and John, this is J— calling from Michigan.  In talking with people, besides the cynicism, everybody does agree, that we are in a collapse phase now, especially like in southeast Michigan.  Everybody’s tied to the Detroit water system and water bills are skyrocketing and people are getting shut off like crazy.  The policy forces are being reduced drastically.

And my point is, when the credit system is introduced, do you agree that there should also be price controls on utilities, as well as food stocks, food pricing?

LAROUCHE:  I wouldn’t approach it exactly that way.  The effect that you’re talking about might have validity.  But I think the way to approach this is quite different.  What you have to do, is you have to get the citizens of the United States, who is by and large a coward; they’ve given in on everything. They’re afraid, they’re afraid, they’re afraid.  Everything’s been taken away from there: their careers have been taken away; their children are worthless.

For example, in California, but not only in California, the young human beings, in California, are by and large, are not really human.  That is, they don’t have any of the patriotic characteristics; and therefore we have a real problem.  We have to mobilize a force, because most of the young people in our generation now, are not fit to make judgment.  And they’re brainwashed, really, literally brainwashed.

And you have people who are members of Congress, who are not really brainwashed as such, but they lack the guts to stand up and denounce what they know is wrong.   And that’s what the last session of Congress did, is exactly that.

So you have to say, the leadership of the Congress is a bunch of cheating cowards.  But the people who know better say, “well, we can’t fight it, we can’t fight it.  We don’t have the power to fight it.”  And that’s where the problem comes.  And what is needed, is to get people to understand, that they have a responsibility, with an element of risk which is involved in that, and they have to take a position against those members of the Congress who have sold their asses down the street.

ASCHER:  I know we’re going to get some reports also Lyn on our activities from New York this past weekend;  and later on, I’m going to announce some the activities coming up here over Christmastime for the Manhattan Project.

Q5:  Hi this is Alvin, here in New York.  Hi Lyn, and everyone listening.  Well, we had a pretty big weekend that actually, as I’ve been reflecting upon it, really began about two weeks before, with a relatively small number of people; but for myself, the quality of the organizing was much different, much improved from that of a year ago, and it was something that I’ve felt existed within the population on the need for Handel’s Messiah.  But also emanating from those of us that were out there doing this work to help build this audience.

And so, the process of engaging in the chorus has been helping me and helping us all along, to produce that type of result.  And then the effect that it had.  People are knowing and will be reading more about the reports and the responses and the effect of what was demonstrated, in a very powerful way in the two concerts that we presented to the public.  And that’s a very, very encouraging thing for us all.

What I wanted to reference is the personal effect that I’m sure others share is, in going through this process and finishing with this weekend, as imperfect as many things were going through it, we did it.  And now that we’re confronted with the immediate crisis of how to act, I can’t express how much clearer I find myself able to both think and act, and not be confused or allow myself to be confused, where this was not the case before.

So the breakthrough was for the Manhattan Project, but I think each one of us, and I would even imagine those that have been doing this for a while, that or members for a long time,  — I won’t speak for them, but I think the effects of this are far-reaching; certainly for those of us that were for the first time onstage and really working at this process.

So, on the one hand, I would say “Oh, the timing of this crisis is terrible!”  My thinking now is that, the crisis is here and I feel ready for it, which means now, I have to organize a number of people, and activate them, so that when we go into our Congressmen’s office, we are of one force that can hopefully move these wretched folks into the action we need.

LAROUCHE:  Well, to bring to bear the issues, the real issues, in this process, you have to go back to a certain point, where there was a debate between Obama and Putin; and, Obama lost, clearly.

Now, from that point on, you’ve had an increasing receptivity on this matter.  But what’s happened is, Putin has been gaining weight, against the British and against other forces, and against other forces in Europe.  Obama was defeated, but in terms of the population, it was a symbol of that debate: Obama was defeated and discredited fully.   So he’s been operating on a lame issue ever since that time.

He’s operating on the basis of rage.  Now, Obama of course is a killer.  Obama kills people every Tuesday; he kills citizens of the United States every Tuesday. That’s his favorite sport. And people are afraid, they’re afraid to take him on.  But Putin is not afraid to take him on.

Now the fact, however, that Putin did intervene, in that show, and did defeat Obama, Obama has been weak in conviction ever since.   He had rage, he has all kinds of things, but he’s a loser.  Now, Obama is not a human being; he has a jockstrap he has in a certain area that I don’t know if he ever washes it; it’s in this little niche inside the White House.  But I think, whether he stinks or not, I think that his attitude about life stinks.  And that’s enough to take care of it.

But the point is now, what’s happened, is because of the defeat of Obama, by Putin, in that session, you’ve had a rising tendency, to revolve against Obama.  And that’s what’s happened. Now, we’ve encouraged it, and that’s what we should do.  But the problem is, the members of Congress have a problem with Obama.

But what’s the problem with Obama?  Obama kills people every Tuesday!  Obama kills innocent citizens of the United States and kills them every Tuesday.  So therefore, you have members of Congress and so forth, who by themselves, if they weren’t terrified, would not tolerate Obama; but they’re afraid that Obama, with his Tuesday kills will kill them!  Members of major press organizations in Manhattan or in the capital of this, yet some people are scared!  Just plain scared!  That they’re not going to cross Obama, because they think Obama will kill them, and they’re probably right.  Obama will kill them, sooner or later.

So, we’ve come to a point now, where we have actually had progress, in trying to deal with this thing, since that United Nations matter.   We’re succeeding.

Now, naturally, we have locations which are very significant.  Manhattan is the most important area, politically, for us in the United States.  We have some people in California, a respectively small group, and they demonstrated their commitment.  We have other people who have a commitment; mostly they’re in the minority.  But! underneath that, they wish they had the guts, to speak out.   And so, everything is on that basis.

