Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 23. januar, 2017 – Samtidig med, at Donald Trump starter sin første uge som USA’s præsident, befinder den vestlige verden sig i en farlig tilstand med tumult og ubeslutsomhed, men en tilstand med et usædvanligt potentiale. Hvilken retning, Trumps præsidentskab vil tage, er uvist. Alt imens Trump førte kampagne imod Wall Streets rolle over Obama og Hillary og eksplicit krævede en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall for at gøre en ende på Wall Streets magt over regering, så hævdede Trumps valg til finansminister, Steven Mnuchin, under sin godkendelseshøring i Kongressen, at hverken han eller Trump ønsker at genindføre Glass-Steagall, fordi, som han sagde, det ville ødelægge »likviditet og kapitalmarkeder«. Dette er især absurd, fordi det kommer samtidig med, at hele det vestlige finanssystem står over for et katastrofalt kollaps af den $2 billiard store (dvs., 2 og 15 nuller) derivatboble – spillegæld, der suger blodet ud at realøkonomien.

»Trump er i vanskeligheder«, fremhævede Lyndon LaRouche i dag og påpegede Trumps eksponering til enorm gæld og kreditorer, der forsøger at kræve ham til regnskab over for City of London og Wall Street. »Vi må udrense de beskidte operatører – vi må have en ordentlig proces i USA, der vil beskytte Trump og beskytte landet.« LaRouche har krævet, at Kongressen afviser Mnuchins udnævnelse til Finansministeriet og omgående genindfører Glass-Steagall, som det nødvendige, første skridt til at genrejse nationens realøkonomi.

Wall Streets magt over ledende personer i begge politiske partier er nu afsløret, med det Republikanske Partis højrefløj, sammen med deres ligesindede Obama-demokrater, der har sluttet sig sammen for at anstifte Trumps fjernelse fra embedet med ethvert middel. Medlemmer af Kongressen og personer i efterretningssamfundet er i færd med at »undersøge« forbindelser mellem Trump, og de personer, han har udnævnt til sin regering, og den russiske regering, og spiller således på det totale hysteri imod Rusland og Vladimir Putin fra Obama-kredsens side (der, som Putin sagde i sidste uge, »bliver ved med at sige farvel, men ikke går«).

Londonmagasinet The Spectator havde den 21. jan. en artikel skrevet af BBC-journalist Paul Wood med overskriften: »Vil Donald Trump blive myrdet, afsat ved et kup eller bare afsat ved en rigsret?« I samme ånd indgav Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) (Borgere for ansvarlighed og etik i Washington), som er finansieret af George Soros, i dag et sagsanlæg i ved domstolen i New York, som anklager Trump for at overtræde det forfatningsmæssige forbud mod, at folk i offentligt embede modtager »emolumenter« (fordele; betalinger) fra fremmede regeringer, med det argument, at fremmede regeringer eller regeringsembedsmænd, der betaler for et hotelværelse i et Trump-hotel, er det samme som en kriminel bestikkelse, og det samme er tilfældet, når banker, der har forbindelse til udenlandske regeringer, låner penge til et Trump-selskab.

Det bør ikke komme som en overraskelse, at chefen for CREW, David Brock, er den samme person, der kørte pressekampagnen ved navn »Troopergate« imod præsident Bill Clinton. De, der mener, at Brock har »skiftet side«, ved intet om Det britiske Imperiums fremgangsmåder.

Den kendsgerning, at Kina og Rusland har igangsat et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden, angiver den retning, der er behov for, for den nye Trump-administration, og for Europa og USA generelt. Kinas proces med Den Nye Silkevej bringer massiv infrastrukturudvikling og samarbejde omkring videnskabelig forskning og udforskning af rummet til alle nationer, der ønsker at deltage – og er ligeledes et stående tilbud til USA om at slutte sig til denne proces. I mellemtiden åbnede russerne i dag et møde i Kasakhstan, der bringer den syriske regering og de førende, syriske oppositionsgrupper sammen for at konsolidere den igangværende våbenhvile i den forfærdelige krig, som Obama anstiftede i dette engang så smukke land, og påbegynder hermed en proces for en politisk afgørelse. Det har en chance for at fungere, netop, fordi briterne og deres marionet Obama ikke er involveret og ikke længere kan kræve regimeskifte snarere end at samarbejde om at bekæmpe ISIS og al-Qaeda.

Alle udviklinger i verden i dag er yderligere bevis for, at Lyndon LaRouche har haft totalt ret i alle sine forudsigelser om det britiske, monetaristiske systems uundgåelige undergang, og om det nødvendige, Nye Paradigme, der kræves for at bringe verden sammen omkring en ny tidsalder for udvikling, videnskabeligt samarbejde og en renæssance, baseret på de bedste traditioner i alle verdens store kulturer. Tiden er inde til, at mennesker af god vilje erkender denne, Lyndon LaRouches unikke rolle, og slår kræfterne sammen i dette svangre øjeblik i historien, for at virkeliggøre denne globale, menneskelige renæssance.

Foto: Trumps nominerede kandidat til USA’s finansminister, Steven Mnuchin, aflægger forklaring for Kongressen, 19. januar, 2017. (foto: CSPAN)           

4. januar, 2017 – Både i USA og hele verden bliver Obama latterliggjort og fordømt for sit massemyrderi, sine krigsforbrydelser, sine løgne og sine hektiske (men mislykkede) bestræbelser på at fremkalde »fabrikeret hysteri« vendt mod Rusland. Stort set ingen, udover de løgnagtige massemedier og de mest hæmningsløse neokonservative omkring Obama og Hillary Clinton, tror et ord af det.

Tirsdag aften blev et interview med WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange sendt på Fox News, hvor Assange igen fremhævede, at de omtalte e-mails fra den Demokratiske Nationalkomite og Hillary Clintons kampagneleder John Podesta ikke kom fra Rusland, som Obama og hans »efterretningsteam« har hævdet, og heller ikke fra nogen statslig aktør. Assange tilføjede, at WikiLeaks, i de ti år, det har eksisteret, aldrig har afsløret sine kilder, og heller ikke vil gøre det nu, men også, at det aldrig har taget fejl, eller blot er blevet beskyldt for at tage fejl. Som mange efterretningseksperter har vist, så findes der intet bevis, eller blot troværdigt bevismateriale, for, at Rusland havde noget som helst at gøre med at skaffe og lække disse e-mails.

Men, sandheden bekymrer ikke den døende race af aktiver for Det britiske Imperium. CIA-chef John Brennan, der er mest kendt for sine ugentlige møder med Obama for at kortlægge ugens liste over dronedrab, optrådte tirsdag på PBS for at himle op om, at de informationer, der viser, at Rusland havde grebet ind i valget, var absolut sande, men at han endnu ikke kunne afsløre denne information. Forespurgt om CIA’s »stensikre« bevis (som daværende CIA-direktør George Tenet dengang sagde) for, at Saddam Hussein havde masseødelæggelsesvåben, svarede Brennan, at det var noget, der fandt sted »for flere lysår siden«, og at CIA nu kun fortæller sandheden.

I Tyrkiet udstedte den tyrkiske premierminister Yilderim en erklæring, der sagde, at, selv om Obama hævder, at han bekæmper terrorisme, så har han i realiteten »sendt våben til terroristorganisationer … Det er kun Tyrkiet, der bekæmper Daesh (ISIS).

USA og andre gør ingenting … Det, vi forventer af den nye administration, er, at den sætter en stopper for denne skændsel.« Tyrkiske ledere stiller alvorlige spørgsmålstegn ved, at USA’s luftvåben fortsat skal have lov at bruge Incirlik Flyvebasen, eftersom de nægter at hjælpe tyrkiske og russiske styrker med at bekæmpe Daesch (ISIS) i Syrien.

Men, at sprænge Obamas krigsplaner vil i det lange løb ikke betyde stort, hvis disintegrationen af hele det vestlige finanssystem ikke standses og vendes omkring, hvilket kun er muligt gennem den omgående genindførelse af Glass-Steagall. Den nye Kongres åbnede i denne uge, med flere ledende Demokrater, der udtrykte, at de har i sinde at arbejde sammen med Trump omkring spørgsmål af gensidig interesse, og de nævnte især store investeringer i infrastruktur og en revision af den katastrofale frihandelsaftale NAFTA. Dette er nyttige og vigtige forholdsregler, men uden Glass-Steagall, der lukker de ulovlige spillebuler, centreret omkring Wall Street, vil intet andet kunne lade sig gøre i takt med, at den fremstormende implosion af det transatlantiske finansimperium vil feje alle andre bestræbelser på at genrejse økonomien væk. Kun gennem Glass-Steagall kan vi sætte scenen for et kreditsystem i Hamiltons tradition, og som kan dirigere kredit til genopbygning og til fremskridt i forskning på videnskabens fremskudte grænser.

Aktivister fra LaRouchePAC var tirsdag til stede på Capitol Hill, hvor de mødtes med mange nye og tilbagevendende senatorer og medlemmer af Repræsentanternes Hus. De fik at vide, at Glass/Steagall-lovforslagene fra sidste Kongresforsamling vil blive genintroduceret i den nye Kongres inden for få dage.

Men Demokraterne har hidtil forsømt at gribe til handlinger, der ville få Trump til at gøre det, han sagde, han ville gøre, under valgkampagnen – nemlig at støtte Glass-Steagall. Ved omgående at gennemtvinge spørgsmålet – før vi rammes af et nyt finanssammenbrud – kan, og må, et tværpolitisk flertal genoprette fornuft i nationen og genoplive regering af folket, ved folket og for folket – og ikke af Wall Street, ved Wall Street og for Wall Street. Det var netop en sådan erkendelse af denne degradering af nationens borgere på vegne af Wall Street, der forårsagede det solide nederlag for Obama/Hillary-kampagnen i 2016.

En koalition af Demokrater fra det nordøstlige Ohio, der har afholdt møder med repræsentanter for LaRouchePAC, har udstedt en stærk erklæring til nyvalgte præsident Trump om at inkludere et krav om Glass-Steagall i sin Tale til Nationen.

Onsdag, den 11. januar, bliver en LaRouchePAC »Aktionsdag« på Capitol Hill for at levere det nødvendige »opløftende« spark bagi til de tøvende og/eller feje kongresmedlemmer om at handle nu.                     

