LaRouchePAC Manhattan Project: Town Hall with Lyndon LaRouche, March 12, 2016

March 12, 2016

March 12th, 2016 Manhattan Town Hall event with Lyndon LaRouche

Lyndon LaRouche conducts his weekly discussion with the LaRouchePAC Manhattan Project.

TRANSCRIPT

DENNIS SPEED: On behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee, I want to welcome you here.  My name is Dennis Speed, and we are going to begin our dialogue here, again, today.

Some people are concerned, and I know this has come up, already outside, that we have an impending conference and an impending process, but this is the process that we are focused on, and all the other processes that we're going to be engaged in in the next weeks flow out of this one. So I think that people want to think about how this process gets upgraded including in this dialogue right now.

So I think we should start with an opening statement from you, Lyn, and then we'll go right into the questions.

LAROUCHE: We're in a very interesting period of stress which is going to be experienced by us; because what is happening is the entire system of the United States and also the trans-Atlantic system is ready to collapse and the collapse could come at any time, and the earliest time is probably the most likely one. And that's what we have to deal with.

SPEED: Okay. Very good. So, then we start with our first question and could I have other questioners line up here, so we can keep it going rather?

Q: Hi, Mr. LaRouche, I'm back again. I want to say good afternoon everybody. My name is M— T— and I want to talk to you again about the space program that we have. I worked with NASA on the LEM program. And what we're trying to do is get our children interested in space technology and we want to ask you what can you give us some ideas or steps where we can go into the schools and introduce this program to them.

LAROUCHE: That, for example. What we have done recently is to approach local school areas, musical areas, and things like that, and in this area what we have a mass meeting in that process in Texas.

Now that is a continuation of what was intended by the original Texas program, which was actually an international one. And the time has come now, where we  find that we do have the ability and maybe some of the charms necessary in order to bring about, an understanding of what the principles are, the principles of artistic and other similar things, and I think we are in good order. We've had rallies on this basis for a period, a number of times, with important people involved and it works. So we do have from Texas, from the Texas area, we do have a well-developed identification of the means by which we should be approaching things.

Q [follow-up]: Yes, and I wanted to make sure our kids, especially disadvantaged kids up here in New York, particularly black and Hispanic get into the field of aviation. I have two sons, both went to Aviation High School [in Long Island], and one graduated from the Naval Academy; and the other son he graduated and went to flight school and got his pilot's license. He was being trained for flight operations down in Texas and he collapsed on the basketball court, unfortunately. I'm saying that there's tremendous opportunities here. We just have to come together as one and exploit this opportunity. I want to say thank you.

LAROUCHE: Thank you.

Q: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche. This is Jessica from Brooklyn. How are you? We spoke on Thursday, on and since that time, it was only a few days ago, I've also been thinking about what people were saying on the Thursday call.

I'm reminded that every day more ordinary people are paying attention to the declining state of affairs in our nation than popular opinion would have us believe, and this brings me to the idea of Glass-Steagall. There was a time when Glass-Steagall was not that known. People didn't respond, when we were out taking about Glass-Steagall and trying to get across the decline of the economy and that there was not a recovery and that there couldn't be a recovery without Glass-Steagall.  For myself, I was of such a mind to bring it to the union, bring it to every event that I could think of, until I started to become called the "Glass-Steagall Lady." [laughter]

So, the way I see it that with the BRICS process now, many people don't know what the BRICS process is. They're not aware that this is a solution to our future, to actually having a future;  that other countries are bringing this to us and that we have something in place that has to be addressed as far as what our future is going to be. It brings in everything that we've talked about. And this is now something we must get out there and do. And I'm talking about myself when I say "we," along with everyone here. So we have to make people understand that the BRICS nations and the BRICS process are the way to have a future and not have annihilation. So, in order to do that I see that the campaign brings people, at least they're thinking about something as far as what we're going to do in the future.

On Thursday, I talked about two ladies that I ran into, in a pizza parlor, that just started talking out of the blue about how we're going to have a surprise candidate that's going to bring something to the table that means something to the Presidency. Well, just to add a little more to that, I found out that those two ladies are actually PTA members. They happen to have children that actually go to my school—like it's amazing. And we were all in the same pizza parlor which happens near the school, so I guess that does make sense.

So, in talking to them again, there's a PTA meeting that's coming up this coming Wednesday. Their children are in the school. I will be teaching them science. So, I want everyone in the room to know that we have to drum the science program into our little ones' heads, and we also have to make people that we run into, no matter where they are, even if it's not a formal meeting, or it's not a union meeting, we have to get them to understand that the BRICS process is in place, and this is what we need to do to assure that we even have a nation, even our species survive, without Obama blowing us up.