Now, what we did, in the Saturday and Sunday events, in Manhattan and around there, what we did, is we got 1,000 people in two successive performances, on Saturday and Sunday, and this changed the course of history, in terms of that operation.  And this is going to reverberate.  The problem is, is you’ve still got  people who are terrified.  And just plain terrified.  And when the Congress comes in, and certain hound dogs in the Congress come in, and say “we’re going to bail everything out,” hmm?  And then the bail-out comes.

Now, what we’re at, now, that no citizen of the United States, legally, on the basis of the most recent seating in the Congress, would defend the United States.  None of these people in the majority, would defend the existence of the United States. They would kiss the rear end of Obama.  Even though he’s despised, and he’s in a wretched condition, and therefore, what happens, the British forces, which are generally the British Empire;  remember, the whole thing is the British Empire.  It goes all the way back to the British Empire, and the fighting, by the United States against the British Empire.

So the British Empire is still, directly or indirectly, the controlling force over the United States, except for where the citizens got their guts working up; and lately, they still don’t have much in the way of guts.  That’s the problem.

Now, what we’ve done, is, we’ve presented the evidence, that the Congress has to stop selling out.  They cannot go through this season, this year, this New Year, we cannot let that happen!We must throw this thing out of this thing, right now — before the New Year!   And this is what the issue is.

In other words, if we don’t do that, you’re going to a general war, a global general war, and the general war will come fast.  Quick and fast!  The mass killing of people, which has been going on in Canada, for example, and going on in other areas, it’s going on.

So we’re at a point, where we have to do things which are not in any way on most people’s agenda.  On the other hand, we have people who do have a conscience, but their conscience does not allow them to speak on the subject.  Our job is to give them the power to speak their conscience.  And that’s where we are.

So I think the idea of the practical exposition, on what the problems are, anybody who wants to be practical in interpreting what the problems are, is making a big mistake.  Our job is to stimulate the citizens, who are citizens, who wish to be citizens, who don’t like this, to get up on their hind legs, and kick the asses where they belong to be kicked.

And our job is to find  the people who will, — you know, this thing about the 1000 people in two successive events, service events, on Saturday and Sunday following, this has changed everything, potentially.  And our concern has to be now, to make sure that that potential victory, becomes an actualized victory.

Q6:  Hello Lyn, this is R—A—, I live in Mansfield, Massachusetts; I grew up in New Hampshire and I was born in New York, so I have a lot of touch points with a lot of folks.

Anyway, clearly there’s a lot of things that need to be improved in the country.  Since the advent of 1871, when the United States became a corporation, that was run by essentially the bank, and then in 1913 when the Federal Reserve Act was passed along with the Internal Revenue Service, which was nothing more than a collection agency for the Federal Reserve, you know, America has been at constant war.   Constant war in a central bankster cabal, they go together like Popeye and Olive Oil.

Now, if Americans want to be a constant war, it leaves the system in place.  But if they want peace, prosperity, tranquillity, they need to nationalize the bank, and have the government issue the currency, and the government issue the low-interest rate loans to stimulate the economy.

In addition, the United States has to raise tariffs and eliminate NAFTA in order to protect American industry, which during the ’80s and ’90s got outsourced to China and the Pacific Rim, and what I’m talking about is the steel, auto, computer, electronic, industries, which were primarily the circulatory system of the great American economy.

ASCHER:  Excuse me, is this getting to a question here?

Q7:  Well, here’s the question, the thing is, if you can centralize bank and have it a National Bank, you can save $1.2 trillion in interest a year, essentially, $19 trillion in debt times 6%.  That money of $1.2 trillion a year can then be cuddled into the re-industrialization of America.

ASCHER:  OK, so Lyn would you like to respond?

LAROUCHE:  Yes!  I would say it sounds loud and convincing, I suppose, to some people, but it’s not convincing to me. Because, yes, you’re just talking around certain things; but my reading of these things is different from yours.  I mean, for example, this idea, this pragmatic approach to the interpretation of the function of economy in the United States, and under popular opinion, is wrong.  It’s just plain wrong.   Because most people don’t have any understanding of what makes mankind work. That is, what the intention of mankind’s mind is.  And therefore, they come up with the solutions which he just did.  And it has the real taint of something is intended to be convincing, but from my standpoint, scientifically, it’s bunk, frankly.

Because, mankind is not an animal.  And that’s what the assumption is.  His argument is implicitly states that mankind is essentially an animal.  Now, mankind is not essentially an animal.   But unfortunately, people who are made ignorant, behave like animals, mentally and otherwise.  And the fact that they are induced to adopt that kind of view of life, puts them in the wrong direction.

What he’s laid out there will not work!  It flat [will not work!  The problem is, that we’ve stooped — Bertrand Russell is probably the key to this whole problem.  Bertrand Russell destroyed the mind of the people of the United States.  He did that through his whole career, until he died.  And when he was dying, he was still rotting.  Same thing.

And what you have to do, you have to look at what mankind is, and it’s the creative powers of mankind, the ability of a senior person to understand more  than all of the practical people, and that’s the key to the thing.  Look, we’ve got a case in California:  the young people in California are, by and large are degenerated.  Why are they degenerated?  They were degenerated, by for example the California school system!  They did it.

