I kølvandet på den banebry-dende pressekonference med Helga Zepp-LaRouche og fhv. Senator og præsidentkandidat Mike Gravel må amerikanerne stille sig selv det spørgsmål: kendsgerningerne er fremlagt, den presserende virkelighed står klart, hvordan vil du agere som en aktør på menneskehedens historiske scene for at konfron-tere denne store prøve på menneskets moralske evne til at overleve?
English Transcript
MATTHEW OGDEN: It’s October 30, 2015. My name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us for our regular weekly Friday evening broadcast here from larouchepac.com. I’m joined in the studio tonight by Jeffrey Steinberg of Executive Intelligence Review; and the two of us did have an opportunity to have an extensive meeting with both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche, during which we had the opportunity to discuss at length the contents of tonight’s broadcast.
Now, we’re going to begin tonight’s proceedings with a short, condensed excerpt of the video of a quite extraordinary and ground-breaking event which occurred earlier this week; on Tuesday, to be precise. This was the really quite historic press conference that was held at the National Press Club, sponsored by Executive Intelligence Review; featuring Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute and the chair of the German Büso Party, as well as former Democratic Senator from Alaska Mike Gravel, who was also a candidate for the United States Presidency in 2008. Senator Gravel, of course, is famous for his incredibly courageous actions in June of 1971, in reading the so-called “Pentagon Papers” concerning the true extent of US military operations in Vietnam and in neighboring countries into the Congressional Record; thus releasing the contents of this heretofore priorly [sic] classified report to the US public. And catalyzing a very dramatic backlash among the American people against the policies of the Nixon administration and the continuation of the Vietnam War at that time. Much more will be said in detail by Jeff Steinberg concerning this historic action by Senator Gravel after we see this video excerpt; and Jeff, I know, will elaborate on its direct implications for today.
But let me use the example of Senator Gravel before we view this excerpt here tonight; both the example of what Senator Gravel did at that time, but also the example of what you will see he continues to do today to make a point which will be hopefully thematic over the course of this show. The point being, for those of you who are viewing this broadcast here tonight, the persistent question that you must ask is: What does this imply for me? The facts have been presented, the case has been made, the evidence has been thoroughly exposed; none of these are in question. The question, however, will remain — What will the American people do to respond? How will you react to that which is shown to you here tonight? What must we do, collectively, to pull this story off of the television screen and to put these facts that will have been presented here tonight into action, to change the course of history? What sort of political activism, what sort of intellectual leadership, what sort of courage will be required to do justice to this moment of human history that we now find ourselves in? Senator Gravel, of course, is an outstanding example of this sort of courage; but more of us are now required to be like him, and to be like Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, as you will also see here tonight. As Mr. LaRouche emphasized during our discussion with him, and as he has emphasized repeatedly before, just as in the Classical Shakespearean theater, the most important individual in the room is not any of the actors who are on stage; but rather, that member of the audience for whom the play is being performed. We ask you, therefore, to indulge us here tonight as you become our audience in this great historical drama which is about to unfold before you. So, without further ado, let me present to you the excerpt of this week’s press conference with Helga Zepp-LaRouche and Senator Gravel.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Thank you.
Well, let me welcome all of you. I think most people in the world right now are aware that we are really experiencing a civilizational crisis, not only a financial crisis. Many military crises around the world, wars, terrorism, hunger, refugees, it’s just an enormous amount of simultaneous crises. And while all of these individual crises have local causes, which trigger them and cause them, I think it’s fair to say that the underlying cause of the strategic, civilizational crisis, is the fact that trans-Atlantic financial system is hopelessly bankrupt. And it is that dynamic which is behind the war danger, which is behind local crises, and which is the biggest threat to the world right now.
So, an instant collapse into chaos is really the danger we are talking about. Now, there is a remedy to that. The remedy is to introduce Glass-Steagall, the banking separation law which was introduced in 1933 by Franklin D. Roosevelt, in response to the economic crisis of the early ’30s, and there are several motions in the U.S. Congress and in the Senate — there is actually legislation with the exact, same text in the Congress and the Senate. So if the political will could be mobilized, that problem could be solved. But it has to be solved. There is no other way than to shut down the casino economy of the Wall Street.
So now we are hit with an additional problem: the refugee crisis in Europe. Now, I know people in America think this is very far away, but I tell you, this is becoming a key strategic factor, also affecting the United States.