So, I want you to give a comment on the kinds of things that need to be done in order to get across, not just Glass-Steagall but the whole idea of the future and the BRICS process.

LAROUCHE: Well, President Franklin Roosevelt was the person who actually defined what you're talking about. He did it. And as soon as they could, they got rid of him. They didn't kill him directly but they almost killed him directly; and that's the problem. So I think don't worry about, you need this man or that man or that man. President Franklin Roosevelt provided the answer.

Remember, at this point, you had Bertrand Russell. Bertrand Russell was one of the most evil people, in the whole history of mankind. He's Satanic characteristics.

Now, so therefore what happened is, Franklin Roosevelt intervenes against the Devil, and does a pretty good job!  But unfortunately, the Republican Party took over the thing, and Franklin Roosevelt was almost kicked out of his job and he died soon thereafter, and I am still attached officially to Franklin Roosevelt because that was what I was committed to. And that's what we have to do.

Q: Hi, Lyn, I just wanted to pick up on something that was just brought up by M— and in a certain sense by Jessica also, which has to do with what Kesha and Tom Wysmuller did and what you're launching around this idea of NASA and reinvigorating the sense of optimism in the United States and linking this to the U.S. joining with Russia, China and others around these enormous projects as the space program, including the dark side of the Moon, I mean all of these things which are there.

Now the specific thing is that in M—'s district, M— who just spoke, and he worked at Grumman.  And he can tell you everything about what occurred there; and also the fact that you have a pool of retirees in this area of New York who worked on these projects.

In his district, one of the state senators came out and he's donating webcams to the schools. And what he did is a made a speech and he said well why shouldn't a child from Southeast Queens be the first person to walk on Mars? What he decided to do was rather than just bring the webcams he decided to bring somebody from NASA. So, this is very interesting and who could be more enthusiastic than kids, who would see this?

If you look at the presentation with Tom and Kesha when they discussed the transmission from the Chinese launch, from the Chinese project of one of the astronauts teaching 60 million Chinese kids the science of the project; and they talked about translating this into English and giving it to schools in the country. You know, this seems to be a great potential.  And what I wanted to ask is we have this idea at this conference that we're going to have on April 7 that we actually encourage delegations of students, as part of this concept of what Kesha's doing and what you're launching  as this idea of using the optimism and the advanced science of space into what we can do to transform the U.S. situation. So I wanted to ask you to comment on that.

LAROUCHE: Okay, so first of all, you have to realize you have to get rid of Obama, because Obama was the one who shut down the space program! And Obama shut down everything that went together with the space program! And that's what he did.

Now the problem is a little more complicated, because it's not located with mankind all over.  In the coming period, China will be developing a space program, a new kind of space program, based on the Moon, the study of how the Moon functions.  And no one has ever, so far, been able to solve that problem.

However, China, or agents of China are working, dedicated to try to discover what the principle is, that defines the back side of the Moon. And that is a very important thing. It's something which does not come from somebody's knowledge. It comes from what? It comes from the Moon and beyond. So, therefore, Earth as such is not the prime consideration. It's a byproduct of this process. So, therefore, what we have to do is we have to teach something else.

If mankind, as is, a unique feature in this process of the human role in space, then what's it all about? And that's the lesson that China itself is going to deliver the answer to proposedly, within one or two years. And they will give an answer in one or two years. This means that man's relationship with space is not something into itself. The whole conception that we worked on, on this thing, is based on a higher level. It's based on a level of the space system, the Galactic System and beyond. These things are the things which are crucial.  And everyone who's fortunate enough to get the right education is going to begin to understand what all this is about.

Q: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche. My name is G— and I live here in Manhattan. I grew up in a European family, here in the United States where Classical music was very important and we listened to it, exclusively. I was just wondering why Classical music is so important to your program? I mean I know, except for the Beatles, and Frank Sinatra, I never really listened to popular music, so I know I like Classical music. Maybe you can tell me why.

LAROUCHE:  Well, because the Italian principle. Now the Italian principle is a name; but it carries with it also a very special quality, which defies what we call ordinary music, which is not Classical music. And if you don't have that qualification of music, the enjoyment of music in that form, then you're missing the biggest part of all music. I think, in short, that is the answer.

Q: [follow-up] So, that's the reason I like it! [laughter] Because it's got that deep part that ordinary popular music doesn't generally have, something like that.

LAROUCHE: Precisely that!

 Q: Hi Lyn.

LAROUCHE: How do you do, young man?

Q: [Frank Mathis] I do well. But I have a report I want to give you and I want to get your comments on, and it's relevant to what the last questioner just asked:  That there is a pervasive and deep ugliness throughout most of the culture, which allows people to support Obama or not fight him, which allows them to go along with this Trump mania, the insanity.  But I think there is something indicative in the type of work that we do in Manhattan, that I just want to get your insight on.