Same thing in Texas; you got Texas all over the place; it’s got real corruption.  All Southern states are, in the main, degenerate.  Now that doesn’t mean every citizen of these states is degenerate, but it means that those who are not degenerate, are having to defend themselves against those who are voluntarily degenerate.  And therefore, if we’re going to solve  the problem, we have to lay the case on, on what is the intelligent viewpoint as against the so-called practical viewpoint.  Practical people are stupid people!  They may not know it, but if you look at the children today, the young people throughout the United States: They’re stupid!  And worse.  They don’t have minds of their own. And therefore, what our problem is, we have to pull together, a group of people, who will provide leadership to people who are prepared to think!  Not to imitate somebody’s babbling.

And we have to pay close attention, to what are the actual, physical principles, or the effect of the principles, as laid out by people like Nicholas of Cusa, and the people like that.  And they’ve laid these things out, and they were intelligent.  The alternate views were not intelligent!  And that’s what the problem is.

The popular opinion in its more popular form, popular opinion is the degeneration of the mind of the human being.   And we’ve got to cure that, we’ve got to get rid of that stuff, otherwise we’ll not survive.   Mankind will not survive under these conditions.

What we’re on the verge of, we’re on a general, which his orchestrated by the whole British Empire system, which has always been the enemy here, and people are trying to kowtow, to gratify people who are thinking like British agents or British mentalities.  And what we have to do, is we have to go deeply, more profoundly, and not be superficial in terms of discussing these kinds of matters.

We’ve got to get to the root of the thing, and Einstein of course is the typical person, who was actually a genius, and most of the other leading scientists were not geniuses; some of them were competent, but they were not geniuses.  And so, this kind of characteristic, you have to be more precise on this thing.  You may have good intentions, but you’ve got to get good results, too.

Q8:  Hi, this is S— from Manhattan.  And I was so happy to be part of the concert Saturday and Sunday.  It was so uplifting, that it gave a new purpose to my life, a new direction.  I’m 72 and I can still sort of sing!

My question is financial:  I’m afraid of the bail-ins.  I can’t take a certain amount of money and carry it home, but I can convert to silver coin or gold coin, and that’s all I have to live on.  I sold the family home, which broke my heart, but  — how fast do I have, to make a move, to convert the little bit of money that I did get from the sale of my home, into a form that will retain its value even if the whole system falls down? That I’ll be able to buy my food and pay my rent and all the activities of daily living.

I have a list of names to call, you know, to kick the behinds of Congress and the Senate.  But you know, they hang up the phone and they forget about you.

I’m worried about the little bit of money I have on which to survive.  And what would you do?  What would you do, sir?  How do you protect the money?  Now if I open a safety deposit box, can they still steal that money in a safety deposit box? What would you do?

LAROUCHE:  OK, fine.  You’ve got two areas.  First of all, you’ve got the economic system that runs the United States right now.  Now that’s a problem that you’ve to deal with.  It’s not easy to deal with, but it has to be done.  Now, that’s the only way you’re going to get justice.  And what you’re talking about is what I would understand as justice.  And you’re talking about being deprived or in anxiety with respect to the prospects of justice.

Now, what we’ve had, with these things that happened on Saturday and Sunday, which were musical assemblies which added up to attended of 1,000 people, both in  Manhattan and earlier in Brooklyn.   So, this gives you an idea of exactly what is possible.  Now the fact that this thing happened, it means that this has not happened in the United States for a long time.  It has not happened.  But suddenly we have, we’ve organized assemblies of musicians and audiences in the order of magnitude of 1,000 persons total.  Now that is something new.  That is something which has not happened beforehand.

So therefore, if we change that tune, shall we say, if we do that, then you have the people who feel that they’re cast aside, from the prospect of survival, they have a reason to be confident, because their interest and what they understand, will inspire other people in the population to spread this kind of approach, and that’s the only way you win.

When you’re in that kind of situation, like Manhattan is now, among popular masses, they don’t have a chance!  They live on the edge of disaster, one way or the other. If you create a social process, a mass social process which increases its authority, then that problem begins to disappear, and therefore, that’s what we have to do.  We have to take all those kinds of factors which correspond to what I just described, and that’s the only solution; that’s the only thing.  You cannot be an isolated person, or a person isolated in the community; that doesn’t work, you don’t have enough fight.  When you get a 1,000 people in two successive assemblies, of audience and performers, and it’s a beautiful job like that, now!now, you represent something.   And what she’s saying, really requires that; it requires the participation, in the body of people, who feel that they’re part of that same process.  And that process will give them power.

Q9:  I live in the country in  Rhode Island, and I have a connection to my little local town representative that connects my  and everybody; and I just want to know that that’s my best connection.  Because if I go up to see my representatives — the state of Rhode Island is very corrupt —  and if I go up to see them in their offices, or at their houses or whatever, like that, I’m likely to end up in jail.  And then released, of course, with no charges.

But my point is, how can I get my message across, in full, outside of what I hear from you guys?  I mean, I meet the elitist people in my work, and I sort of scare them, or they go “Wow,” with what I say, all coming from the larouche.com group.  And just this week, a couple that retired from teaching high school and now work with the University of Rhode Island, hit my with a question, and just looked at ’em and said, flatly, “shut down Wall Street, reinstall Glass-Steagall, and let’s go with it from there, and we’re going to have to make adjustments, and to make things work from that day forward.”  And I said, “that’s what, I believe it was Teddy Roosevelt that did that.”  And I astounded them,  and now they’re doing research and working on it.

OK, so I’m reaching some of my intelligent customers.  But, how can I be more effective?

LAROUCHE:  Just what we’re doing.  What we did in New York, the New York City areas on Saturday, and in Manhattan afterward. And this process, if continued, will change the tempo.  Just sitting around and waiting and for something to harvest, like you’re waiting for a chicken to lay an egg, that does not really work.  You have to get more chickens to do more egg laying, and this is my progressive thing.