It is now publicly debated in Europe, that this refugee crisis was caused by U.S. and British wars in the Middle East, by a policy of regime change, by a policy of playing the so-called “Islamic card” going back to Brzezinski in 1975, when he initiated this policy; and then having a policy of always supporting the “good rebels,” training them, only to see that the good rebels join the terrorists; then you have to make a new war against the terrorists, then you have to bet on the “good rebels,” and so forth and so on!
This has now led to a situation where basically millions of people are trying to get into Europe. Germany probably will have, minimum, 1 million this year. The UN Human Rights report says that there are presently 60 million in flight right now. So we’re not talking about a temporary refugee crisis. We’re talking about a large migration of people running away from war, hunger, epidemics, mainly from Southwest Asia, but also to a certain extent from Africa.
And it is very clear, this will not stop! This will not stop, and you see right now the effect: The EU has completely failed. They ignored this problem since many years, because they left Italy and Greece completely alone for years; there were hundreds of people drowning in the Mediterranean for years! Some of them arriving in Lampedusa in Italy, and the EU said, “that’s an Italian problem.” The same with Greece.
But now with the recent developments in Syria, this is really exploding and you see the pictures. And the pictures are horrible! There is no unity in Europe; there is no solidarity, there is no Europe. It now turns out that something, which was transformed into an interest group for the banks — namely, the EU after the Maastricht Treaty — that you cannot pretend to have “union,” which is bound together by nothing other than the defense of the banks and the defense of the high-speculation system.
And the biggest threat right now is the maintenance of the present financial policies of Wall Street, the City of London, the ECB, which is reflected by the finance minister Schäuble, who says “We must protect the so-called `black zero’, which is a synonym for balanced budgets, which is the idea that no matter how many expenses you have to spend for the refugees, the budget must remain balanced, and that means you have to cut in other areas, like social expenditures, kindergarten, schools, health system; and naturally, for the people who are in a precarious economic situation already, like the unemployed, like the people who have a low but precarious income, they feel threatened. And therefore, Schäuble’s “black zero” fuels the kind of xenophobic reactions which you have heard about, that already this year 500 housing projects for the refugees have been attacked or burned down, and right-wing violence is on the increase.
You see now that President Putin was absolutely when he said several months ago, or even a year ago, that the big mistake of the West to support Nazis in Ukraine, in the form of the Right Sector, has the danger that this Nazism is spreading to other European countries.
So the only solution is, obviously, to change the economic policy, to stop what is high-risk speculation for the United States on Wall Street; to stop what is the “black zero” policy of Schäuble in Europe. And, fortunately, there is an alternative.
Now, very little known, because the Western media in Europe and the United States are generally not reporting it, or if they report it, they misrepresent it, there is an alternative economic system, which has developed. It started, really — well, it started 25 years ago, when we proposed the New Silk Road as a response to the collapse of the Soviet Union; but it was put again energetically on the table by the Chinese government in 2013, when President Xi Jinping announced a New Silk Road to become the policy of China in Kazakhstan in September. And in the meantime, this dynamic, of building a New Silk Road in the tradition of the ancient Silk Road — meaning an exchange not only of culture, of goods, of ideas, but also of technologies, of improving the relation among nations, this has spread like wildfire!
And what you see now is the unfolding of an alternative economic system which is completely based on different principles than the trans-Atlantic high-risk and high-profit speculation. It is based on real investment in infrastructure, on uplifting populations out of poverty, like China has done in lifting 600 million people out of poverty in the last 30 years; and it is offering now, in reality, the Chinese economic miracle, to other countries that participate in the construction of this New Silk Road.
It has reached a point where mankind is challenged, that either we change the paradigm and establish an order in which all people on this planet can live as human beings, or we will not make it, and we will vanish as the dinosaurs did 65 million years ago because we have proven we are not any smarter.
Now, I think the human species is smarter, and therefore, I’m confident that if we put this question on the table.., which is eminently possible through the approach we have taken by this report, which says “The Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” by simply extending the existing New Silk Road development into all of these areas.
Now I think the whole world is waiting for that, and what we are trying to do, is we are trying to cause this shift to happen. We just have to evoke the better tradition of America to make that happen.
So that is where I think we are. I think we are really in danger, if a collapse of the system happens without the reform of Glass-Steagall protecting the normal population from that, we could really end up in mass killings of an unprecedented dimension. If this would happen in Europe, on top of the refugee crisis, I think we would have civil war in Europe, and we probably would have civil war in the United States.