I had two experiences yesterday. One was at a school of third and fourth graders, where we want to present music, to invite the children to the concert we are going to have on the 27th.  And the response was electric. The children were the entire time in an organic discussion on Classical culture, the history of the languages: Why is this so much fun? How did you guys get into it? Can we be a part of it?  That was the response.

And later that evening I met up with another organizer, who was also doing the same thing throughout Brooklyn, and we had the opportunity to attend a concert hosted by a very famous, distinguished, bel canto singer, whom you are familiar with. The singer worked with us in the '90s on the tuning campaign. And the entire concert was a performance of people, who had won a competition this singer has been holding every year. And what was pervasive throughout this concert was, once again, that we have to go after the youth and the young people, youth orchestras, youth choruses, etc., but it's sort of an under-the-surface thing.

So we went up to the singer afterwards, the bel canto singer, and we asked her about the tuning question again. She is someone who has recently got in contact with us on the Messiah as well. So I gave her a report of what we did in Brooklyn and Manhattan, and her response was, "Excellent!" And I said "We have to pull together another tuning conference, like we did in the '80s and '90s." And her response was, again, "Look, if you're going to pull it together, just give me the details, and we'll see what we can do."

But what I have in my mind is that this something that is only indicative of what we can do in Manhattan.  I've never experienced this anywhere else, I was just down South, never had an experience like that down South! And it's something that we run into every day. And I think, along with the space program, it's the only type of quality of human activity which can give people the power, the Empfindungsvermögen, the capacity to deal with the right quality of ideas to fight this fight. But it's in Manhattan, and it's everywhere, so I wanted to see what you had to say about that.

LAROUCHE:  That's how the space program was formed, is by Germans who came back into the United States, collaborated there, because they had an understanding of what the principle of composition was. They were already specialists in science, scientific work and music, but they decided, coming into the United States, sort of being consented into the United States, and they founded the whole space program.  And that's what we're defending, and that's what Obama tried to destroy! And we're trying to build it back again. The program is absolutely necessary. As a matter of fact, the human mind depends upon the insight into that principle; otherwise it's not a good mind.

Q: This is R—from Bergen County, New Jersey. Originally I was going to crack a joke, and then proceed to talk about what I wanted to ask you about, which was American exceptionalism in the light of the Presidential killings in Somalia, and so forth: 150 people, it was reported on the website.

But as I was listening to Frank, I decided that there's so much one can do to focus on negativity; there's so much negativity out there, and there's so much stuff that's going on that is just plain wrong. And when I listened to Frank, I said this is a positive note, this is positivity. I work with kids, and I just want to emphatically agree with the efforts Frank and the others are doing to bring us up to a higher and more uplifting level, in order to move forward.

LAROUCHE:  The answer is very simple to the whole thing. In principle, that is the principle. The musical principle, as you can put it in terms of, in general, in Classical music, the same thing. The principle is the same. Now, sometimes it's been a little butchered, or decorated excessively or something like that.  But that is the principle.  The Italian principle is an example of this.  But there were other samples of that earlier, expressed in different terms.

Q: My name is R—M—from Goshen in Orange County. Mr. LaRouche, I hope you live a long life, maybe 120 years old would be a good idea.

But my question here, I mention the aerospace, and the technology with NASA.  In our organizing, I believe that maybe the Basement Team could list out the different technological benefits that have been achieved.  Like, for instance, there's a tube that can go down your throat with a flashlight, it can control it, and it has a laser beam in there, in order to locate where a tumor may be in your stomach, or your body without cutting it open.  These are technologies that have been promoted with NASA.  And I feel in the organizing, people should tell these people out there as they  organize, to enlighten them, to encourage them, say well,  "Gee, that is good."

Like for instance, me, I had laser surgery, so I won't have the cornea in my eye, the whiteness in the eye won't evolve, I can go blind. I had that, through NASA technology has achieved that.

And a simple one is the microwave. These things have all been promoted by NASA. In our organizing, I'm suggesting and requesting it should be announced. And the Basement Team should list all the different benefits that have been achieved through technology with NASA. You can't just say NASA and the benefits that it has achieved. But what are they?  To enlighten them, to encourage the person, to say "yes, that is a good idea." This is how I feel that maybe we'll enhance the membership and the promotion of contributions, where they will see that there's something there, it's not just stops and says, "it promotes technology."  But what are they?

This is what I think really should be promoted as an organizer.  I've been a contributor for a long time, and I still want to be doing that.  Thank you!