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 9. november, 2016 – Donald Trumps slående valgsejr tirsdag kan kun korrekt forstås i sammenhæng med globale udviklinger, der alle reflekterer en stærk, folkelig afvisning af systemet med krig og åger, der har domineret det transatlantiske område i de seneste seksten år med Bush’ og Obamas præsidentskaber. Denne revolte har en international karakter og reflekteredes i juni måned i år, da britiske vælgere afviste den Europæiske Union i Brexit-afstemningen. Vi ser refleksioner af denne revolte i Tyskland, hvor Merkel-regeringens anti-russiske politikker møder en mur af modstand, inklusive fra ledende tyske industrikredse, der ser handel og samarbejde med Rusland som et eksistentielt krav.

Dette mønster går længere end til betydningen af begivenhederne i USA alene, hvilket på ingen måde skal forsmå betydningen af de amerikanske vælgeres revolte imod Wall Street/Washington-etablissementet. Et betydeligt antal amerikanske vælgere så Hillary Clinton som en fortsættelse af de seneste 16 års gamle, dårlige politikker, og de så hende desuden som en person, der ville få os ind i en krig med Rusland, som kunne betyde afslutningen af liv, som vi kender det, på denne planet.

Valget af Trump var et valg imod faren for krig, der i stigende grad kom til at være associeret med Hillary Clintons anti-Putin tirader under hele kampagnen. Det var et valg for en overhaling af USA’s økonomiske politik, der begynder med genindførelsen af en Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling, som Trump åbent tilsluttede sig under en vigtig kampagnetale i Charlotte, North Carolina, hvor han også advarede om, at Hillary Clinton ville starte Tredje Verdenskrig, hvis hun blev valgt.

Mandatet fra 8. november er givet til en fornyelse af traditionelle, amerikanske politikker og værdier, der begynder med en genoplivning af realøkonomien gennem anlægsinvesteringer i infrastruktur og genopbygning af industrien.

Lyndon og Helga LaRouche leverede et stærkt budskab i en dialog med medarbejdere den 9. nov., der i uddrag blev udsendt på LPAC-TV som et specielt webcast efter valget. 

Hr. LaRouche krævede en »New Deal for Universet«, der omfatter en genoplivelse af USA’s rumprogram, i partnerskab med nationer som Kina, der har fortsat menneskehedens udenjordiske forpligtelse, mens USA, under præsident Barack Obama, rent faktisk har lukket det engang storslåede amerikanske rumprogram ned. Både Lyndon og Helga LaRouche understregede, at tiden er inde til, at menneskeheden må se længere end til kun nationale interesser, og til menneskehedens interesser som helhed.

»Vi må række ud og se menneskeheden i et større lys ved at udvide menneskehedens magt ud i universet«,

erklærede hr. LaRouche.

Der er en global bevægelse, der går i retning af sådanne dybtgående ideer og udfordringer. Denne bevægelse reflekteres i Kinas lederskab inden for udforskning af rummet og i det voksende kinesisk-russisk-indiske samarbejde omkring udviklingen af det eurasiske område, gennem storslåede infrastrukturprojekter. Det er kun i sammenhæng med disse globale, dybtgående forandringer, at den fulde betydning af tirsdagens valg kan blive korrekt forstået. Afvisningen af det gamle, døende system, der er vældet ud af de amerikanske vælgere, er et begyndelsespunkt, men ingen garanti. Det vil kræve arbejde, men vejen er afstukket.

Foto: Den valgte præsident Donald Trump under sin første optræden til et offentligt borgermøde, 19. august, 2015, i Pinkerton Academy i Derry, NH. (Photo: Michael Vadon CC-SA).                 

8. nov., 2016 – Wells Fargos og andre af de største Wall Street- og London-bankers store forbrydelser vil fortsat være i Kongressens fokus i det umiddelbare kølvand på valget og vil fortsat stille spørgsmålet om at genindføre Glass-Steagall.

En gruppe Demokrater i Senatets Bankkomite – Elizabeth Warren, Jeff Merkley og Sherrod Brown – har initieret en strøm af breve til lederen af Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Mary Jo White, og andre finanstilsynsfolk, hvor de redegør for mistanke om Wells Fargos kriminelle aktiviteter. Som følge heraf har SEC, der har været sen til at handle, indledt en undersøgelse af Wells Fargos børshandlerafdeling, efter at whistleblowers har fortalt Senatskomiteen, at falske børsmægler-kundekonti blev oprettet dér, så vel som også i afdelingerne for kommercielle bankaktiviteter. Wells Fargo har netop betalt yderligere en bøde på $50 mio. til Consumer Financial Protection Board for at kræve for store afgifter fra husejere, hvis ejendom banken har inddraget pga. forfald i betalingerne, for nye vurderinger af de hjem, de har mistet! Senatorer er blevet informeret om, at Wells Fargo udstødte de tusinder af ansatte, som de fyrede, og skadede deres evne til at arbejde, alt imens de gav de højplacerede supervisere, der pressede de ansatte til at begå bedrageri, en rig belønning.

Wells Fargos korruption lugter nu så meget, at skaden på deres »omdømme« kan true selve banken i den kommende periode. Demokraterne i Senatets bankkommission synes helt klart at forberede vejen til nye, endnu mere skadende høringer om Wells Fargo.

Wall Street Journal fra i dag rapporterede, at SEC havde lanceret endnu en undersøgelse af bedrageri – i dette tilfælde bedrageri med derivater – imod JPMorgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup og Bank of New York Mellon. Denne type derivater har det besynderlige navn American Depository Receits (ADR); det er derivat-papirer, eller væddemål, der er udstedt til amerikanskbaserede investeringsfonde af banker, baseret på europæiskregistrerede aktier, som bankerne har købt. Disse banker udstedte imidlertid derivat-værdipapirerne uden at eje aktierne, og overtrådte herved direkte deres derivatkontrakter.

JPMorgan Chases forbrydelser, lige fra at sponsorere Bernie Madoffs Ponzi-svindel og fremefter, er eneste emne for en hel bog, der netop er udgivet – det er af gode grunde en stor bog – med titlen JPMadoff … Bankens seneste bøde til SEC, $267 mio. for at bedrage kunderne mht. priserne for finansielle produkter, blev idømt så sent som for tre måneder siden.

Desuden er der fortsat kongresmedlem Maxine Waters erklærede hensigt om at lovgive om at bryde Wells Fargo op, »og hvis det også bryder andre banker op, så må det være sådan«.

2. november, 2016 – Amerikanerne kræver en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven for at lukke Wall Streets kasinobankvirksomhed ned, i takt med, at de udtrykker stærk opposition til præsident Barack Obamas og Hillary Clintons krig-og-Wall Street-politik

* I en tale i Charlotte, NC, den 27. okt., krævede Donald Trump Glass-Steagall: »Clinton-politikken bragte os den finansielle recession – gennem at ophæve Glass-Steagall [1999], fremme subprime-lånene og blokere for reformer af Fannie og Freddie. Tiden er inde til det 21. århundredes Glass-Steagall og, som en del heraf, en prioritering af hjælp til, at afroamerikanske virksomheder kan få den kredit, de behøver … Lige ret, og lige retfærdighed, for alle betyder de samme regler for Wall Street. Obama-administrationen stillede aldrig Wall Street til regnskab.«

* En opinionsundersøgelse, hvori deltog 1000 Demokratiske vælgere i staterne Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida og Missouri, og hvor spørgsmålet lød, »hvad bør der gøres mht. Wall Street-bankerne«, viste, at 70 % sagde, »genindfør Glass/Steagall-loven«. Opinionsundersøgelsen blev rapporteret den 1. november.

* Den 1. nov. opslog kandidaten til Kongressen i Ohios 4. Kongres-valgkreds, Janet Garrett, på sin hjemmeside et krav: »Vi må vedtage Glass-Steagall og lancere en Ny National Infrastrukturbank«.  Garrett sagde, »Hvis jeg bliver valgt, har jeg til hensigt at ’lægge kraftigt og omgående ud med’ et angreb på det nuværende, økonomiske rod. Jeg vil anråbe ånden fra Franklin Roosevelts Første Hundrede Dage og vil indstille til, at USA’s Kongres tager to, omgående skridt, som jeg selv vil deltage i:

»For det første: Vi må i Kongressen vedtage to lovforslag om at genindføre Glass-Steagall, HR 381 og S. 1709. Jeg vil omgående være medstiller af HR 381 … For det andet: Jeg vil, straks, jeg indtræder i embedet, fremstille lovforslag til skabelse af en ny Nationalbank for Infrastruktur, med de tidligere sådanne succesrige institutioner som model.«

* Ligeledes 1. nov. udstedte den Demokratiske kandidat til Kongressen for West Virginias 1. Kongres-valgkreds, Michael Manypenny, følgende erklæring: »Jeg indstiller til, at Kongressen vedtager Glass-Steagall, samt en National Infrastrukturbank med $1 billion.« Han sagde, »under Franklin Roosevelt blev nationen totalt genopbygget under New Deal og den efterfølgende krigsoprustning. Utallige broer, veje og offentlige bygninger blev i West Virginia … bygget med finansiering fra FDR’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation (svarer til en kreditanstalt for genopbygning, -red.) … Ligesom dengang i 1930’erne, vil en generel politik for en massiv forøgelse af infrastrukturudvikling skabe mange tusinde jobs til arbejdere i mit distrikt og i hele nationen. Én positiv effekt vil blive at gøre en ende på epidemien af selvmord og misbrug af opiater, som resultat af fortvivlelse, fremkaldt af stagnationen.«

Dette er de massive virkninger, i en forandret, politisk situation, af LaRouchePAC’s mobilisering for Lyndon LaRouches »fire hovedlove for at redde nationen«.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 26. oktober, 2016 – Erkendelsen af, at verden er på randen af verdenskrig, er nu ved at komme åbent til udtryk i den amerikanske og europæiske befolkning. Breve til avisredaktører skriger, at Obamas rænker for at optrappe krigen i Syrien vil bringe os i konflikt med Rusland. LaRouchePAC-aktivister på universitetsområder rapporterer, at studenter pludselig rejser børster, med ængstelige diskussioner om truslen om krig. Selv Donald Trump, der vil bruge enhver mere eller mindre fornuftig, populistisk idé til at fremme sin kampagne, har nu advaret om, at valget af Hillary Clinton, med hendes trusler om krig mod den syriske regering, vil antænde gnisten til »Tredje Verdenskrig«.