No, we’re in a position, if we can bring people more closer together, on these kinds of issues, you find out you can change things.  And I think the Manhattan  — I spent a lot of effort since October of last year, on building up an organization based on Manhattan.  Other things don’t work.  New Jersey?  That’s sort of, off and on.  Leesburg?  Ohhh!!  Almost hopeless.  And Texas, doubtful.

But so therefore, you actually have to bring into play, forces which are moving ahead in the right direction.  And you find that the authority that they carry by the increase of their authority… for example right now, right now, you had a bunch of people in the Congress, and they sold out.  Hmm?  They sold out because they were intimidated.  And the muscle came down on them and said, “No, you’re shut down.  We’re going to wipe out everything. At the beginning of next year, you’re not going to have anything.  Everything is going to be cancelled.”  And that’s fact right now!  Right now, on the first day and second day of the next year, you’re going to find, under the present conditions, a general collapse of the people of the United States.  and it’s going to get excessively worse.  Hmm?

So therefore, our role is to understand what the forces are that we have to bring into play, tocreate an increase of the forces, which are qualified to change the thing.  And that’s  the problem.  What we’re doing now, yeah, we have the members of Congress; well, most of the members of Congress are gutless wonders.  And a lot of the other members of the Congress, are intimidated by the gutless wonders.  And if you can’t get something in motion, and I would say, what happened in these two things on Saturday and Sunday, in the most recent events, and that probably is worth more than anything else.

I mean, that’s the principle which will work.  Because people find themselves with this, their voices are now beautiful, at least the singers are beautiful; and others are there.  So you’ve changed the environment.  And you have to change the environment; it’s not building up on one person after another person after another person, it’s changing the environment. Because most people are operating on an understanding of mankind, which is not right.  It’s incompetent.  You have to give them the courage, to recognize that there is another way, which is necessary, whereas the old one that they thought was practical, is not.  And that’s where the problem lies.

If you can’t inspire people, to find in themselves or in their circles of friends, they can’t find something in themselves, which gives them a sense of potency, you can’t win. So therefore, the primary thing is, can you supply a real meaning of potency to people around you?

ASCHER:  Let me just announce for those on the phone, in terms of the ongoing Manhattan Project, I’ve been supplied the follow schedule, which is that it will be continuing tomorrow … on Saturday, our regular Town Meeting with Lyndon LaRouche will occur between 2 and 5, and after that there will be a candlelight vigil and singing at the Lincoln Center in Manhattan.

Q10:  Hello Lyn, this is W—B— in Denver.  And what I was wondering about was, in this oncoming financial crisis, leading to the destruction of economies, do the BRICS nations have any sort of cushion perhaps to soften the blow, so to speak, from this spreading disaster?

LAROUCHE:  Well, what we’re doing, if we don’t, as of this weekend,  — and it’s this weekend, after what we’ve done in terms of Manhattan both on the Saturday and Sunday events where we had 1,000 people total, in these events, you don’t have much of a chance.  And if you’re going to talk about technologies and things, and how this is going to work, and how this will or will not work, it’s nonsense; it doesn’t work.

What you have to do, above all, you have to change attitude of a growing part of the population!  And why are they being cheated?  Well, in the main, it’s the fact that they are not being very practical;  what they call “being practical” is not being practical!  They’re trying to muscle in on something and exploit an opportunity which they think is an opportunity;  but mankind is not a collection of animals.  It’s not a zoo!  Mankind is a species, which as a whole, that is the overall process, moves the population.  It is not this individual or a few individuals, it’s this process.  And when people are convinced, to adopt a process which is a viable one, or an improvement of things, it works.

When they say, you’re trying to muscle in on some deal and make a handful of your friends are going to make a deal and you’re going to get a successful operation, that is bunk! Society doesn’t work that way.

Q11: [internet]  Lyn, I just got a question from B— in Fair Oaks, California.  Here is his question:  “Mr. LaRouche, I just returned from visiting the Federal Building in Sacramento, California, where I met with the office of Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, urging her to move the Glass-Steagall bill through right away.  My question may be a difficult one to answer, but, how much time is there left, before we must absolutely pass Glass-Steagall?”

LAROUCHE:  We don’t have any lapse of time available to us. We have to do it immediately, and can do it effectively, immediately.  And the problem is, if you do that in the proper way, then you will actually overrun the conventional attitudes now.

People don’t have the guts to stand up and look at the other guy in the eye, and say, “Hey, hey, Joe.  You’re bullshitting aren’t you?  Why don’t you come around and be honest?”  And that’s the only way to do it.

What do you think’s wrong with these members of Congress? Well, some of these members of Congress are Plump or Dunk or whatever he is — or, Bump, I guess is the better term — and this thing is not really of any importance.  It’s garbage; we know him, well.  He was an associate of the FBI; he wasn’t a member of the FBI, he was an associate of it, and he was an opportunist and he got payoffs and he got little generosities, and he got all kinds of things; and he would go around, and start a deal.  Look at all these “Bump” people, that fill all these skyscrapers.  What they doing?  They’re just dirtying up the sky, scratching up the sky!   But he doesn’t mean anything.  But he’s around and he’s used as an agent, and he’s not worth anything.

And Hillary herself has lost any asset that she’s ever had and she quit that because she capitulated to Obama.  And she’s an Obama agent.  And Obama is an agent of British Empire.  So, that’s where it goes.

So therefore, people have to stand up for themselves on the basis of principle, not on “my gimmicks” but on what the principle is that they want to defend.  And that’s the only solution.  And I think we were doing it successfully in Manhattan during Saturday and Sunday.  I think that’s the right thing.  And the question, we have to sustain it.  That’s the approach you want to take.