LAROUCHE: The problem is that the practice of medicine underwent a change in earlier period; the practice of medicine, surgery and so forth.  And there were changes in practice. This happened in the course of my early adult life.  And this kind of change in medical practice took a change, and it was not always the right thing to do. Physicians who were competent physicians knew of this matter, and would try to apply their skills as they knew them, to help in these kinds of problems.  And so the problem is, all you need to do, is to have a better improvement of contributions of physicians and those who are related to physicians.

If that's done, which was being done before, with the same principle, then the same thing can be done in a better way with more modern techniques, with techniques that are available now. But the point is, it's the problem of the care of the human being, in this case, which is quite crucial. We know that can be delivered. It was being delivered in the course of the wartime period, after the wartime; but we have lost some of that practice. It doesn't mean the practice has disappeared, it means the utilization of it is made cheaper. And that's a problem.

SPEED:  Let me just say before you start, let  met announce again, when you come to the microphone and you ask a question, just ask the question and then pause.  Mr. LaRouche will answer. And please try to  keep the question short enough that it's coherent.

Q: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, this is D— from the Bronx. I have a very touchy question to ask. It's in regard to the closing of churches. In the past, I'd say three years, four churches were closed in our 20-block area around the church that I attend. Have you any idea, could you give us any insight as to what's causing it and what we can do to keep them open?  Because as one of the only means by which people in the community...?

LAROUCHE:  Well, you've got one real problem to deal with. First of all, the degeneration of the morals, of the citizens of the United States, since the beginning of the 20th century, that is since the birth, so to speak, of Bertrand Russell, there has been a consistent degeneracy in every respect, not just in this religion or that, but in every respect, which has been becoming worse, and worse, and worse. And that's the problem.

Yes, the religious question comes in.  But it is not clearly understood what the religious question is. There is a meaning, but, what's the meaning? What's the basis of the existence of a baby?  How does a baby come into existence, and what is the consequence of the baby existing? Well, if the baby is smart, the baby will be smarter than its parents? And it will be an actual achievement, not some kind of boo-boo this or that, boo-boo that.

So therefore, when people are being religious, there are two kinds of religious. One is a concentration on understanding of the meaning of mankind's life, from the birth to the termination of that life; and that termination of that life is the instrument which brings mankind into improvements, in the understanding of what mankind's mission is in the universe. And if you can look at it that way, which is I think is the only short-term way of expressing it, you have the solution. You have to understand what's the requirement? What is the goal of man's existence, after the parents of the man or so forth, have died? Is the man who lived after the parents had died, did that have a meaning? Is there some causal effect of that? Yes! And the question is, how does society help mankind realize that opportunity?

Q: [follow-up] Thank you very much for the information, sir. And I hope that things progress in our affair here in New York City.

LAROUCHE:  Good.  Very Good.

Q:  Hi, Lyn.  Just on that, in fact, adding on what we've been talking about before, I wanted to brief you on what we've been doing in Brooklyn to build this Messiah we're doing on Easter Sunday.  And the idea, what I wanted to communicate is, this church we're going to be performing at, is in an area quite similar area to the last one. And, in fact, what's happened in this area, since those two performances we did in December, of the Messiah, there's been a great reverberation in these communities around these two performances that we did.  And that's having now an impact on what we're doing now to build this next one, which is at a church which has—which was almost shut down in 2011.  Right now they're resurrecting this church, which is about 30 years older than the Statue of Liberty. And it has amazing acoustics.

And so right now, what we're doing, is creating a major field in this area, where you have now a lot of people very excited about the process. In fact, one lady told me, because I've been going to her place of business for the whole time this has been going on, she told me that "I like seeing this saga unfold, what you guys are doing."  So there's a whole development that's being shaped by this. And you can see, as we're going through this whole process, you can see that the more we have of this music program, the more you're actually going to create a real process of development, much like Lorenzo Da Ponte did in shaping the Italian culture in New York in the early 1800s, where he actually created the opera culture.

I've been thinking about that, on top of also doing this whole process as well. So I wanted to see what your comments were on that.

LAROUCHE:  No the point is, this kind of process is well known.  The relationship to the Italian model, is really very significantly known, and it's distinctive. There's a German version, which is also somewhat differently tuned, but it's the same kind of thing.

So these kinds of forms, they're not based on religion as such; it's not explicitly religion, as such; it's on the idea that mankind has a role beyond its society, and that is the role. It takes the form that's often called religious form.  But you have to be very careful about this, because there are religions, and there are religions and so forth and so on; and you've got to make sure you've got the right message.  But the point is, yes, there is a process of this nature.