Borgerne er med rette bange. Obama fortsætter i embedet, trods det, at alt, hvad han har rørt ved, er brudt sammen: Obamacare er kollapset i takt med, at forsikringsselskaberne dropper ud og præmierne stiger til tårnhøje niveauer, i nogle stater med næsten 100 %; Deutsche Bank og Italiens Monte dei Paschi er ved at kollapse i Europa, samt med smitten, der er klar til at ramme Wall Street, hvor Obamas obstruktion af Glass-Steagall har skabt en boble, der er langt større end den var ved sammenbruddet i 2008; narkotika truer nu med at ødelægge en generation af unge, alt imens præsidenten prædiker legalisering og »ingen retsforfølgelse« af banker, der er taget i hvidvaskning af narkopenge; og med Bush’ og Obamas »uophørlige krige«, der nu truer med at blive til atomkrige.

Der er grund til at være bange. Begge kandidater har allerede vist sig at være totale fiaskoer, en kendsgerning, som næsten alle amerikanere og det meste af verden erkender. Men, insisterede LaRouche i dag, katastrofen kan afværges ved netop at fjerne Obama, før han kan trykke på knappen; og ved at gennemføre Glass-Steagall og et kreditsystem for udvikling efter Hamiltons principper – nu, før sammenbruddet af finanssystemet fører til kaos. Både det Republikanske og det Demokratiske Parti vedtog Glass-Steagall i deres valgplatform – ikke, fordi kandidaterne støttede det, men for at formilde de enorme understrømme i befolkningen, som er rasende over statens redning af Wall Street (bail-out), og som kræver, at spekulanterne nu afvises. I dag responderede Trump atter til det folkelige raseri og krævede gennemførelsen af en version af Glass-Steagall »for det 21. århundrede«.

For at opnå dette, må vi inspirere folk til at rejse sig og erklære, »Jeg nægter at være bange«. Det skete i september måned, da, på trods af, at Obama, Wall Street og saudierne kørte en frygtkampagne, det amerikanske folk fyrede op under deres repræsentanter i Kongressen med henblik på at tilsidesætte Obamas veto af JASTA-loven, som giver ofre for de saudiskledede terrorangreb på USA den 11. september (2001) mulighed for at lægge sag an imod dem, der var ansvarlige i den saudiske regering og det saudiske kongehus.

I normale tider vil dagene efter et præsidentvalg være kendetegnet ved en forlænget pause, en ’afdragsfri’ periode, mens den nye præsident udvælger en administration og formulerer en politik, og mens borgere tager mål af denne politik. Men dette er selvfølgelig ikke normale tider. Begge kandidater er så forhadte af befolkningen – der i de fleste tilfælde hader begge kandidater lige meget – og deres politik er så moralsk depraveret og morderisk, at dagen efter valget vil blive en dag med raseri, måske endda kaos. I endnu højere grad end før valget, vil der hos de fleste amerikanere findes en forudanelse om den fare, som konfronterer Amerika og verden. Den kendsgerning, at der kun findes én løsning – nemlig, at Obama fjernes, og LaRouches uopsættelige love gennemføres – vil ikke ændre sig på grund af valget, men vil være endnu mere indlysende og nødvendig.

I hele den næsten to år lange valgproces har der stort set været nul dækning af det faktum, at verden uden for det transatlantiske område er blevet transformeret, et spørgsmål, der nu aktivt diskuteres på Valdai Internationale Diskussionsklubs 13. årlige konference i Sotji, Rusland. BRIKS, den Nye Silkevejsproces og de nye internationale finansinstitutioner, der er etableret af Kina, Rusland og deres partnere på alle kontinenter, har bragt resten af verden sammen omkring et nyt paradigme for harmoni, udvikling af infrastruktur, samarbejde om rummet og en fælles front mod den terroristsvøbe, som er skabt af de amerikanske og britiske, ulovlige krige i Sydvestasien. Viden om dette nye paradigme, som EIR-rapporten Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen indfanger det, udgør den gnist, der behøves for at vende frygt og raseri til optimisme og kreativ tænkning, med henblik på at bygge en fremtid for menneskeheden.

Vi har intet valg.

Foto: Præsident Franklin D. Roosevelt udsender sin første 'Fireside Chat' om bankkrisen, fra Det hvide Hus, Washington, D.C., 12. marts, 1933.

Kotegawa var ansvarlig for den gradvise afvikling af mange af de japanske banker under den asiatiske krise i 1997 og diskuterer her forskellen mellem den måde, hvorpå Japan adresserede de bedrageriske bankpraksisser, der førte til bankernes krise, versus, hvordan Vesten har gennemført en bailout (statslig redning) af de kriminelle, der var ansvarlige for krakket i 2007-08.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Krakket har været i gang siden 1. januar, 2016. Det var den dato, da alle regler i Europa blev ændret således, at banker ikke kunne få en bailout (statslig bankredning). De skulle angiveligt reddes gennem en bail-in (ekspropriering af visse typer af bankindskud); det er blevet til at betyde, at indskyderne og obligationsindehaverne ville få eksproprieret deres penge for at skabe ny kapital til insolvente banker. Det har vist sig at være en total ’non-starter’, komplet ubrugeligt; det fungerer ikke. Det blev afvist af Italien, og er grundlæggende set blevet opgivet og smidt i skraldespanden. Men de står ikke desto mindre over for, at der ikke er mulighed for bailout; især Deutsche Bank står på det seneste over for, at der ikke er nogen mulighed for bailout.

Da dette først skete, og oliepriserne faldt til omkring $30-40 fra næsten 3,5 gange så meget, og alle de andre råvarepriser kollapsede, har dette, samt truslen om, at de ikke kunne få bailout, betydet, at ikke alene Deutsche Bank, men dusinvis af storbanker i de europæiske lande, i Det forenede Kongerige (U.K.), siden da har stået på kanten af afgrunden, med udsigt ned i dybet. De ventede simpelt hen på at se, hvor udløseren af faktisk tab af al likviditet i dette baksystem ville finde sted; om det ville blive i det tyske banksystem, i U.K.’s nationaliserede banker – som er i en meget dårlig forfatning.

Det er, hvor hele dette banksystem har stået siden 1. januar; enormt overgearet. Otte år; 7,5 år med kvantitativ lempelse, der har givet dem mulighed for at blive enormt overgearet; Deutsche Bank har en gearing-rate på 37:1 iflg. en rapport, der netop er udgivet af FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; USA’s Statslige Indskudsgarantifond). Det er værre end Lehman Brothers’ gearing-rate, da den gik konkurs; ikke meget værre, men værre.

Samtidigt har de ligget og marineret i otte år i et miljø med 0 % ’s rentesatser; hvilket betyder, at de ikke er profitable. De kan ikke på én og samme gang være forsigtigt kloge og solide, kommercielle banker, og så også være profitable. Så hvad har de gjort? De har generelt tilsidesat deres aktiviteter med at modtage indskud og udstede lån – deres kommercielle bank er fuldstændig gået over til den hajtank, der indeholder diverse former for spekulationer; med salg af kunstfærdige og komplekse instrumenter, som ingen forstår – inklusive dem, der sælger dem. De solgte dem til deres afdelingskunder, de solgte dem til kommuner og byer, de solgte dem til organisationer; og de forsøgte grundlæggende set at plyndre indskuddene i deres kommercielle bankenheder og bruge dem til deres spekulative operationer, fordi de ikke kan tjene penge ved kommerciel bankaktivitet, eftersom de har ligget marineret i 0 % ’s rentesatser i otte år, med udsigten til, generelt, en ubegrænset fremtid med mere af samme slags. Så når man frem til krakket.

Det, der diskuteres omkring IMF-mødet, og jeg tror, vi kommer til dette, for vi har venner, som er dér; ud over dem af os, der udgiver The Hamiltonian, har vi andre venner omkring disse møder. Det, som diskuteres dér, er muligheden og frygten for et reelt likviditetskrak, som kunne blive udløst, hvad øjeblik, det skal være. Det, som ikke diskuteres dér, er de kriminelle handlinger, som disse banker begår som et resultat af deres spekulative kultur, og som et resultat af den tilstand, de befinder sig i, efter at have ligget i lage i disse 8 år. De forbrydelser, som de nu er i færd med at begå, fordrer absolut, både som et spørgsmål om juridisk retfærdighed og som et spørgsmål om fornuftig, sund bankpraksis, at bankerne omgående opdeles.

Vi behøver ikke se længere end til Wells Fargo, der skulle forestille at være den næststørste bank i USA, et mønster på ikke-spekulativ, kommerciel bankvirksomhed. Se på, hvad de har bedrevet. Deres bankenheder for investering og værdipapirhandel har i bogstavelig forstand stjålet pengene fra deres indskydere i en skala af hundreder af tusinder (af indskydere), for at tjene gebyrer og profitter på kunstfærdige instrumenter (læs: makværk). Det er kriminelt. Vi husker nok Detroit og alle de andre byer i hele verden – i hvert fald i hele Europa og USA – som man solgte disse meget komplekse derivater og rente-swaps til. Hver gang, de ønskede at udstede en obligation og låne nogle penge til kommunen eller byen eller offentlige transportselskaber, hvad det nu var, solgte man disse produkter til dem. Det er stort set det samme som at sige, at de ikke anede, hvad det var, de fik; præcis ligesom indskyderne i Wells Fargo, som ikke var klar over, hvad det var for noget, man havde solgt til dem. Så uklar var forståelsen hos kommunens/byens finansdirektører, og hos finansdirektører for selskaberne for offentlige tjenesteydelser, af disse derivater, som bankerne fik dem til at købe, simpelt hen for at gøre lånet til en obligation med variabel rentesats, at man lige så godt kunne sige, at de solgte dem disse derivater uden, at finansdirektørerne overhovedet vidste, at de fik dem, indtil de opdagede, at de tabte millioner og atter millioner af dollars hvert år. Og forbløffende nok, i hvert eneste tilfælde i hver eneste by/kommune i hele verden, var den samme satsning gået galt på nøjagtig samme måde; og det løb op i – i nogle tilfælde med storbyer – i hundreder af millioner af dollars for bøder, gebyrer og tab, som de ikke kunne komme ud af. Denne kriminelle aktivitet kan kun afsluttes på én måde. Det er ved at sætte Glass/Steagall-loven i kraft igen. Hvis nogen prøver at fortælle dig, at, ved at tilføje endnu en specifik, lille regel til de andre tusinder, der findes i Dodd/Frank-loven, osv., at, så vil denne kriminelle aktivitet stoppe, så lægger de røgslør ud – de bedrager dig. Der findes kun én måde at standse det på. Uden Glass/Steagall-loven i en omtrentlig periode på de seneste 20 år, er hver eneste storbank blevet meget større, og er blevet til en båd, hvis midte er fuld af indskydere med et stort antal – i visse tilfælde hundreder af tusinder af hajer, som udgøres af de spekulative afdelinger af dette enorme holdingselskab – alle disse hajer, der svømmer rundt omkring båden, der er fuld af indskydere, og som forsøger på den ene eller anden måde at få noget blod, få en arm eller et ben, få en hel krop, for at få blod ud af båden.