Q12:  Hi Lyn, this is T—W— from Lake Arrowhead, California.  I’m calling in with a sort of a report, because I’m closely located next to where the San Bernardino shooting incident took place.  I’ll try to make a long story short:  when it was happening, I happened to be in an auto shop, where I live in Lake Arrowhead, and the billing lady there, told me that she had just heard on the police radio that the husband of her friend was one of the ones killed.  And so, I said, “What’s her name?” and she said it’s Renée Wetzel.  So I then looked up in the paper, and the man that was killed was named Mike Wetzel and he’s a resident of Lake Arrowhead where I live.

So, I decided I had to go to his memorial service, which was last Saturday, and it was a very beautiful event.  It was in a large gymnasium, there were 1,000 people there and many people gave moving memorial addresses; he was very well known and very much loved in the Lake Arrowhead community. He had six children who were all there, a wife and an ex-wife, his father was there, three of co-workers were there, two ministers that have known him from childhood; they all gave beautiful memorial addresses.  It was just a very moving ceremony.

And I’m sitting and I didn’t actually know Mike, but I’m thinking to myself, “Gosh if only these people could possibly understand what was really the cause of Michael’s death,” but it wasn’t really these FBI-concocted terrorists, the two people that supposedly were the shooters; one of them was a normal guy with a job at the Inland center, with no history of anything strange; they were a couple, they had a baby.  The baby was dropped off at her mother’s house so she could grab a couple of Kalashnikovs and go shoot up the place, supposedly, you know?

Well, the story doesn’t add up, it doesn’t make sense in any way; I’ve come to the conclusion that that couple couldn’t have had anything to do with it.  They were just patsies, who are cultivated for the purpose by the FBI.  And the actual killings, I believe were done by some hired killers.  I don’t believe it was actually them that did it.

But you know, and one thing I did, afterward I wanted to confirm some of this, so yesterday I called a local newspaper, the San Bernardino Sun, and I said: “Look, there were supposedly 100 people in that room, 14 of them were killed.  That leaves 86 eyewitnesses.  Now, I would like to know why we have not seen a single interview, with any of those eyewitnesses, since the day that the killings took place?  There were two interviews on that day, and those two interviews, both witnesses indicated there were three, white male shooters.”

So I called the reporter and said, “why haven’t there been any interviews with eyewitnesses?  Wouldn’t that be a huge scoop? Why are you guy out there interviewing people, and why don’t I see anything?”  So then he starts giving me excuses.  Like he said, “we don’t want to traumatize the victims, we have to give them some time and so on, before we disturb them.”  That was the first thing.  And I kind of scoffed at that, I said, “those 86 witnesses, most of them were unharmed and I’m sure lots of them would like to tell their stories, so there ought to be investigative journalists all over the place trying to interview them, on TV, newspapers, everywhere.  And there hasn’t been a single interview?  Why? Why haven’t you been out there?”

And so the reporter basically told me, “we can’t interview those witnesses because they might say something that would contradict the FBI’s story.  And we can’t do that, we can’t question the FBI.  That is not allowed.”  And I sort of had an insight into how this whole thing works, like there is this total atmosphere of intimidation, and one thing you don’t do is question the authority of the FBI or suggest for one second that what they’re saying might not be true!  That is not allowed.  And everybody knows that, it’s like this undercover of fear. There’s things that you can’t say; while in some sense, it’s unconscious fear, you know, it’s like they don’t even know it, but they just don’t go there.  It’s like an unconscious inhibition, let’s say, has been put into them.  And so, that’s I think how this whole atmosphere of terror and intimidation is being created.

So that’s why I could…

LAROUCHE:  It’s being created, yes.  But it’s being created not by the FBI, it’s being created by Obama personally.  You follow the press coverage on that thing:  Obama was the one who put the lid suppressing that, suppressing the story.

Now, the truth was, there were a lot of other untruths around this whole thing.  Now, these people were recruited, they were Saudi connections, Saudi influence.  It was the same factor, and the same ratios, of events were the same thing that happened in France, in the assassinations there in France.  And this is run by the Saudis; it’s run by things like the Saudis which Obama works for.  Obama is part of that, but Obama actually works for the British, the British Monarchy.  The British Monarchy created this whole thing.  And if you ever looked into 9/11, and who did what in 9/11 — and I was an expert in this area, with a friend of mine and some others — and that’s what the whole story is.

Why did the Congress not deal with the 9/11 case?  Why’d they put the lid on it?  That’s where the problem lies.  Obama? Obama’s on the wrong side; he’s not an American, he’s something else.  He’s like his stepfather, has the same kind of disease that his stepfather had, he was a man who kills people.  Obama kills people, every Tuesday, he kills innocent people!  And you have even important people who have important positions, they have been threatened.  They will not speak up; they will not tell the truth.

So you’ve got a nation of gutless wonders!  Now it’s not all the fact that they’re gutless wonders, it’s the point is, they don’t see any way that they can survive under these conditions. And there’s nobody up there, there’s no FBI up there, who’s doing very much in terms of defending the citizens of the United States; or defending any other part of the planet.

The whole thing comes down, from the British Empire, the British system!  That’s what’s been going on all along.  And you get different versions of it, you get different flavors of it, so forth, but it’s all the same thing:  Without the British Empire and what it represents, and you take 9/11:  Why was 9/11 never exposed, publicly?  Never!  Why?  Because they had a payoff, with the British and the Saudis; and the Saudis did it.

The Saudis are the ones who actually, personally, sank the towers in Manhattan.  It was two guys who captured each plane, they went up around that area, around the Towers up there; they brought them down.  A similar thing was done in Washington, itself, and other things like that.