But the key thing is, you've got to get people to stop thinking about looking at the graveyards.  They've got to look at the future embodied in the human being.  And we have to take the child, the child of parents; is this child going to be a creative force for mankind?  That's the issue!  The purpose is to have people who are good people. But! what you really need, what mankind needs, when you think about how many evil people there are running around in the United States right now, you say, "Wait a minute!"  This is not just a name, something to name. The point is that you want people, young people, who will develop themselves into becoming a creative force for the future of mankind.  And if you don't have that, you've lost the message!

Q: [follow-up] I would just add on to that: A lot of people are responding to what we've been doing in the schools with the Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture.  And with these young musicians inspiring these young people in the schools to be active with this Classical principle.

LAROUCHE:  Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn't.  It depends on it. But you've got to get a more precise determination, of a finding on that issue.

Q:  Mr. LaRouche:  My name is R—, from Queens.  What would you propose after we get rid of Wall Street and Obama, how to bring manufacturing capability back into New York?

LAROUCHE:  Well, to make short of this business, what we're concerned about is the development of mankind, as a species of mankind.  And the object is to develop children, who will have successors to their own children.  And these people will achieve something in the future of mankind.  That's what the whole lesson is.

The religious argument often goes awry, because it assumes that you get rewarded when you go dead, when you're buried.  And people will worship the death of the person.  Now, I'm sure the person who's dying, is not really happy about the approach of death.  At least they shouldn't be.  And what they should be is, what they can achieve in life, in continued life, as a contribution to those, who come after them, by creativity.  And that's the way to go at it.

You've got say, well, the Creator does not want to kill you. The Creator wants to get the music out of you, so you can enjoy it!  And that's the point.  The point is, the loving relationship among people, is based on that approach.  You have relatives who died.  It's a sad experience.  It's a tough fight.  But once you are assured, that that life meant something,  that life, before it died, was continuing its influence on what would follow after their own death, that's what makes the difference of mankind. Otherwise mankind has no meaning.

Q:  Good afternoon, Lyn.  It's B— from New Jersey.  On Wednesday I was up at the rally at Columbus Circle in Manhattan. And I was just being very straightforward with people there.  I was prompting people by saying, "Look we have to get the United States to act human again."  You know, that really sums it up. What comes to mind to me is what Kennedy said about the space program, about long strides.  And it's not really the accomplishment itself of getting somebody to the Moon.  But you can get from people the kind of response you need by saying, "Look, if we can do that, what can't we do?" Give me an example of what we can't do, and you can overturn it by proving to people that we've done things that people at the time thought at the time were unimaginable.  That's what's important—to get people to think about that in one step, that process of getting from here to there.  I think you've put this very succinctly, saying that it's like in music, it's what's between that is really more important, to get people to make that leap.

So I'd just like your thoughts on that, because Manhattan is an amazing place in talking to people there.  It is the crossroads of the world, in a certain sense, because you do meet everybody, on the streets of Manhattan.

LAROUCHE:  Yes, in a sense, that's true.  But in a more poignant way of getting at it, is the fact that people who are able to be creative—and there are many cases of this kind of thing.  And it's that creativity, the perpetuation of that creativity, which makes mankind more powerful in terms of dealing with the challenges of human life.

I mean, are you going to say that you're going to put a corpse in the ground and that's the end of a story?  Or are you dedicated to the proposition that that person should, if at all possible, in a sense, continue a projection of their achievements in life, in one way or the other?  You don't like to bury a person in the ground!  You want something better.  You want something which supersedes that.  You want a mission that performs something, which makes the whole thing meaningful.

And you have a problem that you have to confront, whenever a friend dies, or a person that you know dies, you've got a problem.  And that problem is, it often leads you to despair, moral despair.  And therefore you've got to devote your own life, and the life of the people around you, on the basis that their life has a continuation beyond their death—a living continuation, beyond their death, where they represent still even after they have died, they represent something living, in terms of what they are able to contribute during  of the remainder of their post-life.

Q:  Hello, Mr. LaRouche.  H— from New York.  It's good to see you.  I'm just bringing up something in our politics locally in New York City, that the mayor is proposing something called, "meh"; doesn't sound good already. But "meh" is the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) policy, which a Trojan horse to destroy most of the working class neighborhoods left in New York City.  And it was approved by the City Planning Commission in February, although 90% of 59 community boards voted against it. But today, of course, the New York Times came out for it, in an editorial, and I'm sure the FBI is also in there somewhere boosting this.  We have real estate developers that just are interested in making money instead of, like under Glass-Steagall we had the sub-contractors under Franklin Roosevelt to build the public housing, to build the infrastructure we need.  So, how do we develop the surrounding region, the Hudson River Valley, etc., and stop New York City being a safe deposit box and real estate money hole?