Den eneste måde, hvorpå man kan vende selv en sådan enkelt, enorm bank omkring og sige, give os en bank tilbage, der kan udøve kommerciel bankvirksomhed; som kan tage imod indsættelser/indskud og udstede lån og faktisk investere i industri og fremskridt; giv os det tilbage. Der findes kun én måde at gøre det på; og det er, at man tager sin harpunkanon og dræber disse hajer. Og måden at gøre dét på er at vedtage Glass/Steagall-loven; sæt den i kraft igen. Man rejser således, grundlæggende set, et sådant hegn op omkring indskuddene, at hajerne absolut ikke kan få nogen adgang, og man vi så se, at disse spekulative bankenheder – mange af dem – hurtigt vil gå bankerot. Det var meget velkomment i går at høre et forslag fra et parlamentsmedlem i Hamborg i Tyskland om, at man netop skulle gøre dét med Deutsche Bank. Hvis man kan gøre det med Deutsche Bank, som Lyndon og Helga LaRouche foreslog for et par måneder siden, så kan man gøre det med alle storbanker i verden. Hvis man rent faktisk kan få en rigtig bank tilbage, en kommerciel bank, en udlånsbank, ud af den monstrøsitet, det roderi, som er Deutsche Bank i dag – i processen med en bankerot; så er den eneste måde at gøre det på lig med det forslag, som dette parlamentsmedlem kom med. Det samme forslag, som Lyndon og Helga LaRouche fremsatte for to måneder siden, kendt som Herrhausen-forslaget for Deutsche Bank. Dette parlamentsmedlem sagde, opdel og, på en lovmæssig måde, kør ned og fjern alle disse giftige, spekulative bankenheder. Så kan den kommercielle bank genkapitaliseres, endda af regeringen, på en sådan måde, at den nu begynder seriøst at investere i økonomien.

Så det er altså, hvad man ikke diskuterer; det er de kriminelle handlinger, og hvordan man skal standse dem. Det er et langt mere fundamentalt spørgsmål end spørgsmålet om, hvilke af disse banker, der først går ned og udløser den generelle eksplosion af afviklinger. Vi må få Kongressen til at vende tilbage (til Washington). Hvad foretager de sig, når de forlader Washington i to måneder, efter at have sagt, at, nu vil de stramme skruen over for Wall Street i en række høringer om Wells Fargos kriminelle handlinger; for dernæst at forlade byen i to måneder. Holde pause for et totalt ubetydeligt valg, der ikke har noget valg at byde på, når de i stedet burde stramme skruen over for Wall Street; når de burde lovgive! Det er, hvad vi diskuterer her; den mobilisering, der nu er i gang, for at få dem til at komme tilbage til Washington og genindføre Glass-Steagall nu, og så fortsætter vi derfra.

Ovenstående er et uddrag af LaRouchePAC’s webcast, 7. oktober, 2016. Hele webcastet, med engelsk udskrift, kan ses her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=15135

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 13. oktober, 2016 – Der er gode grunde til ærlig frygt i øjeblikket. I verden som helhed er der en fare for atomkrig pga. fejlberegninger, hvis det da ikke skyldes faktisk anstiftelse på vegne af London/Saudi-Arabien/Hvide Hus-aksen; der er lidelser og konflikter; og der er de moralsk fordærvede, amerikanske valg. Men ånden af mod til at overvinde ondskab og fare blev demonstreret i USA den 28. september, da Kongressen med et overvældende flertal underkendte Obamas veto af JASTA-loven, om spørgsmålet om at stille Saudi-Arabien til ansvar for massemord, der blev begået på amerikanske jord og mod amerikanske borgere. Kongressen blev, af den moralske kraft, der kom fra befolkningen, vores mobilisering og lederskabet af familierne til ofrene for 11. september-angrebene, tilskyndet til at gøre det rigtige.

Vi har nu atter et presserende behov for denne samme ånd. Det, der kræves, er at tvinge Kongressen til at træde sammen og genindføre Glass-Steagall for at bryde med finanskollapset og krigspolitikken. Der er intet andet – det være sig en ny regel, et sagsanlæg, endnu en høring, en fordømmelse, en appel, en undersøgelse, osv. – der vil virke.

Se på USA netop nu, hvor livsbetingelserne er ved at kollapse – med en produktion, der lukker ned, et landbrug i krise og en smuldrende infrastrukturbasis, der ikke engang kan klare forudsigelige, årstidsbaserede storme. Sundhedssystemet befinder sig i et katastrofalt kollaps, der plyndrer dyrebare husstandsindkomster og dømmer mange til døden som følge af sygdomme, der kan helbredes, men som ikke længere vil blive behandlet under det bankerotte Obamacare-system.

For Obama og hans controllers er dette en succes. I sit seneste skriveri hævder Obama, »Ud fra næsten enhver målestok er dette land bedre, og verden er bedre, end det/den var for 50, 30 eller endda 8 år siden.« (Artiklen er »Barack Obama: Now is the Greatest Time to be Alive« (Nu er den bedste tid at være i live i), i november-udgaven af wired.com, hvor Obama er gæsteredaktør for innovationens fremskudte grænser). Han er ikke kun en løgner; han er en dræber. Inden for hele kategorier af amerikanere stiger dødsraten som følge af narko, økonomisk krak, ubehandlede sygdomme, sindssyge, sårbarhed over for katastrofer, terrorisme og fortvivlelse. Og i et par tilfælde er amerikanske borgere blevet dræbt gennem Obamas »tirsdags-dræbermøder«, der sanktionerer mord uden om retsvæsenet.

I dag er Obama i Pittsburgh, hvor han deler podie med en førende fortaler, Atul Gawande, for fjernelse af »overdrevne« sundhedsydelser i Amerika – hvilket vil sige, at slå folk ihjel. Anledningen er Det Hvide Hus’ Konference om de Fremskudte Grænser den 13. oktober, og det nominelle tema er innovative teknologier. Gawande promoverer på nationalt plan en dokumentar, »Being Mortal« (Om at være dødelig), om tidlig død. Hans seneste artikel fordømmer »epidemien af for meget sundhedsydelse« i USA. Med andre ord, Hitlers sundhedspolitik ved navn T-4 (Tiergarten Strasse 4, Berlin), gående ud på at fjerne »overskydende« mennesker. Dette er, hvad arten af Obamas Lov om et Budgetrigtigt Sundhedssystem – skabt i London – lige fra begyndelsen har været.

Andre på stabslisten for dette Hvide Hus-arrangement omfatter Anousheh Ansari, den private rumastronaut, der skal opreklamere galskaben med »Mars-rejser«, så Obama, der går efter at nakke NASA, kan skryde om at støtte fotos af rummet.

Lyndon LaRouche talte, da han blev briefet om dette og billedet af verden i dag, om ikke at bukke under for frygt. For det første, »Når man har med en dødsensfarlig fjende at gøre, så bukker man ikke under for frygt. Man koncentrerer sig om at fjerne ham!« Tag initiativ til handlinger, der vil gøre præcis dette. Han sagde, »Hold op med at være bange; gå derud og vind.« Vi kan være med til at styrke de sociale processer for, at folk ikke giver efter for frygt – i betragtning af, hvad vi netop har præsteret med JASTA. LaRouche forklarede, at folk prøver på at overleve under frygtelige betingelser, med inflation i leveomkostningerne – for sundhedsydelser og basale livsfornødenheder. Nogle mennesker, der tidligere var optimistiske, er nu tilbøjelige til at give efter og opgive. Men, »vi må ikke give efter«.

Summa summarum sagde LaRouche: »Der er en vis form for frygt, som er en god frygt.« Det er, når man siger: »Vi vil ikke finde os i mere af dette.«

10. oktober, 2016 – Daisuke Kotegawa, den japanske økonom, der i vid udstrækning var ansvarlig for at løse den japanske bankkrise i slutningen af 1990’erne, og Japans adm. direktør for IMF 2007-10, sagde i et interview med EIR lørdag, at, hvis de vestlige nationer skal overleve deres finanssystems aktuelle sammenbrud, må de opdele bankerne i overensstemmelse med Glass-Steagall og arrestere de bankierer, der er ansvarlige for at køre finanssystemet bankerot.

Japan sendte flere dusin bankierer i fængsel på tidspunktet for deres krise, alt imens USA ikke arresterede nogen efter Lehman-chokket i 2008, understregede hr. Kotegawa. Han sagde, at fængslingen af bankiererne var nødvendig for at vinde befolkningens tillid til, at omkostningerne i forbindelse med omstruktureringen af bankerne ikke ville føre til den samme krise i fremtiden, og for at genoprette tilliden til banksystemet.

Og så brød arrestationerne bankernes magt over regeringen, især parlamentet. Alt imens Kotegawa ikke gik i detaljer, så stod det klart, at han var på det rene med, at det faktum, at USA og Europa ikke enten har gennemført en bankopdeling, eller arresteret de ansvarlige kriminelle, har resulteret i gentagelsen af boble-udviklingen og Wall Street-bankernes og City of London-bankernes næsten totale kontrol over regeringerne.