So I think the incentive to change policy, as long as there is time, is gigantic, and the optimistic note is that the alternative is already in place. Thank you.
Gravel: Thank you very much. Wasn’t that a fantastic expose by Helga LaRouche? [applause] It leaves no room for me to talk!
All I can do is underscore her comments in this way: Stop and think that in the world today, you have really two choices. You can either grow and prosper as a result of growth; or you can turn around and follow a different path of militarism. As an American citizen, I say it all the time, I’m very patriotic; I love my country, I love the world more, but I do love my country. And I’m embarrassed, absolutely embarrassed at the conduct of my country for the last 40 years. And your choices are very simple, when you look at what China is offering with the Silk Road vision, it’s an offer to unify the world economically through mutual growth; addressing the problems that are so vital to our personal benefit as human beings. That’s what China offers. And now, what does the United States offer? We try to sabotage institutions that will be able to finance growth; we turn around — and I’ll go deeply into this — we try to antagonize China.
Now, you read in the American press, particularly this morning there was in the paper about the — and Helga referred to this — about a destroyer that was sailing very close to this Spratly Islands, an island just bordering the 12-mile limit. Why are we doing that? These are silly boys playing with silly toys! That’s really what it is. It makes no sense at all. This destroyer came out of Japan, and so this is a provocation. So, this is our approach, the American approach, to dealing with the crises of the world, is to provoke China. Because of what? China is in the ascendancy economically in the world; there’s just no question that with their present plans that China will be the country of the 21st Century. And its vision, to share that growth, with the rest of the world, it’s just awesome as a vision, and will define what the 21st Century is all about.
And it won’t be the American Century. And I would only hope, and it just stands to logic, that if the United States would join forces and hold hands with China and proceed to develop the entire world; boy, would this be a human accomplishment nonpareil.
Now, when I look at what’s happened in the Middle East, I’m reminded of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: that’s our foreign policy. For those of you who may forget, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: Famine; War; Destruction; Death. That’s our foreign policy! You can call it, Obama has the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, and he’s riding it like a chariot. When you really in depth look at these elements, it just breaks your heart. Because as Helga just outlined, it’s so easy to pursue the other course; it’s so much more humane to produce the other course.
And when you look at what we’ve done here; you read the American press, and of course, everything is Putin has been demonized. We are demonizing China and to some degree Xi Jinping; and this is wrong. These people shouldn’t be demonized; they’re heads of governments. You don’t see them demonizing Obama; you see people like myself demonizing Obama, and rightly so.
And I do this because, you have heard the cliché, “my country, right or wrong.” Well, for me, that’s the most immoral statement you can make. If you love your country, and you see it doing something wrong, you should do something to correct it. And that’s where I have charted my course in life; and at my age, I hope I have another five, six years, and I’m going to try to raise as much billy hell as I can, on our foreign policy. Because that foreign policy is wrong, and as I said earlier, it’s a policy of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
And so what can we do about it? Well, the first thing that I’m going to try to do, I get into very many causes as a result of this, and I have become a spokesman or endorser of these various causes, like endorsing what the LaRouche organization is doing with China.
I’m delighted to be associated with the LaRouche organization and the wisdom they’ve brought forward in a leadership role. And here, I’m taking a page out of their book, suggesting that the leadership of China should take the initiative and bring the Silk Road to the commons of the China Sea. Thank you very much. [applause]
STEINBERG: Senator Mike Gravel is 85 years old. Lyndon LaRouche is 93 years old. They are two of the last stalwarts of the generation that grew up as children under Franklin Roosevelt, and directly participated in the Second World War. They have a certain level of moral commitment and moral authority that is sadly lacking in most of the leadership of our nation today. I just want to tell you a bit more about Senator Gravel’s actions back in 1971, in releasing the “Pentagon Papers.” Because it’s of great relevance today, and it really puts an onus on not only every member of Congress, but every individual who considers himself a patriotic American citizen, to hold yourself and your fellow citizens up to the standard, to hold your elected officials, up to the standard that was reflected in what proved to be an historic action by a lone individual in the U.S. Senate. Now, in 1971, the war in Vietnam was raging out of control. Richard Nixon was a highly popular president, and months later, in the 1972 elections, he would win an absolute landslide victory. Yet, the consequences of Vietnam, the consequences of Nixon’s ending of the Franklin Roosevelt Bretton Woods system, that began this slide