LAROUCHE:  That's a funeral parlor. [laughter] That's what you're talking about!  We don't want funeral parlors; we want hospitals.  We want skyscrapers to be taken over from the Wall Street gang, using those skyscrapers as part of the healthcare and all the other kinds of things that a skyscraper can do.

Because we know that Manhattan, from my own knowledge of Manhattan, we had certain hospitals in the lower part of Manhattan, and they were specialists in supplying healthcare, in emergencies and so forth, during that time.  And so therefore the idea of having the healthcare system, including a hospital system and things that go with that, is the instrument of creativity; it's an instrument of generosity.  And therefore, what you are doing is you are developing mankind, by providing the kind of healthcare that a good hospital system, like Manhattan used to be, can do it!

So there's the life, there's the activity there's the reality.  It's the ability to deliver healthcare, in this case, and other things of the same nature.  To educate people so they're not ignorant, to develop people so they have new skills that they're deprived of.  So these are the things that are of living values.  And you want to think about everything, even a dying person, you want to think about the living values of this dying person.

Q: [follow-up]  OK, by the way, did somebody important die, recently that maybe I didn't hear about?

LAROUCHE:  Well, I think people are dying all over the place, and what's happening now, the rate of dying is increasing. And Obama is doing that!  there are other ways it's being done, but that's the key one.

Q: Hello, my name is C—.  How're you Mr. LaRouche?  I came to raise the question about war and what fighting wars does to the people who fight them?  We know that in America's history, there's a lot of wars have been fought, and a lot of men and women have died, but more men than women.

I disagree with women being included in combat, which they're started, they passed the law to put them in combat.  And we're being told that they're going — they're trying to fix the Selective Service so that when they do start drafting people, females will be drafted too. And I would like to know what you think about that, and how we can stop it, because females, from what I have studied on this, have been getting molested in our services.  So if they go into the military, they really don't have a way — so what can we do?  What do you think we can do to stop this?

LAROUCHE: Well, the first thing you really have to think about the totality of people, as individuals of people.  You have to think about what the meaning of their life is, because you just cannot write people off.  You've got to be given accountability of what this is all about.  I don't think that the woman thing; we all know about woman problem.  There's no question about that, about why women tend to die, more than men do often in certain cases.  But that's all there.  But the problem is you have to have the healthcare system, to encompass the protection of the people and the protection of the healthcare system as a system, is what is required.  And most of the abuses that come in terms of women and so forth, all of these things can be dealt with — with science; with science.

Q: [follow-up]  I understand what you're saying, but us dealing with them with science, and them going into combat, fighting in other parts of the world, won't have anything to do with that.

LAROUCHE:  This is something that's part of a whole system. And you've got to attack the problem from a whole system:  Can we at last free mankind from being killed?  Yes, we can.  Let's do it.

Q: [follow-up]  OK.  You know they opened up 200,000 jobs for women in military combat.

LAROUCHE:  That's no problem.

Q:  Hi, Lyn, Alvin in New York.  In having discussions with people now, that are taking the time and interest to read the pamphlet, this is all around the development of our upcoming conference on April 7, I'm encountering that the pamphlet itself, obviously, is so dense and so broad, that overall, I believe — I'm in the early phases of this, and these people all require more follow-up, more than I'm used to doing; and I'm committed to do that.  But really that there's a favorable response over all. I am receiving the short-sighted, or kind of "headline" responses, "oh, it's all about money," "it's all about greed," things like that.  But even when it's coming from them, my sense is, they don't really believe that.

Now, I feel personally that, from going through the site, from staying in touch, from reading things of the entire strategic crisis and solution, that all of this stuff is always in my mind.  And it's only until I start engaging people, that are actually taking the time to read this, that I can actually really begin to respond to them in a truthful manner, and I'm finding a favorable response.  I'm not saying that people are jumping up in arms and embracing this, but it seems to be provoking them to think, because we're insisting upon a future now, and that seems to make sense to them.

This also involves an expanded network of mine that is also new, so there are new people, and I think that's better for me that I'm having this opportunity with.  So there's still going to be a lot of problems that come up, along what appear to be the practical side; yet, I feel that I'm onto something if they're willing to read that pamphlet and show that they're sane on some level.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, it's a question of the ability of the individual to detect in himself or herself, the meaning of life, extended life; human life. And if that factor is brought into play, the general expectation of survival of life and achievement in life, are likely to be promoted.  If you are operating with desperation, with the usual kinds of sins, angers, rage, all these kinds of things, they become forces, which are deadly to the human life.  I mean, you just take a guy, he takes an automobile out; he's enraged, he's inside the automobile and the automobile is carrying him, to where?  To his death.  And this is the kind of thing that can commonly happen.  And you get something in the newspaper you get report here or a report there, "So and so has died."  How'd they die?  Well, in an automobile accident, or they killed somebody or they did something of that nature.