Produktive selskaber, sagde han, kan ikke gå bankerot over en nat, eftersom de har et produktivt grundlag til at håndtere finansielle problemer over tid. Sådan forholder det sig ikke med banker. Hvis en bank eller et banksystem mister tillid, kan hele strukturen kollapse over en nat, understregede Kotegawa. Det er, hvad der er ved at ske med Deutsche Bank.

Han gentog sit tidligere forslag til at håndtere Deutsche Bank: fuld eller delvis nationalisering; omgående bankopdeling mellem de kommercielle banksektorer og investeringsbanksektorerne; samt arrestation af de ansvarlige bankierer. Samtidig må, sagde han, alle de vestlige nationers autoriteter i fællesskab, og i hemmelighed, fastlægge en bestemt dato for afgørelse af betalingen af Deutsche Banks gigantiske udestående derivater. Modparterne i disse derivatkontrakter – hvilket omfatter hver eneste storbank i USA og Europa – må være rede til, sagde han, at påføre deres banker den samme Glass/Steagall-opdeling, eller også vil de blive trukket ned at kollapset i Deutsche Banks investeringsbankdel.

Kotegawa tilføjede, at den udviklede sektors rolle på dette punkt vil være at adressere det enorme svælg i udviklingssektoren, mellem den faktiske levestandard og så denne sektors befolkningers forhåbninger. Enhver løsning på den vestlige bankkrise afhænger af en reel efterspørgsel på produkter – ikke trykning af penge – og som vil komme fra et forpligtende engagement over for den reelle udvikling af verden som helhed. Han bemærkede, at rent historisk var nøgleinnovationerne i produktion centreret i USA, Tyskland og Japan, og disse tre nationer må genoprette denne dedikation til innovation og produktion.   

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 10. oktober, 2016 – Samme dag, som Barack Obamas saudiske allierede, med anvendelse af hans præcisionsvåben, var i færd med at bombe 1.000 yemenitiske civile under en begravelse den 8. oktober, hvor de dræbte 200 eller flere mennesker, skrev han en lang lovprisning af sig selv i The Economist, hvor han endnu engang erklærede: Store banker er gode, og jeg vil ikke tillade, at de brydes op.

The Economist er den ugentlige udgivelse, der er talerør for City of London, for hvis banker (og for Wall Streets banker) Obama har været en agent siden sit første G20-møde dér i april 2009. Dengang forsvarede Obama AIG og Goldman Sachs, et alia, mod kravet om at stille deres topledere for retten, og han fortalte amerikanerne, at »noget af det, de gjorde, var umoralsk, men ikke ulovligt«. Storbankerne er blevet fundet skyldige i dusinvis af åbenlyst illegale handlinger siden da! Men ingen højplaceret leder er sendt i fængsel, takket være Obamas forsvar for deres magt over Kongressen og loven.

Obama gør krav på et eftermæle for »økonomisk genrejsning«, når narkoafhængighed og selvmord har nået hidtil usete niveauer i Amerika, og dødsraterne i store dele af befolkningen i deres bedste arbejdsår stiger. Han påberåber sig »økonomisk genrejsning«, når han i årevis har ødelagt vores arbejdsstyrkes produktivitetsvækst, elimineret NASA’s bemandede rumforskning og lukket udvikling af fusionskraft og fusionsteknologi ned.

Obama gør krav på Fredsprisen, når han har kastet amerikanske militærstyrker ind i flere krige end nogen anden præsident i historien og dræbt tusinder af ukendte personer gennem dronekrigsførelse.

Han og hans diplomater raser imod den russiske præsident Putins succesrige interventioner imod al-Qaedas og ISIS’ terroriststyrker i Syrien; de taler om at fremprovokere krig med Rusland. I mellemtiden har Obama selv insisteret på at bevæbne og hjælpe Saudi-Arabiens uprovokerede invasion af og nær-folkemordsangreb mod det yemenitiske folk.

Dette er en præsident, der netop er blevet påført et nederlag af Kongressen og det amerikanske folk på spørgsmålet om saudisk-britisk støtte til terrorisme. Han blev tvunget til at ophæve hemmeligstemplingen af de »28 sider« om saudiernes rolle i angrebene den 11. september (2001); Kongressen underkendte en masse hans forsøg på at nedlægge veto mod Loven om Retsforfølgelse af Sponsorer af Terrorisme (JASTA).

Obama er endnu ikke ude, men det burde han være. En så kriminel præsident burde ikke kunne beordre det amerikanske folk: »Bryd ikke Wall Street-bankerne op«.

Kun en dåre ville ikke kunne få øje på, hvor nær vi er på en finansiel nedsmeltning, og til krig med Rusland eller Kina. Det, som USA gør nu, er afgørende for at redde menneskeheden.

Glass-Steagall må vedtages i USA, og kopieres i Europas storbanker, der hører hjemme på en statsanstalt. I modsat fald er kreditudstedelse til produktiv beskæftigelse, en genoplivet økonomisk vækst og voksende produktivitet ikke mulig.

Tiden er nu inde for at levere endnu et vigtigt nederlag for Obama.

Foto: Som Det britiske Imperiums loyale tjener vil Obama gøre alt, hvad der står i hans magt, for at blokere for Glass-Steagall. [flickr/thejointstaff]

Vi befinder os midt i en forhøjet mobilisering, og jeg kan sige, at netop, mens vi taler, bliver eksemplarer af det allerseneste nummer af avisen The Hamiltonian, den ugentlige avis fra LaRouchePAC, uddelt i New York City; men også på gaderne i Washington, D.C., uden for det årlige IMF-møde. Hovedoverskriften i The Hamiltonian i denne uge er meget klar; den har titlen »Ét minut over midnat, krakket er begyndt!« Og det kunne dårligt opsummere vores diskussion her i aften bedre. De andre artikler er også apropos; hvis I endnu ikke har læst dem, opfordrer jeg jer til at gøre det. Vi har »Økonomi handler ikke om penge« af Jason Ross; »Finanskrise i oktober; Vedtag Glass-Steagall nu« af Rachel Brinkley; »Et lille skridt for Kongressen, Et kæmpespring for menneskeheden«, af Dennis Speed, om gennembruddet med underkendelsen af JASTA-vetoet; og »Nero-Obamas sidste dage: Fremstød for atomkrigs-folkemord«, af Carl Osgood.

Så avisen uddeles nu, mens vi taler; og vi har allerede sidste-minut-rapporter fra uden for IMF-mødet, hvor personer responderer meget ivrigt, inklusive nogle tyske økonomer, der kendte Alfred Herrhausen personligt, inden han blev myrdet, og som responderer til Alexander Hamiltons stemme via de forslag eller det politiske perspektiv, som Lyndon LaRouche fremlægger netop nu.

Engelsk udskrift.

Friday LaRouche PAC Webcast October 7, 2016

"ONE MINUTE AFTER MIDNIGHT!"

GET CONGRESS BACK IN WASHINGTON TO PASS GLASS-STEAGALL NOW!

MATTHEW OGDEN:  Good evening; it's October 7, 2016.  My name is Matthew Ogden and you're joining us for our Friday evening webcast from larouchepac.com. I'm joined in the studio tonight by a guest — Paul Gallagher from Executive Intelligence Review — and by two members of our Policy Committee via video; Bill Roberts joining us from Detroit, Michigan, and Kesha Rogers
joining us from Houston, Texas.
        We are in the midst of a heightened mobilization, and I can say that as we speak, copies of the very latest edition of the Hamiltonian, the weekly broadsheet from LaRouche PAC, are being distributed in New York City; but also on the streets of
Washington DC outside of the annual IMF meeting. The headline of the Hamiltonian this week is very clear; it's titled "One Minute after Midnight, the Crash Is On!"  And I think that couldn't summarize our discussion any better here right now.  The other articles are also apropos; and if you haven't read them yet, I'd encourage you to.  We have "Economics Isn't About Money" by Jason Ross; "Financial Crisis in October; Pass Glass-Steagall Now" by Rachel Brinkley; "One Small Step for Congress, One Giant Leap for Mankind" by Dennis Speed, about the breakthrough with the JASTA veto override; and "Nero Obama Pushes Nuclear Genocide in Final Days" by Carl Osgood.
        So, that is now being distributed as we speak; and we already have up-to-the-minute reports from outside of the IMF meeting, where individuals are responding very keenly, including some German economists who personally knew Alfred Herrhausen before his assassination and who are responding to the voice of Alexander Hamilton via the proposals or the policy perspective that is being laid out by Lyndon LaRouche right now.
        What I want to begin with is a very quick brief overview of the crash as it stands, and as it is unfolding over the coming few days and few hours.  We will also discuss a little bit of the mobilization that we're engaged in.  But we're going to move very quickly from that discussion to an elaboration of what Mr. LaRouche wished to convey as he communicated during the discussion that we had with him a few hours ago.  But before we get to that, Paul, let me just ask you to give us a very quick
overview of the crisis.