And what happened?  The damned Congress, as a whole, as a body, has refused to tell the facts, about how the citizens of Manhattan were killed!  And it was done by the Saudis, it was done by a mass of Saudis. Remember:  Everything was shut down, under the Bush family, everything was shut down.  And the Saudi families who were guilty in this process, part of the team, woke, safely walked out of the United States, and were sent back to Saudi Arabia.  And many of these people were the active agents who did the killing!

And the leading interests in Saudi Arabia, actually orchestrated the killing.  Who did it?  It was the British Empire that did, and it was done under the rate of oil speculation.  And that’s how Saudi Arabia got powerful, because the British protected them, as the United States, under Bush and Obama, defended them.

So if you want to find a complaint there, look at Bush, the Bush family, and look at Obama, and then trace it all back from there.  That gets to the core of why you get this kind of a sense of experience of what’s going on.  Yes, the FBI is involved in this kind of thing, but they’re only subordinate agents when they do that.

The point was, it’s done by the British Queen and the British interests.  And the British interests and the Saudis and Obama are all the same thing.  So get the facts right and you’ll find out the solutions can become transparent.

By the way, I did a personal investigation on this thing; Jeff Steinberg came in on the same operation, but in parallel. Jeff and I had worked together; I was working for Ronald Reagan at that point, and Jeff had followed in on what I was doing at that point.  So Jeff and I had this relationship with that thing, we both knew the story about Saudis, how the Saudi thing was done.  We were expert in it; I independently I worked with these British agents who were political agents who were actually investigating this problem; and most of them got killed, or something similar happened to them.

But I’m a known factor in this thing, I’m an expert in this thing.  And there’s no doubt about it; and any justice means that anybody who is supporting Obama, now, is an agent of the enemy of the United States.  And that’s the thing.  Because you make the comment that everything you say is plausible to me, as the fact, but the secret body of evidence is what you didn’t get into.  But what you were doing, what your investigation, your appreciation is an accurate one except it doesn’t go far enough because you didn’t have any rules to follow it adequately.

Q13:  Good evening, Mr. LaRouche, this is P— from Connecticut.  I agree with Alvin:  After enjoying the wonderful concert of Handel’s Messiah I felt so inspired by this. I guess it was the same way that Thomas Paine’s letter to George Washington, and that George Washington read it to his men, Dec. 23rd of 1776:  Well, I have no doubts or fear to take this fight with the people to the Capitol and bring in Glass-Steagall.  And this is my declaration.

LAROUCHE:  It’s a good one.  [laughter]

Q14:  Yes, this time I’m in Long Island.  Steinmetz and I started having the argument, [inaudible 1:07:22.6] couldn’t come here.  But yes, he could come here.  But we have to go out and be like Roosevelt, when there is no Roosevelt.  We have an anti-Roosevelt in the White House.  How are we going to move so fast?

LAROUCHE:  Well, it’s a question of how many people have got guts?  And who’s got the guts to understand things and look at things honestly.  Because you know the typical American is generally a liar.  Now it’s not that they like to tell lies, though some of them do.  In fact, many of them do.  But as a generality, no; the fact is, they’re ignorant.

Now, the ignorance is not necessarily honest ignorance; like the member of the Congress who supported a piece of legislation, which swindles every citizen in the United States of their life savings. And it’s because these members of the Congress were gutless, or worse, that that legislation was shoved through.  And if we don’t change that now, you’re all dead, sooner or later. And it’s all because of your gutlessness, by a few of you who wouldn’t take action, through the Presidency and the Congress, and wouldn’t present the truth in law.

So therefore, it’s the liars, the cheats and liars who didn’t tell the truth, about that matter of legislation:  They are the guilty parties.  And they are shameful, and what they need their little rumps kicked, by a big shoe, from the rear. That’s the best way:  It’s uplifting.  The most uplifting:  Kick ’em in the rear end and that’s the most uplifting way you can deal with problems.

But no, that’s the problem.  These kinds of cowards, they’re implicitly treasonous, because they knew what they did.  And the other people who gave in, gave in because they were intimidated. Now you’ve got to have a citizenry with guts, and I don’t know if we can say we have one.

ASCHER:  Lyn, are you referring there to the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act and the bail-in provisions?

LAROUCHE:  Absolutely, that is a genocidal policy.  It’s mass murder, and anybody who supported that legislation, is guilty of mass murder, criminal activity.  And the only way they can do that is cancel their vote on that issue.  And it was wrong, it was a crime, it shouldn’t have happened.

ASCHER:  And of course this is the same provision that’s going into effect already in Europe and officially on Jan. 1st in Europe as well.

LAROUCHE: This is the same thing which came out of the Pope, the official Pope.  The Pope was a guy who was used as a stooge, to bring this about.  He’s the one that did that.  Now the Pope himself probably is not the author of this thing, but the Pope was the guilty party.  He was the criminal in the case.  Now he may be mentally — I would grant him the possibility he may be just insane, and doesn’t know any better.  And the effect is, that  the Pope is a criminal in his behavior, a mass criminal.

And everything that this crew does, because it was a British operation, entirely a British operation, nothing else.  So if you want to do something, you have to go in and take the Royal Family and give them a Royal outcome.

ASCHER:  This is the Pope and the Green agenda and his relationship to Schellnhuber.

LAROUCHE:  Absolutely.  But the point is, the Pope is not insane.  He’s just a corrupt coward, and he doesn’t deserve to be called the Pope.  We’ll call him the Pump.