And therefore the question is, how do you understand, the meaning of the continuation, of life, human life?  And therefore, if you realize that human life is an important commodity, then you're going to defend it; you've got to defend it in various ways. And I think in society, when you look at society, look at the newspaper reports on death, that should be enough to warn you:  Why do people die?  Because they really have lost the connection to continuing to live. And when people are more intelligent about this matter, they're more likely to take precautions.

Q: [follow-up]  Well, as a follow-up, a part of this, again, new extended network  that seems to be developing in front of me, one of them who is labor related, part of a major union here in New York City and nationwide;  so the idea of Glass-Steagall, even of the space program, they're in agreement with. Then he says, look, before you do all this, you've got to remember, that we put a murderer in the White House from seven years ago.  What they want to do now, is back off Obama.  They want to act like he didn't exist.  They want to talk about an election that's upcoming; they want to dismiss that, in other words deny the crisis, and so I wanted to bring that out.  Because that's when the person's heads shot back and, you know, we'll be in touch again, but there's a real denial there and they want to get into this Bernie thing, this crash, it's called "Bernie."  And we've got to keep them coming back to the actual current crisis, the now.  So that's a part of this network that I'm dealing with, and I wanted to throw that out to you as well.

LAROUCHE:  You've got a leading figure working for Obama, who is killing people; who is on record as involved with killing people.  And she was associated with a friend of mine, and that's the story!

Q: [follow-up]  I'll pass that on. [laughter]

Q:  Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, Y—M—.  My question is in regards to the articles related to the space programs.  I've seen many good information regarding what they said about the far side of the Moon, the new challenge; but I believe that this challenge cannot be done unless there is cooperation between the United States and the People's Republic of China, to get to that goal. In the past, we had during the Cold War, competition to go to space between the United States and the former U.S.S.R.  Today, cooperation is mandatory, because I believe that technology is the way to unite mankind.

There's a lot of challenges, but I want to ask you if they're realistic.  Mars, we speak about Mars, but we have to understand that many areas of Mars are corrosive enough towards material coming from Earth, would burn there as soon as it gets there.  Pluto has been a great achievement; taking pictures, going there, seeing it around, that's a great endeavor, but can we really have something farther than the Solar System, going out on the heliosphere?  It's not confirmed that Voyager I and Voyager II are technically on what we call interstellar highway, the heliosphere.

And the last point, scientists claim there might be conditions of life in [inaudible 51.17] system but in terms of light-years the distance is far beyond our imagination.

And also, what the last point: Meteorite control.  If we work together as nations in this planet, we might work better to avoid a meteorite event that could be very unfortunate for all the countries, and all the political regimes.

LAROUCHE:  I think what we have with Russia and China working together right now, we do have access to the development of the means which can be dealt with to understand what mankind's role in the universe is.  Now, rather than trying to isolate some particular factors of that, you have to say something else:  Can mankind develop a system, by mankind, working in terms of the Galaxy, the Galactic System, and that Galactic System can be managed to make it possible for life, and human life to be improved.  Now, this is directly or indirectly doesn't make much difference, because the greatest source of water,  needed by mankind in the Galaxy is a Galactic source.  There is more water provided for mankind in the Galactic System, than there is on Earth.

So therefore, when we understand that, and understand these things, we find that mankind does  have access, to gain control over areas of the Solar System, beyond anything we've experienced so far.  And the idea of what space program can do, provides means by which mankind — people are today, living people today, are still doing space program, living in a space program attachment.  So this is all available.

We have to look at mankind as mankind is a power over the Solar System.  Mankind is a power.  And that's been proven many different kinds of ways. And the idea is that mankind should be able to develop the abilities, to bring this around.  I mean, there's more water in the Galactic System, than there is on Earth. And we can get a lot more of it.  So that's not a problem.

What is being done by China, right now, especially, on concentration on the new plan; what has been done by Russia in these directions, they're largely experimental, but they're there.  So the general understanding, of what mankind can cause to happen, for mankind and beyond, and to take the Galactic areas and other areas, larger areas, Mars and so forth, all these things are accessible to mankind, potentially. And the question is, do we want to accept the potential?

Q: [follow-up]  For the first step, maybe for the U.S. government must be to put a bigger budget for this within the coming years.