PAUL GALLAGHER:  The crash has been on since January 1, 2016.  That's when all the rules in Europe were changed so that banks could not be bailed out.  Supposedly they were going to be bailed-in; that has turned into meaning the depositors and
bondholders were going to have their money taken in order to make new capital for failing banks.  That has turned out to be a complete non-starter; it isn't working.  It was rejected by Italy, and has basically been thrown up into the air and into the
trash basket.  So, but nonetheless, they are facing no bail-out; especially Deutsche Bank recently has been facing no bail-out.
Once that occurred, and the price of oil fell into the thirties and around $40 from nearly 3.5 times that and all the other commodity prices collapsed, that plus the threat of not being bailed out, has meant that not just Deutsche Bank, but dozens of major banks in the countries of Europe, in the United Kingdom, have been at the abyss looking down since then.  Simply waiting to see where the trigger for actual loss of all liquidity in that banking system was going to occur; whether it would be in the
German banking system, in the Italian banking system, in the nationalized banks of the UK — which are in very bad shape.
That's where this entire banking system has sat since January 1st; tremendously over-leveraged.  Eight years, 7.5 years of quantitative easing, which has given them the opportunity to be tremendously over-leveraged; Deutsche Bank is leverage 37:1,
according to a report that just came out from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.  That is worse than the leverage ratio of Lehman when it failed; not much worse, but worse.
        At the same time, they've been marinated for eight years in an environment of 0% interest rates; which means they are not profitable.  They cannot at the same time be prudent and sound commercial banks, and at the same time be profitable.  So, what have they done?  They have generally shoved aside their taking deposits and making loans — their commercial bank has gone wholly into the shark tank of various speculations; selling elaborate complex instruments which no one understands —
including the salesman.  Selling them to their retail depositors, selling them to cities, selling them to towns, selling them to agencies; and essentially trying to loot the deposits in their commercial banking units into their speculative operations, because they can't make money by commercial banking, having been marinated in 0 % interest rates for eight years with essentially an indefinite future of the same stretching ahead of them.  So, you reach the crash.
        What's being discussed around the IMF meeting, and I think we'll get to it because friends of ours are there; in addition to those of us who are getting out the Hamiltonian, there are other friends of ours around these meetings. What's being
discussed there is the potential and the fear of a real liquidity crash being triggered at any moment. What's not being discussed is the crimes that these banks are committing as a result of their speculative culture and as a result of the condition that
they are in after this 8-year marination. The crimes that they are committing now absolutely demand, as a matter of justice as well as sound banking, that they be immediately broken up.
        We don't have to look any further than Wells Fargo, which was supposedly the second-largest bank in the United States, which was supposedly the paragon of non-speculative commercial banking.  Look at what they have been doing.  Their investment banking and securities units have literally been stealing the money from their depositors by the hundreds of thousands in order to make fees and profits on elaborate instruments.  It's criminal.  We remember Detroit and all the other cities around the world — around Europe and the United States anyway – which were also sold very complex derivatives, interest rate swaps. Every time they wanted to issue a bond and borrow some money for the city or the town or the transit agency, whatever it was, they were sold these products.  It is as good as saying that they didn't know what they had; just like the depositors at Wells Fargo weren't aware of these things they had been sold.  So dim was the understanding of the city treasurers and the agency treasurers of these derivatives that the banks were making them buy in order to simply float a bond, that you might just as well say that they sold them those derivatives without the treasurers even knowing that they had them, until they found that they were losing millions and millions of dollars every year. And amazingly, in every single case in every city around the world, the same bet had gone wrong in exactly the same way; and they were running into — in some cases with large cities — into the hundreds of millions of dollars of fines, fees, and losses that they couldn't get out of.  This criminal activity can be ended in only one way. That is by enacting the Glass-Steagall Act. If anyone is telling you that by adding yet another specific little
regulation to the thousands of them that are in the Dodd-Frank Act and so forth, that this criminal activity will stop, they are blowing smoke. There is only one way to stop it. Without Glass-Steagall for the last nearly 20 years, you have had every major bank get much larger, and turn into a boat in the middle full of depositors with a large — in some cases hundreds and thousands of sharks, which are the speculative units of this
immense holding company — all those sharks swimming around the boat full of depositors, and trying in one way or another to get some blood, to get a limb, to get a whole body, to get blood out of there.
        The only way you can return even in an individual huge bank like that, to say give us back a bank which can do commercial banking, which can take in deposits and make loans and actually invest in industry and progress, give us that back. There's only one way to do it; and that is to get out your spear gun and kill
those sharks. The way to do that is enact the Glass-Steagall Act; put it back in effect. Essentially, you make such a fence around the deposits then that the sharks absolutely have no access, and you will find that those speculative units — many of them — will rapidly be bankrupt. We're very welcome to hear a proposal from a legislator in Hamburg in Germany yesterday, to do exactly that with Deutsche Bank. If it can be done with Deutsche Bank, as Lyndon and Helga LaRouche proposed a couple of months ago, then it can be done with any major bank in the world. If you can actually get back a real bank, a commercial bank, a lending bank out of that monstrosity, that mess which is Deutsche Bank today — in the process of failing; then the only way to do it was the proposal this legislator made. The same proposal, that Lyndon and Helga LaRouche had made two months ago known as the Herrhausen Proposal for Deutsche Bank. That legislator said, separate and in an orderly way, run down, eliminate all of these toxic, speculative units. Then the commercial bank may be
capitalized, even by the government, in such a way that it begins to invest seriously in the economy.
        So, that's what's not being discussed; is the crimes and how to stop them. That's a much more fundamental question than which of these banks is going to go first and be the trigger for the general liquidity explosion. We have to get the Congress to
return. What are they doing having left Washington for two months after saying they wanted to get tough with Wall Street in a series of hearings on Wells Fargo's crimes; then leave the city for two months.  Go into recess for a completely meaningless
no-choice election, when instead they should be getting tough with Wall Street; legislating. That's what we're here to discuss, is that mobilization which is now on to get them to go back and restore Glass-Steagall now, and then we'll go on.

OGDEN:  Well the smell of that 2008 crash is back in the air for sure; and I think people are beginning to recognize what time it is, as demonstrated in this. This is a headline from the New York Times yesterday: "Deutsche Bank as the Next Lehman Brothers". They say, "far-fetched, but not unthinkable"; but remember, that 2008 crash happened exactly during this campaign season, and the Congress came back into emergency session.  And at first, voted down the bail-out and then voted the bail-out up. It's that kind of environment; this is what we're seeing.  This is an October crisis; this is not something which is going to wait until after the elections.  This is not something that's going to wait until the lame duck; and that's the lead on the
LaRouche PAC website today.  "Send Congress Back To Enact Glass-Steagall Law; Lame Duck Is Too Late".
        I don't know Bill, if you want to say a little bit about what the status of that mobilization is, and what people have to be thinking about.

BILL ROBERTS:  Sure, Matt.  I can confirm that it was my experience when confronting two Congressmen yesterday here in Michigan, and I think some of our super activists have reported a very similar experience.  While these Congressmen are paying lip service and while their lips say "Yes, I'm for Glass-Steagall"; their actions say "No."  Because as Paul just pointed out, if they were in reality about the fact that Glass-Steagall is something that must be put in place preemptively, then they would
be rushing back to Washington to pass it.  The vote to override Obama's veto of the JASTA bill is quite fortuitous, because really if you think about all of the excuses that these members of Congress have: you can't get the two parties together; you can't take on these high-powered lobbyists.  In both of those cases, the defeat of JASTA — the justice for the families of the victims — the way that this happened, proves that in fact, it is possible.
        This mobilization has got to be accelerated and continued. What our activists are doing–and we are building up a full-scale mobilization on this–is to confront these Congressmen on the full reality of what Glass-Steagall actually is. As Mr. LaRouche
pointed out today, Glass-Steagall is just the first of four steps. I think that while many well-meaning people say they support Glass-Steagall, in fact their unwillingness to take leadership on this so far, reflects a lack of understanding of the reality of the situation, how dire it is, and, frankly, a lack of a sense of what Glass-Steagall is, in the sense that this was a real historical bill that was signed into law by Franklin
Roosevelt.
        When you hear some of these Congressmen, or Bernie Sanders talk about Glass-Steagall, it's just "break up the banks," and that's it. And then they start talking about the abuses of the pharmaceutical industry, as if it's just this sort of gimmick.
But, as Mr. LaRouche has pointed out, this is a strategy, frankly, for victory against genocide. With JASTA, Obama was confronted on his taking the side of an imperial authority to have arbitrary power over people's lives. This is the same exact question. It is even more deadly.
        I think it's on that sort of level that this mobilization has to upshift to, to get out of the domain of just a question of "Are you for, or are you against Glass-Steagall?," but "What is your commitment, now, Mr. Congressman to ensuring that the
government intervenes to save the American people, as Franklin Roosevelt did?"

OGDEN: Absolutely! Thank you very much. That, I think, brings us directly to the subject that we discussed with Mr. LaRouche earlier, and this is the subject of our "institutional question," which I'm just going to read. It says, "Mr. LaRouche,
you have said that it is absolutely urgent that Glass-Steagall is implemented immediately, and that this is the first step towards a whole series of actions that must be taken to save the economy. Can you please elaborate what the other steps are?" So, that's the question.
        Paul, I'm going to let you elaborate a little bit, and then we can also get to the Four Laws, as Mr. LaRouche specifically identifies them.

PAUL GALLAGHER: Well, maybe we'll get to them very quickly, because it brings us really to the question of these two extremely well-known, very fundamentally important figures in history, extremely controversial and very little understood,
namely, Alexander Hamilton and Lyndon LaRouche. Certainly the recent efforts to lampoon Hamilton on the stage in New York have not aided at all in people understanding what he really contributed to the human race, to this nation, how he built this nation, in an indispensable way.
        We were talking to Lyn LaRouche and Helga LaRouche earlier today about this subject. What Lyndon LaRouche said, repeatedly, actually, was that when he introduced what he called his "Four Cardinal Laws for the Economy" in 2014, he was modelling them directly on the Reports of Alexander Hamilton to the Congress of
the United States. Here is where those reports are found, in this book, The Reports of Alexander Hamilton, [edited by Jacob Ernest Cooke, II] which gives the four Reports that Hamilton made to the Congress, through which he established the legislative
actions– but they were really broad government actions, based on crucial legislation in each case â which made it possible for this country to survive the extreme bankruptcy which it came into during the course of the Revolution, and to rapidly, from that point on, expand and become the leading industrial and technological power in the world.
        What LaRouche was looking at, was four laws and obviously not meaning four traffic laws–four broad actions that must be taken in order to revive the economy from its present zero growth, zero productivity growth state, and nearly zero infrastructure investment, no infrastructure mission. To revive it from that state there are four broad actions which have to be taken, which can be represented and made possible, authorized by legislation, but are really very fundamental.
        Glass-Steagall is the first, and must be done right now, but it just opens the door. It's like taking out the garbage, as we say. It opens the door to the other actions, and it
corresponds very much to Hamilton's establishment on this continent–initially even before the Constitution was adopted, and before any of his Reports to the Congress were made and the institution of a commercial bank and something whose only purpose was to, as he put it, "gather the savings of the country, and place them in the hands of those who could make the most productive use of them."
        That idea of a "commercial bank," in the Bank of New York, which he founded; and, obviously, in the Bank of the United States, which he founded, was unique. Before that, you had merchant banks in Europe, which essentially took partnerships in trade ventures and financed trade; and then you had banks which were formed in order to lend to the government, and get control of government finances. The Hamiltonian bank had absolutely neither of those purposes, but rather the purpose which we'll get into, I think, in the course of this.