Oh, he’s evil, the guy who would do this, the only excuse that he could have for the crimes that he’s committed, is to say he was terrified.  This Pope has got to be removed from office. But we’ve got to get the whole British Royal Family up there at the same time.

Q15:  Hi, this is Jessica from Brooklyn, New York.

LAROUCHE:  Oh good!  How do you do?

Q15:  OK!  I was part of the fantastic, wonderful presentation of Handel’s Messiah on Saturday and Sunday.  I was particularly enthralled with the Saturday performance because it was Brooklyn.  [LaRouche laughs] But the Sunday performance was a little different, but it was good, too.  And it was interesting that the Saturday performance had a lot of families; the community was really rallied to come out to that church and support their church, and our singing.  And the children’s faces — I just remember looking at the children and seeing them watching the orchestra play, and how it was just so enlightening to them; and of course, that passed on to their parents, not the other way around.

So that’s one thing I wanted to say; it was just very uplifting and like you said, there’s nothing like that type of thing to make us understand that we are human beings and we have this creative power, in us, and that we can spread that idea of creativity in human beings and the worth of your life, what you’re living for, to other people.

And with that said, I was also thinking about something else:  There have been decisive points in history, and these decisive points have made people decide that it’s all or nothing, that, I get fearful, too; I’m listening to people on the call, and people are trying to figure out, “Should I store water? Should I take my money out of the bank, and have something on hand?  Should I quickly go and buy up a bunch of gold coins, because I’ll have to barter with that, when the banks crash?  I have to have some gold coins on hand or some silver or something, in case the money is worthless, even if you do manage to get it out of the bank before the doors close?”  That kind of thing.

And then, I thought, since this concert happened, I thought about the decisive points in history and it gets to me, where I have to I have to decide, what kind of thing can I do, to implement my best efforts?  Now there’s calling Congress people; there’s talking to the news stations, the TV stations, social media; there’s radio, unions, there a union meeting coming for me, where I intend to bash them about Glass-Steagall and rally the members to the point of calling their congressmen — again — calling the offices; somebody’s going to be there, and forcing them to come back into session and pass Glass-Steagall.

So I think we all have to think about what we can do to implement our best efforts to not fail at this.  Because like these different times, there’s Joan of Arc; there’s the crossing of the Delaware; there’s the Gettysburg battle;  there’s landing at Normandy in World War II; there’s Iwo Jima; there’s these decisive points where you cannot lose.  It’s not even a matter of what should I do if this happens?  It’s that, we can’t lose. This is something that has to be done.

I think when Washington crossed the Delaware, he knew that this was something that they had to succeed at.  And that’s what I’m starting to come to, especially since this concert.  So we have to implement our best effort, whatever that effort is. I’m not good at social media, and I tend to shy away from that.  But I’m good at Congress, I’m good at calling them; I’m good at union meetings; I’m good at interventions, where I call these people on the carpet. Those kinds of things I’m good at.  I’m good at leafletting, I’m good at talking to people on the street.  So those kinds of things are what we have to really think about.

And my question to you, Mr. LaRouche is, which one of these things do you think — or maybe two or three things — do you think we should all put our best efforts into?  Is it trying to get the Congress back into session?  Or are all these things, like I’m saying, something that we should do according to what we do can best as an individual?

LAROUCHE:  You have to go to President Gen. George Washington.  George Washington a decision, a very tough decision. He had the British agents and their accompaniment were celebrating in New Jersey.  And so he moved all of his forces, and under most difficult conditions; under wet conditions and very dangerous conditions, and what he did is he wiped out the British and their complement, and that was what made the United States’ existence a possibility.  It was George Washington’s decision, under absolutely adverse conditions, with the British and their minions, assumed that they were celebrating, and Washington moved in and took them all over: and that’s how the United States was created.

Q16:  This is C— from Santa Rosa, California.  Lyn, in converting each Congressman or people that I try to organize, I have come out front and said, “What’s really at the root is that you’re afraid.  Your cynicism or your pessimism is you’re afraid. You’re maybe directly afraid of Obama, or afraid of Big Brother or whatever.”  And I got some very interesting reactions off that, and I want to go into that, because what I found is, my way out, which is not a technique or anything, is that I found that referencing back to what I asked you last week is I have to develop myself, culturally, intellectually, and that’s the thing that gives one strength. You have to do your reading, you have to try to understand music, which I’m still trying to struggle with understand the role of music.  I listen to it, but there’s things about it I don’t understand.

So I want you to talk about this thing that the fears that these Congress people, and the fears that the common people out here that we’re organizing are essentially the same. So, could you take it from there?

LAROUCHE:  OK, let’s take the George Washington case, for example, because that’s very pertinent.  Washington made a move, which all his opponents at that time, said would never happen. And the fact that he did that, that he crossed the Delaware, he landed on the other shore, and took the enemy in hand before the enemy could really mobilize its own forces; if he hadn’t done that, we would never have had the United States!  And the same thing is what  you’re talking about now.

There is a point in history, a point in the current of history, at which something can happen, and a solution will come only because some people have undertaken to follow through on something that other people said “oh, that would never happen”; and that’s what it is.  It’s just like that.

See because mankind is not just a simple human being, the idea of mankind and the individual human being is rubbish, actually, it doesn’t function.  Because mankind doesn’t function that way.  Only very rare people will function in that direction, very, very rare, and they’re almost named in history against all the others of the same time.  And therefore, the problem that we have to face is the fact that, do we have the ability, to recognize the opportunity which is in correspondence to what Franklin would have done, what George Washington did.

And very few people do that.  Because they don’t do it on the basis of being practical.  They do it on the basis of knowing that mankind requires this to be accomplished, and very few people have that view.  They say “well, that’s not practical.”  I don’t give a damn about what who thinks is practical!  I never did.  I’d have been a fool if I ever did.