LAROUCHE:  I think we want to bury the bad Presidents. [laughter]

Q:  Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, I'm P— from the uninformed state of Connecticut. [laughter]  Recently, I've been busy educating our young adults, high school, college students, in which they are all very accessible as in part-time jobs, with CVS, large food chains, and actually all the retail stores. There are two types of students: Uninformed and a very small percent of scholars.  The best coachable are the uninformed. [laughter]  What is your advice in this method of cutting to the chase?  Getting at the truth and their roles in the future?

LAROUCHE:  Well, I think the obvious answer to that is there are technologies which exist, and which can be introduced, but they have to be developed; and that's what you have to concentrate on.  You want to develop the mind of the human individual, and you want to have the practical means which will lead to that result.  And that's what you need.  So therefore, you've got sometimes reexamine the educational systems because they don't correspond, to what mankind's purpose should be!

Take children out, given 'em a good education, let them have what they think is a party, a summer party of some things like that, and they will become excited if they do so.  And they will be now better children than they would have been if they hadn't been given that opportunity.

Q:  This is S— from New York, and I have a question about truth. Now, what I wrote is that, bearing in mind that the past is history, from which to draw insight, it can be said that future holds the truth of the moment you have formulated to be truth.  Meaning that the truths that we hold to be self-evident are the future.  This also being the basis of scientific discovery and as you often say, the immortalization of individuals.  How can we further this concept in our daily lives?

LAROUCHE:  It isn't quite like that.  Because if the human species, I mean a whole bunch of people, a whole bunch of human beings, if they catch on to what they can accomplish by their own self-development, in terms of creativity, to make invention, invention of other things, to have better insight into things, all these things are essential.  And the question is, how do you get society to accept those standards? The problem is, you get a system under Obama, for example, or under the Bush family, they're no good!  You don't want a Bush family, or Obama!  This is a sick party!

What you want to do, is you want to actually grope around, to find out where you got sources of information which lead to what you want; that is, what you think you can achieve for mankind.  And that's the only answer, the final answer; I mean, that's the short and final answer of the question!

SPEED:  OK, Lyn that is it for our questions for the day, and I want to take up something here, so we have a little dialogue.  You and I will have a little dialogue.

LAROUCHE:  OK.

SPEED:  So what people are running into...

LAROUCHE:  Don't ask me to dance! [laughter]

SPEED:  That won't happen.  That won't happen.

So what people are running into in their organizing, is a lot of people are asking the absurd questions, which we are now telling our people, "don't answer them. Stay out of answering absurd questions."  And as a consequence, since people want to be — there are many of them, you don't have to make a list — but you can imagine that in part, this also is sometime dragged into the meeting.  So now what people are trying to do, is beat off those absurd questions, and being preoccupied with absurdity, try to focus on what you're telling us we're supposed to be doing, both in Manhattan and in the country.

At the same time, this is frictional!  So, of course, you know, there's a tug inside of people. And I wanted you to say something, if you would about, how do you stay on topic, on this idea of this conception of mankind, stay off the tactical, and stay away from being polluted by the friction that people are experiencing when they're talking to the people out here in the street?

LAROUCHE: Well, the only answer I can really give you is, I've had a lot of experience in life.  And I've had 'em in different countries, different parts of the planet and so forth. When you are sensitive to that, and it's been my life's efforts, when you are associated with that, you respond to almost anything, because you're exposed to almost anything.  And I've been in various parts of the planet and this and that and so forth.  And so it's easy for me; for other people it's more difficult, because we don't get that variegated characteristic of development, which enables people to leap more quickly to recognition of what the issue is.

The key thing, the first thing you have to do, is you have to learn not to be thwarted by ignorance, and that's what the problem is.  And I think ignorance is a thing you cannot afford to pay.  [laughter]

SPEED:  OK, now the second question, is, several people are sitting here, who have had commitments from people to come, and they didn't come.  One of them's to my left here, others — people say, "yeah, I'm coming," but then they get scared, or else they tell you one thing and they change.  Of course, this is part of the organizing process.  But you've been emphasizing that we're going after human minds, not warm bodies. Now, that's something that I think really has to be kept in mind.

LAROUCHE: Well, there is really no guarantee that you can win whatever you want to win, just because you want to win it. You have to earn it.  And if you haven't learned to win what is necessary, freely, if you cannot respond when a question is thrown at you, when you cannot find an answer to the question, then you're in trouble.  And when you have a role of leadership of the type that I got stuck into during my life,  — and I'm almost a phenomenal character nowadays — when you get into that kind of experience, you don't make mistakes.  You understand what mistakes are, and you don't make them.  Or you will simply say, I'm not ready to give you an answer.  That's the object. [barking in the background] And even the dogs will tell you that. [laughter]

SPEED:  OK, so that's what I have.  Does anybody else have any questions?  If not, looks like this is it, Lyn.

LAROUCHE:  À bientôt!