into economic decay in 1971, was something that had to be dealt with. The U.S. Congress commissioned a whole series of documents from the Pentagon on the status of the war in Vietnam. Those documents were maintained under strict control, under lock and key, and were basically barred from being presented to the American people. Under those circumstances, a handful of patriots, who would be vilified for their actions, decided that they had to do something. Sen. Gravel, who I had the pleasure of spending a day earlier this week up on Capitol Hill with, recounted the story. He received a cryptic call in his office from a man named Daniel Ellsberg, who at that time was a national security official working directly under Henry Kissinger, had access to the copies of what came to be known as the “Pentagon Papers.” One evening, he called up Sen. Gravel, and simply asked him, “If I provide you with a copy of these papers, will you make them public?” Sen. Gravel said, “Yes!” and said “Let’s not talk about this on the phone.” There’s a whole, basically, a cloak and dagger story, that I won’t bother to go into here, but suffice it to say that Sen. Gravel was provided with a hard copy of something like 7,000 pages of Pentagon documents that showed that the Vietnam War, contrary to media coverage, contrary to statements by most elected officials, was not going well. Yes, the body-count was piling up, but the United States was losing the war, and it was known, certainly before 1971 that that was the case. But the American people were kept in the dark. Much of the Congress was kept in the dark. And so Sen. Gravel took the courageous act of releasing the “Pentagon Papers.” He used the opportunity of chairing a late-night subcommittee on buildings and maintenance to come up with the proper formulation for releasing those documents. He knew that under the strict principles of the U.S. Constitution that it was perfectly legal, because members of the Congress — members of the House, members of the Senate — in fulfilling their obligations to the American people to keep the population fully informed, was given absolute immunity from any kind of criminal prosecution for any sort of release of data, no matter how its classified “Top Secret,” if the data is released as part of the normal business transactions of the United States Congress. Now, in point of fact, the courageous release of the “Pentagon Papers” — the efforts of Daniel Ellsberg, the efforts of Sen. Gravel — resulted in a bright light being shined on the fiasco of Vietnam, and it began the process of forcing a fundamental reversal of U.S. policy. Within a period of time, Richard Nixon, soon after his landslide victory, was on his way out the door. And, it was in the context of the “Pentagon Papers” that some of the worse crimes of Nixon in fact took place. For example, one of the break-ins, in addition to the Democratic Party’s national headquarters, that was ordered out of the Nixon White House, was the break-in to Daniel Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office, to try to obtain discrediting information on Ellsberg. This is not the way the Constitution provides for the U.S. government to function. So, Sen. Gravel took an action, and the Supreme Court, in one of the rare instances of a unanimous decision on a critical constitutional issue, ruled that Sen. Gravel’s actions were completely legal, were completely constitutional, and that therefore he was protected from any vindictive action coming from Nixon, or anyone else, as a result of what he did. That started the ball rolling, for bringing an end to one of the most disastrous chapters in modern American history, probably the single most disastrous event in the post-World War II period, right up until the point of the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq. Now, one of the things, that is immediately begged by reflecting back on what Sen. Gravel did, is the obvious fact that we’ve been talking through these Friday night webcasts for quite some time about the role of the British and the Saudis in the original 9/11 attack. We’ve told you about the 28 pages from the original joint Congressional inquiry into 9/11, that were blacked out and declared secret by George W Bush, and have been maintained secret by President Barack Obama. These are vital facts in these 28 pages that reveal an aspect of action on the part of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and by extension our so-called British allies in organizing and supporting the most heinous crime that’s been committed on American soil since Pearl Harbor; namely, the 9/11 attacks in New York and at the Pentagon here in Washington. So, you’ve got to ask yourself. The information is out there. Where is Senator Mike Gravel today? Why is it that no members of the US Congress, who have read those 28 pages, have used the precedent of the Supreme Court’s unanimous 9-0 ruling in the Gravel case to say, “We are completely free to tell the American people the truth about 9/11.”? Why is it? And we’ve been harping on this issue on this broadcast for the last two weeks. Why is it that the blood on President Obama’s hands, through his drone-kill policy, has not led to the convening of impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives? How is it that the American people and our elected representatives have become so callous to the reality, and so committed to “going along to get along”, as President John F Kennedy warned about in his famous Profiles in Courage book? How is it, that there is not a single individual in government, how is it that there are not millions of people in the street taking up these issues?