OGDEN: Let me just display on the screen, right now, the first slide. This [Slide #1] is the title screen: “The Four Laws, by Lyndon LaRouche.” On the next slide [Slide #2] you'll see the link to the actual document which was published by Mr. LaRouche
on June 8, 2014, which we encourage you to read in full. It's titled "The Four New Laws to Save the USA Now! Not an Option: an Immediate Necessity." [https://larouchepac.com/four-laws]  That's the website you can go to, to read the document in full, and that will also be included in the description to this video, so you'll have access to that as the broadcast continues.
        On the next slide [Slide #3] you'll see a very short quote which I've taken from the introduction to that document, in which Mr. LaRouche says the following: "The only location for the immediately necessary action which could prevent such an
immediate genocide throughout the trans-Atlantic sector of the planet, requires the U.S. Government's now immediate decision to institute four specific, cardinal measures: measures which must be fully consistent with the specific intent of the original U.S. Federal Constitution…."
        On the next slide [Slide #4] you'll see "No. 1: the immediate re-enactment of the Glass-Steagall law instituted by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, without modification, as to principle of action. No. 2: A return to a system of top-down, and
thoroughly defined as National Banking. The actually tested, successful model to be authorized is that which had been instituted, under the direction of the policies of national banking which had been actually, successfully installed under President Abraham Lincoln's superseding authority of a currency created by the Presidency of the United States (e.g., 'Greenbacks'), as conducted as a national banking-and-credit-system placed under the supervision of the Office of the Treasury Secretary of the United States". Mr. LaRouche elaborates after that, that this was the system that
Alexander Hamilton created. "No. 3: The purpose of the use of a Federal Credit-system, is to generate high-productivity trends in improvements of employment, with the accompanying intention, to increase the physical-economic productivity, and the standard of living of the persons and households of the United States. The creation of credit for the now urgently needed increase of the relative quality and quantity of productive employment, must be assured, this time, once more, as was done successfully under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, or by like standards of Federal
practice…" Next slide [Slide No. 5] "…used to create a general economic recovery of the nation, {per capita}, and for the rate of net effects in productivity, and by reliance on the essential human principle, which distinguishes the human personality from the systemic characteristics of the lower forms of life: the net rate of increase of the energy-flux density of effective practice. This means intrinsically, a thoroughly
scientific, rather than a merely mathematical one, and by the related increase of the effective energy-flus density per capita, and for the human population when considered as each and all as a whole." Following this, Mr. LaRouche said, "The
ceaseless increase of the physical-productivity of employment, accompanied by its benefits for the general welfare, are a principle of Federal law which must be a paramount standard achievement of the nation and the individual."
        And then "No. 4." Next Slide. [Slide No. 6] "'Adopt a Fusion-Driver 'Crash Program.' The essential distinction of man from all lower forms of life, hence, in practice, is that it presents the means for the perfection of the specifically
affirmative aims and needs of human individual and social life. Therefore: the subject of man in the process of creation, as an affirmative identification of an affirmative statement of an absolute state of nature, is a permitted form of expression.
Principles of nature are either only affirmations, or they could not be affirmatively stated among civilized human minds."
Following this, Mr. LaRouche elaborates the concept of Vladimir Vernadsky's idea of the noosphere, in which he places man as specifically distinct, and in a hierarchy, above other forms of life; and then elaborates the concept of "physical chemistry," as
the only yardstick in the science of economics.
        So, again, that document, in full, is available to you at https://larouchepac.com/four-laws. The link is available in the description to this video. We encourage to read that and study that, in full, along with these Four Reports that Paul mentioned–the Four Reports by Alexander Hamilton to the United
States Congress. With that said, I think we can open up, especially this fourth point, that I just named here, and I invite Kesha to say a little bit on this subject.

KESHA ROGERS:  Okay. Thank you Matt. I think we really have to start with the unstated-but-consuming principle that exists in all four of those Laws. Mr. LaRouche really captured this in recent discussions: that mankind has to re-discover the meaning of "mankind," and what is the purpose by which we, as the human
species, exist? What is our purpose, in terms of promoting the power of the creative potential that lies only in the human species, unlike any other species.
        When you think about the Fourth Law, people start to say, "Ah, Okay. Well, you know, LaRouche is promoting nuclear power and fusion power, and so forth." It's not just about that. It's a subsuming principle of all Four, that starts with, what I would
define as the principle of Agapé. How do you develop Glass-Steagall? How do you develop the credit system, in the way that Hamilton understood, in the way that LaRouche understands? It comes from the understanding of the benefit to all mankind, which exits in advancing the creative potential for all mankind.
        If you really look at how that has influenced our nation, under Presidents George Washington, and particularly in Roosevelt and John F Kennedy.  These Presidents didn't just look at Hamilton's conception of national credit, Hamilton's conception
of development of economics from the standpoint of just the law. It started with the understanding of a unique principle in the United States to advance the productive and creative powers of every living being in this nation and on this planet.  One thing
that we talk about is what you saw under President Franklin Roosevelt, who was a devout student of Alexander Hamilton, and really what expanded from the period of Franklin Roosevelt through the period of John F Kennedy, was what named as the
Golden Age of Productivity.  I think that what we need right now is a Golden Age of Productivity for the world.
        Where is the opposition coming to this?  Well, if you look at what has happened with the attacks on our US space program, which would be the defining principle, the defining process which would bring together new scientific discoveries for mankind;
revolutionizing science in the way that we should be doing, which is our human potential.  That's what Obama rejects.  When Obama said that we don't need any fancy fusion, and now you've seen not only the shutdown of our manned space program; but now the potential for advancements in new creative breakthroughs of
scientific and technological advancements that exist through programs such as the fusion research centers and development programs at MIT and Princeton.  That's being shut down because we didn't go with Glass-Steagall; we didn't go with the Hamiltonian credit system to actually put the necessary credit into these great scientific endeavors and large scale infrastructure projects.  This isn't just happening because somebody thinks the money should go elsewhere.  It's happening because of a rejection to this truly human identity that it is our human nature to advance to provide for the future; to bring about the creating of a future.  So, when you think about what we're up against here, when people say "Oh yeah, we need to break up the big banks and we need Glass-Steagall"; we need Glass-Steagall, we need to break
up the big banks, but we need it on Hamilton's terms.  We need it on LaRouche's terms from the standpoint of a higher conception.
We have to stop the death rate; we have to stop the mass killing in the United States and around the world.  The way we're going to do this, is that these programs have to be implemented from the standpoint of a higher definition and conception of what it
means to be human.
        I think that gets us to a fundamental point of why you look at what China is doing with the development of their space program — and LaRouche has really emphasized this very emphatically — that China has to be a model from the standpoint of the space program.  Not just because of a singularity of a program they're taking up, because China's now going to the far side of the Moon, unlike any other nation; doing something that no one else has yet to do.  What does this mean?  This is a breakthrough in a revolution in science; this is a breakthrough
in the benefit and the potential progress to all mankind.  I think that is where LaRouche's Four Laws have to start from; and what China is doing right now is what we in the United States, the foundation and the principle of this United States was
founded on.
        What our great visionaries and scientists understood was the unique principle of mankind that defies this oligarchy's rejection of that identity; and why we became a nation committed to this principle of the creative, productive powers of the human
species.  If you think about these visionaries from the standpoint of what China and nations around the world are doing to advance this creative potential, it can really be stated and defined in what the great space pioneer Krafft Ehricke again outlined as what our true extra-terrestrial imperative as a human species is.  One thing I wanted to point is — again, I've stated this on a number of occasions — we brought up Krafft Ehricke's three laws of astronautics and what this really represents to promoting that potential.  But I want to focus in very quickly on the third law, which is not always stated as clearly as it could be; but I think it really captures this idea that he says, "By
expanding through the universe, man fulfills his destiny as an element of life; endowed with the power of reason and the wisdom of the moral law within himself."  I guess the point is, where does this power of reason come from?  Where does this moral law and nature within the existence of mankind lie?  And it lies in
mankind's creative potential, the discovery that exists only in the human species to be able to introduce new scientific principles; to introduce new laws that no other animal species can do.  This is what we're losing sight of right now.
        But the thing is, if we allow for the human population to be killed off en masse, we take away that potential.  Look at what's happening right now:  the death rates; what's happening with the drug overdoses, the suicides.  What's happening with the fact that nations are dying because we don't have the scientific and technological advances to deal with threats that occur in terms of threats that come with natural disasters, that we could be saving lives.  Look at the numbers of people that are going to die in Haiti right now.  All of this could be stopped if we actually had a program in place immediately; a global Glass-Steagall.  So we can actually stop the death rate and organize people around saving human lives so that we can advance for the future; so that we can put forth a new meaning of what mankind and the future of mankind must be.  That's where the Four Laws lie; that's where we have to get Congress, as you said, back in Washington DC right now.  Because they have a responsibility
to this nation and a responsibility to mankind.  The fact that Obama rejected the offer by China for cooperation, rejected the offer by China to be a member of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and to be a part of the New Silk Road Development
Plan, already tells you — once again — his commitment is not to the advancement of the people of this nation and the people of the world.  It is to this financial oligarchy, to this empire, and to the purpose of death that he has been promoting for far too long and cannot continue to get away with.

OGDEN:  Yeah, I'm actually glad you brought up the AIIB, the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, because one of the other elements that Mr. LaRouche raised in the discussion that we had with him this afternoon, was the necessity for international development bank banking types of activities.  That there has to be a commitment on the level of agreements among nations for these vast development projects, and a Hamiltonian banking system which will allow these to take place.  We see the emergence of this with what China is doing and some of the other collaborative
programs around the development of the New Silk Road.  This is the kind of vast surge in productivity and increased standards of living that we see in places of the world that have suffered almost no development.  The interior of Eurasia and elsewhere.
But it's something that the United States had originated over 200 years ago with what Hamilton conceived; and it's something which the United States is in no way participating in today.  In fact, it's rejecting and attempting to shut down — as you said Kesha. So, that's something that Mr. LaRouche also introduced into the
discussion.  Maybe it's something that we can also discuss a little bit more of.