And therefore I often do things like that, you know, not just George Washington’s things, but I will do that; I have don’t it often, I’ve led the charge, often, on these kinds of things. Because  ithas to be done!  People say “No, no, that won’t work, that won’t work.  You can’t do that, you can’t do that.” I say, “You’re wrong.  I’m going to do it.”  [laughs]  And that’s the way I operate, and that’s the right way to operate: George Washington’s way.

ASCHER:  Well, just to reiterate, there’s available on the larouchepac website, a statement“Emergency Christmas Eve Message: January 1st Is Doomsday! Only an FDR Action Can Save You.”  I’ve already announced there will be distributions of this in Manhattan tomorrow; a town meeting [with LaRouche] on Saturday.  Others around the country will be getting this out widely.

Secondly, the recording of the Messiah performance is going to be available on the Schiller Institute website, probably tomorrow.  They’ve been working on the audio file, but for those of you want to hear the impact this had, it will be up on the website some time soon, so stay tuned to the www.schillerinstitute.org website, particularly under the Manhattan Project link and you should be able to find that performance available

Lyn, did you have any final remarks that you wanted to conclude this evening with?

LAROUCHE:  I think I want to put the whole thing into a package.  Let’s hope that would cumulatively make a package which would be useful for people.  Let them decide themselves on that one.

ASCHER:  All right, and thank you very much.  And we will be next Wednesday, Dec. 30, the day before New Year’s Eve.  Thank you very much Lyn.




Leder, 25. december 2015:
SØRG FOR, AT DER BLIVER ET NYTÅR:
DUMP OBAMA OG WALL STREET!

I den sammenbrudsproces, der allerede er i gang, af hele det døde, transatlantiske finanssystem, ser vi nu time for time nye tilfælde af insolvens og stormløb for udtræk, alt imens en vifte af »officielle« regler træder i kraft den 1. januar, som vil bære atombrændsel til bålet. Om denne proces sagde Lyndon LaRouche i sidste uge, »Det, der vil ske, er, at der bliver en acceleration af krisen.« Han sagde: »Accelerationsraten – processens selv-acceleration – er sådan, at, inden for en uge, kunne det hele være udslettet. Det er en sådan situation, vi er i.«

Vi står ved et punkt, hvor det er ’do-or-die’ – knald eller fald – denne Jul: enten fremtvinger vi en handling for genindførelsen af Glass-Steagall og de relaterede nødforanstaltninger, eller også får vi massehelvede og forbandelse.

Wall Street Journal præsenterede i går en oversigt af de seneste opdateringer om den finansielle disintegration ved at opremse navnene på de hedgefonde, der er bukket under, og ved også at dække status for flere mere fremtrædende selskaber, der nominelt set stadig er aktive, men kun ved at gennemtvinge »betaling i afdrag« til de spekulantkunder, der ønsker at få deres penge. For eksempel forventes en enhed under det berygtede Carlyle Group LP, Claren Road Asset Management, pr. den 1. januar at have en sum af 1,25 mia. dollar under deres forvaltning, hvilket er langt under de 8,5 mia. dollar, de havde for kun 15 måneder siden, før deres kunde-investorer begynde at forlange masseudbetalinger i løbet af 2015. Men eftersom Claren Road-operationen har gennemtvunget en politik med »betaling i afdrag« over seks måneder, så dækker disse 1,25 mia. dollar ved årsafslutningen ikke engang de udestående krav om afdrag for tredje og fjerde kvartal 2015. Den samme situation gør sig gældende for mange andre af Wall Streets spekulationshuse, store så vel som små fisk.

Sjoverne er bankerot! Nogle af udtrækkene og udsalgene, der finder sted, skyldes, udover et stormløb mod udgangen, forsøg på at honorere kontrakter og de sædvanlige krav om kontantreserver, men det markerer, at systemet er færdigt. Så kommer vi til 1. januar og mange nye punkter for en detonering.

I Den europæiske Union træder nye regler for bail-in i kraft på denne dato (1. jan.) efter at politikken allerede er blevet gennemført i Cypern, Italien, Portugal, Spanien og andre steder, med dræbende konsekvenser. Denne EU-forholdsregels officielle navn er Artikel 55, med titlen BRRD (Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive)(’direktivet for bank-genrejsning og bankopløsning’).

I Eurasien træder Ukraines frie handelsaftale med EU i kraft den 1. jan. Samtidig var der et sammenbrud i drøftelserne den 21. dec. mellem Rusland, Ukraine og EU om, hvordan man skulle gå videre. »Ukraine er på vej ned«, bemærkede LaRouche. De kan ikke komme nogen vegne.

I Amerika er Puerto Rico på vej mod betalingsstandsning den 1. januar, med Washington, D.C., der ikke har taget skridt til nogen handling i den forbindelse.

Generelt set vil tredje del af Baselaftalerne træde i kraft den 1. januar. Det, som 2016 Basel III-reglerne gør, er, at de beordrer banker til at sælge massive mængder af dødelige bail-in-obligationer; med andre ord, så skal banker udstede »rottegift« til bankkunder og investorer. Det går under betegnelserne »med lang løbetid« eller »absorbering af tab«, eller mere elegant, obligationer »i overensstemmelse med Basel III«.

Læg hertil Obama/Londons fremstød for krig, og konsekvenserne af at tillade dette vanvid at fortsætte en dag mere er dødbringende. LaRouche indkalder til en »mobilisering af de villige« – af dem, der er villige til at se problemet, af dem, der er villige til at handle.