Now, you’ve just seen some of the photographs of the refugees who are flooding into Europe. And in every instance, these are refugees from regime-change wars that were either initiated by the Bush administration in partnership with the British, or in some instances with the French; or regime-change operations initiated by the Obama administration. How is it that these millions of refugees flooding into Europe, who are creating a tremendous instability; as Helga warned, creating a potential new Hitler moment in Europe? How is it that there is no action in Washington? How is it that it’s possible that the US actions, which directly led to this humanitarian nightmare, are being ignored by you the American people and by our elected representatives? There is a callousness; there is a fear; there is an avoidance of reality that permeates our entire system and our entire culture right now.
And the bottom line is that we are facing an imminent danger of war; potentially thermonuclear war. You, just in the last days, had a US Navy ship entering into territory that China claims as sovereign Chinese waters in the Spratly Islands. You’ve had just in the last 24 hours, General Philip Breedlove, the commander of NATO, basically saying under no circumstances is he prepared to cooperate with Russia. [that] Russia is carrying out a diversion in Syria, because the fundamental issue is actually Ukraine. How can these kinds of statements and these kinds of actions, which could bring us to the very brink of thermonuclear war under a President who has been consistently pursuing policies of mass kill; how can this be tolerated? What is it in you, the American people? What is it in our elected representatives that has created these conditions where the evidence is mounting by the day that we’ve lost the moral fitness to survive as a nation? And if we continue to tolerate for one moment more, the danger is that we will be staring down the barrel of thermonuclear weapons; or that the kind of absolute chaos that Helga warned about in the press conference earlier this week, in Europe and here in the United States, is about to erupt.
This is a fundamental moral flaw that can and must be addressed and reversed. The moment for toleration of criminality on the part of the President of the United States has come to an end. There were ample grounds for the impeachment of George W Bush and Dick Cheney, for the lies that led to the Iraq War and many, many other things. There were bills of impeachment that were being drawn up by Representative John Conyers, by his staff on the House Judiciary Committee, during the Bush period. And a deal was struck between the two parties, where the famous quote from Nancy Pelosi was, “Impeachment is off the table.” Well, that deal has carried forward as President Obama has carried out similar crimes, and in some respects, even more egregious crimes. The idea that every Tuesday afternoon there is a meeting at the White House, chaired by the President, where he signs off on the latest list of targets to be stalked and executed; to be murdered in cold blood by drone strikes. The toleration for this has now reached the point where it’s absolutely intolerable.
Over the past several weeks, we’ve provided you with the facts; there’s no need to provide any more details. The facts are available; they’re in the public light. You can read them on the LaRouche PAC or EIR websites; you can go to The Intercept and read the primary documents themselves. But clearly, that’s not the issue. The issue is that we’ve lost our moral compass; and that we’re now at the point that unless there is a fundamental moral change in the fabric of our people, it may just be too late.
OGDEN: Thank you very much, Jeff. Now, I’m going to read the brief institutional question that came in for us this week. And this was presented to Mr. LaRouche when we had a chance to meet with him. The question reads as follows: “Mr. LaRouche, what is your view of the current state of the US economy, and do you think the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System should raise the interest rates?” Now, I know how I would respond. I think instead of hiking the interest rates, the Governors of the Federal Reserve System themselves should take a hike; but I’ll let Jeff deliver Mr. LaRouche’s response.
STEINBERG: A number of years ago, Mr. LaRouche regularly repeated a kind of a irony, a metaphor for the state of mind of the American people. He said, “Your typical American walks out on the street, gets hit by a car; breaks his leg and then crawls back inside and turns on the television. And until he sees on the local news that his leg has been broken, he’s not quite certain that it’s actually happened.” Well, I think as for the state of the US economy, there’s a great similarity to the situation we’re dealing with right now. Again, it’s obvious to most of you out there, if you simply ask yourselves a very simple question: Are your conditions of life better today than they were 15 years ago, before we entered into this prolonged period of an abysmal control, a British control over the US Presidency, first under Bush and now under Obama? Do you still have an optimistic view about the future? Can you honestly look at your children and grandchildren, and assure them that their conditions of life will be better than yours, and that what you did with your life in some small way, contributed to the idea that future generations will be better educated, better clothed, better fed, with more leisure time to pursue real culture? I think for the overwhelming majority of Americans, the answer to that question is a resounding “No.”
So, let’s just consider a few facts that have just come out in the last week about what the actual state of the American economy is, and maybe presenting the sort of gross picture, and taking it out of the domain of “I’ll get by, I’ll struggle through; as long as I can watch television and take my mind off of the problems of the real world, I’ll somehow be able to make it.”