GALLAGHER:  At this IMF meeting, the IMF introduced a report on the world economy, and they said the big problems are:  no growth, most especially including in the United States and of course in Europe; in Obama's recovery, no growth at all; and too much debt.  What did they propose as a solution?  To cut back credit all over the globe, and especially to insist that China and India — which are the only two engines of real economic and industrial growth in the world — should cut back their issuance of credit.  That tells you that there is functional insanity at the top of the IMF; they are completely unaware of the relationship between credit and debt.  It is in fact the case that what Alexander Hamilton did ⦠The United States now needs a
national investment bank; it needs a national infrastructure bank, whatever you want to call it, it needs a national bank with that purpose.  What Alexander Hamilton created, as LaRouche in the second of his Four Laws, was essentially a bank which he said was needed in order to be the liaison between the government and the private banks.  In the process, again remember that characterization of gathering the savings of the country and placing them in the hands of those who could make the most
productive use of them.  So that Hamilton was able to actually reorganize the debt of the United States and the states – which was largely unpayable at that time; provide a means of extinguishing it over a long period of time and redirect that reorganized debt through a bank into new credit, the purpose of which was to go into the key areas of the development of the productivity of the new American labor force.  It could have been coming to the third action LaRouche is talking about, Hamilton
was most controversial there, because the bank that he created to reorganize the unpayable debt of the United States and the states and make it into credit; that bank could have been a land bank, that was what was being done in Europe.  Alexander Hamilton had studied all those experiments of Turgot and all the other national land banks which had been set up, which had the effect of perpetuating agriculture as really the only economic activity in the country, and of enriching farmers.  But of course, it tended to enrich the monopolists who got control of the production of farmers.  It also potentially that effect.
Hamilton said, no, that is not what we want to be as a nation. We don't want a national bank to finance unchanged farming practices all the way to the Pacific Ocean; which is what Jefferson wanted, and other.  Rather, we want the farms to become the market for truly creative new manufacturing and industrial development — craftsmen, artisans, the founders of manufacturing businesses.  This is what our national bank, said Hamilton, has to bring about; not just the endless extension of farming, the basis of the government finances on a national land bank.
        What LaRouche specified — and again, as he was saying, he was thinking of Hamilton's Four Reports to the Congress in his Four Laws; what he specified is then the national bank's credit must be invested in truly productive infrastructure investment.
We're not going to get productive by investing in endless fields of solar mirrors out in the desert, or making a desert out of what was previously just a plain.  We're going to become more productive by investing in the most advanced infrastructure
investments and missions that the country could possibly have.

That brings us directly to Kesha's conceptual overview, particularly of the fourth critical action; what LaRouche called the Fourth Cardinal Law, that there are frontiers of science.  We know that the exploration of deep space, reviving that with everything that goes with in terms of the human experience and also in terms of developing new means of studying, measuring, and changing potentially, the laws of the universe; Einsteinian action in exploration of deep space.  That requires that we have a major effort such as that which collapsed in the late 1960s when NASA's budget essentially, virtually disappeared overnight just as we were landing on the Moon.  There was not a Hamiltonian credit institution backing that space exploration, that Apollo project, up; and its budget suddenly disappeared.
        We need, according to LaRouche's outline of these actions that have to be taken, to put that on the basis that we are going to go fully at the frontiers of science.  Go with China to the other side of the Moon, from which the universe can be studied
and observed in a way that it never has been before.  Take the Moon's long view of the universe and bring it back and share it with all the nations of the Earth; which is what the Chinese space administrator at the conference in Mexico last week was
committing China to.  So, we also have to make this international, as LaRouche specified.  It is a crime that whereas China has created the institutions of credit — the New Silk Road Fund, the AIIB that Kesha raised — the so-called policy banks which make trillions of dollars in infrastructure at home and abroad.  Where it has created, one hand reached out for an actually international credit and sound banking system, the United States has not responded.  It has no national banking institution; does not have, for the most part, sound and prudent banking going on in the private commercial banking system either.

Germany — the other critical economy in the trans-Atlantic region — same thing; no such national institution.  The Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau which they built up after the war, has practically been eliminated; and therefore, no hands coming from the trans-Atlantic side, from the European economies join with that initiative of China, either in the exploration of space, or in the creation of the credit for it.  Therefore, this terrible predicament that our friends reported and are experiencing who are at the IMF meeting; that they are somehow trying to reduce the runaway indebtedness of the world by cutting off the new credit which could actually — if directed as Hamilton and LaRouche say — if directed into the frontiers of science and technology, could actually make that debt manageable; both by being written off and also by being made whole in the long term.
        This is where Glass-Steagall is intended to lead, is into these kinds of actions.  By first putting an end to the crime syndicate which has taken the place of major banks, and breaking it up and making the rest of these crucial actions possible.
But, as Bill said, we have a lot of members of Congress – why not name a few?  Maxine Waters, who in the hearing on Wells Fargo said, "I'm introducing legislation to break this bank up; and if it breaks the other banks up, so be it."  She's not a sponsor of the legislation which would break that bank up in the way that
would actually make for sound banking.  A whole bunch of Senators at the Democratic Convention, who were interviewed on the floor in a television video, and said they were absolutely for restoring Glass-Steagall; but haven't sponsored the legislation: Senator Stabenow; Senator Booker of New Jersey; Rep. Sherman of
California.  There are so many members of Congress, who are not putting their sponsorship and their action where their — they're like on Facebook.  They "like" Glass-Steagall, but that is the end of it; they haven't done what they have to do.
        So, get like-minded friends of yours and associates, people you know who, like you, support Glass-Steagall, and ambush these Congressmen with bunches of calls all at once to their offices demanding this.  Ambush them as Bill was talking about, at the many town meetings and public appearances that they'll make.
We've got to get them to go back to Washington and take the action against Wall Street before this crash wipes us out.

ROBERTS:  Let me make one more point, too, which is that Glass-Steagall has enjoyed popular support for years; it's in both party platforms.  Why hasn't there been a hearing on Glass-Steagall when you have 130 members of Congress that support
it?  Well, it's simple — because of Obama.  It's the same reason that Obama has sabotaged Glass-Steagall is the same reason that Obama sabotaged the space program.  Because the space program is the one area, as Kesha was developing, where it's completely transparent that the real nature of the human species and the
real nature of economics is the Hamiltonian conception of the increase of productive powers of labor and of real physical economic growth that's generated through the discovery of new principles.  You can't have a space program without that; you
can't send human beings out into space and conquer the Moon and other domains.  There's no pie to divide up; space is infinite. It just becomes utterly clear; it's like this experience that's been related by so many astronauts that go up to the Space Station.  They look down at the bright blue Earth, and they say, "Well, I don't see any borders.  I see these little land masses." And it becomes very clear to them that we are one unified humanity; and that is something that Obama had to kill.  So, just as in the case of the JASTA vote, Obama has to be confronted; there's no nice way about this.  He's the reason why this has not happened.  I just wanted to make that point clear.

OGDEN:  Absolutely!  He was rendered impotent over this historic defeat of his veto of the JASTA bill.  All of the so-called practical political arguments that people presented to you over years and years — "Oh, we're for Glass-Steagall, but it's just not — we can't politically make it happen."  All of those crumbled with this historic victory, secured by the activation of the American people to create the conditions in
which Congress had no choice but to override Obama's veto.  All of these arguments against the immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall have crumbled.  There's no better opportunity than in the wake of that victory with the restoration of the
confidence of the American people that in fact, you can force this kind of historic political change to happen through this kind of mass-based activation.  Coming off of that victory, it's the time to create the political climate in this country in which if Congress does not return to Washington to immediately re-enact Glass-Steagall; that that's a toxic environment.  And the American people know how to make that happen; we can do that, we can lead that.  It's the kind of climate in which if you were clear as to how close we are to a total disintegration of this trans-Atlantic system, you wouldn't think twice about doing that.
And any Congressman who's trying to escape from the reality of what it would mean for Deutsche Bank with all of the derivatives counterparties to go through the floor; that this would be far, far worse than the Hell that was experienced in 2008.  That would be a collapse from which you could not recover; you can't bail your way out of that kind of crisis.
        So, it's only through the immediate re-enactment of Glass-Steagall — but also, as you made the point, Bill, I think very clearly — knowing that Franklin Roosevelt created Glass-Steagall in the context of the entire program that he instituted with his Presidency.  The full weight of the FDR program has got to be present with the first step that's taken with re-enacting Glass-Steagall.

ROGERS:  It's important to bring out what we put out as a standard in the report we published — which people should go back to — "The United States Joins the New Silk Road; a Hamiltonian Vision for an Economic Renaissance" — because I think that captures the essence of what we have to seek to bring about.  Not just an economic recovery, not just putting a few people back to work; but we need a whole, complete breakthrough. A revolutionizing of science in the way that LaRouche is calling
for; a revolutionizing in the conception of the nature of mankind; what it means to be human; what we are as a species. And then how we bring together the conception of mankind for the benefit of all from the standpoint that we are now going to
advance and share in the greatest potentials for mankind that ever existed.  That's found in, as Krafft Ehricke said, "leaving the confines of one small planet" and going out into conquering and development of space.  I thought that Bill just said it well;
that that exists not from the standpoint of borders, or from the standpoint of competing for resources.  This is not about competing for resources or existence of borders; but it's that we have a unique potential as a species to come together and to act to create this economic renaissance as it's never been defined before.
        I think that is really what we have to get the emotional quality around, as we saw an emotional drive around this JASTA fight.  It wasn't just about the families of 9/11; but this was the question of the fight for human beings.  The fight that existed really took place in people starting to sing together. When people sang together, the power that they found within themselves with the development of what took place with the
Living Memorial concerts as one; but the principle that people started to really sing together and to realize that they had more power against this enemy than they ever thought existed.  And they acted on that power.  We have to do the same right now to
realize that this evil can be and must be defeated.

OGDEN:  Wonderful.  So, I think that with the title of this week's Hamiltonian — "One Minute After Midnight" — we can proceed with the correct sense of urgency; and everything that has been said today defines exactly what the mission is. So, again, if you can read the full document — LaRouche's Four Laws — which is provided in the link in the description to this video, that's available.  And secondly, the Four Reports by Alexander Hamilton; this is available as a book.  Jacob Cook is
the editor of this version; it can be made available as well.
And please read these in conjunction, and maybe that can be the subject of your Congressman's next town hall meeting.

        So, thank you very much for joining us.  And I would like to thank both Kesha and Bill, as well as Paul.

Please stay tuned at larouchepac.com, and Good Night.