Today in the United States, there are 16 million children living in households that on a regular basis, face severe food shortages, meaning that you’ve got a rampant outbreak of malnutrition among young people in this country. That 16 million figure, by the way, represents 21% of all of the children in the United States. Across the board, in every corner of society, 25% of all American men are living either at, or near, the official poverty level, and that level is abysmally low; does not really reflect, even closely, the horrors that these people are living through.
And if you think that this is something that largely involves our elderly, our senior citizens, people nearing retirement, no. Among 18-34 year olds, in the United States today — men, that is — 33% are at or near poverty. You have 22 million Americans living in what is officially defined as deep poverty, which means living at, or below, one half the official poverty rate. To give you an idea of that: The official poverty rate is, for a family of four, to be merely $24,000 a year. Think about what kind of family of four could possibly live on that amount of money.
There’s 1.5 million households in the United States which have absolutely no cash income whatsoever, meaning that they are living 100% on government social safety net programs, and can’t survive on that.
Yet you read in the newspaper that the official unemployment rate is 5.1% or 5.2% and that the jobless rate at the peak of the “recession” back after 2008 has been cut in half. Well, the only reason that that number has been reduced is because there are now 94 million working-age Americans who are not counted in the labor force. That’s not because they’re disabled, and unable to work. It’s because they’ve either never been able to find a job, or they have been unemployed for such a long period of time, that they don’t even appear in the statistics any longer.
So, that’s a brief snapshot of what has happened in our nation. You know it. Probably a majority of people out there watching this broadcast now are personally experiencing it, and feeling it. And the fact is, there is something you can do about it. You can change your behavior. You can continue going along as you are in a fantasy world, or you can decide, now is the time to put your foot down. We live in what was once a great republic, and therefore, we can make those changes. We can force our elected representatives to take the kinds of emergency actions.
Helga talked about the re-instatement of Glass-Steagall. That means Bankrupt Wall Street. It’s got to happen now, it’s got to happen immediately, if there’s to be any kind of reversal of the real state of economic collapse and poverty.
Now, to just contrast the downward spiral and the financial bankruptcy of the United States, and really the whole trans-Atlantic region, let’s consider what, in human terms, has been the result of the Chinese policies that both Helga and Senator Gravel were talking about on Tuesday. Over the last 30 years in China, 600 million people have been lifted out of poverty. At the same time, during that same 30-year period, we’ve been in a persistent downward spiral, and that spiral is now exponentially escalating towards a complete crash, over the last 15 years, under the Obama war Presidency and the Bush war Presidency before it.
So again, the issue is not sufficient facts. You know that. You know it in your own mind and your own heart what’s actually going on. The question is, will you act and will you act in time?
OGDEN: Thank you very much, Jeff.
Now, as a consequence of you watching what has just been presented here tonight, you are now an actor on this stage, the stage of human history, for the reason that you are now faced with a decision: What will you do with what has just been presented to you? How will you respond? With the clarity of the historical decision that is now facing us to be made, how do we take what has just been presented, and literally, pull it off of the screen, as Mr. LaRouche termed it, and put the necessary actions in place, as Jeff has just outlined them in detail.
Now that you have seen, and you have assimilated the case that has been put before you tonight, you have now become one of the actors, one of the active players, in this great Shakespearean drama of today. The question lies not in the fact of the case; the facts are all there. The facts are all clear. But rather, the question lies in how we respond. How will we act on the stage of history today? What will we do with the reality as it now faces us, and act to shape a future which is worthy of what the human species uniquely can, and must, be?
And for those of you who have also been participating in the weekly Fireside chat discussions with Mr. LaRouche, and especially the Manhattan meetings, which Mr. LaRouche has been addressing on a consistent basis every Saturday, you know that this is taking hold, and this is what Mr. LaRouche has been discussing with you, and is becoming a movement within the American people, at least those intellectually courageous few who have been engaged with this, and have made these crucial decisions.
So with that I would like to bring a conclusion to this broadcast here tonight. If you haven’t viewed the press conference featuring Mrs. Helga LaRouche and Senator Mike Gravel in full, it is available on the front page of the larouchepac.com website, and by all means, please circulate this as widely as you possibly can. This was a very significant event.
So I would like to thank Jeff for joining me here in the studio tonight, and I would like to thank you all for joining us here as our audience this evening. Please consider what you’ve seen here tonight, and what that implies for you. And please stay tuned to larouchepac.com. Good night.