Friday Webcast, July 22, 2016
Tune in tonight at 8pm for our weekly Friday webcast with hosts Matthew Ogden and Benjamin Deniston.
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good Evening! It's July 22nd, 2106. My name is Matthew Ogden, and you're watching our weekly broadcast here on Friday evenings from LaRouchePAC.com. I'm joined in the studio by Ben Deniston, from the LaRouche PAC science team; and then I'm joined via video by two members of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee. We have Diane Sare, joining us from New York City; and we have Michael Steger, normally from San Francisco, California, but joining us today from Seattle, Washington, where he's preparing for a major conference which is coming up this weekend. We can discuss that further.
We all had a discussion a little bit earlier today which was informed by the discussion we had with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche yesterday. I think one thing that's very clear, is that there's no other way to describe this current period of history, than the one that Helga LaRouche has termed it, the Erinyes Principle. The Erinyes have begun their dreadful dance.
Four weeks ago was the historic conference sponsored by the Schiller Institute in Berlin. Go back and look at the keynote speech with which Mrs. LaRouche opened that entire conference — an international conference; participants from multiple countries, multiple continents, all over the world. Helga began that speech with a very prescient statement: that the Erinyes Principle is what is now dominating history. That conference happened right on the heels of the Brexit vote. Since that Brexit vote happened — which was a shock to everybody; nobody saw this coming — history has taken on a tempo, a rhythm, which has moved increasingly rapidly since that time, very clearly in the direction of a total breakdown of the trans-Atlantic system. Not just the trans-Atlantic financial system, although that's a major part of it, but the trans-Atlantic political system, and the trans-Atlantic social system.
What Helga Zepp-LaRouche termed the Erinyes Principle — which is a reference to a very beautiful but very chilling poem, [The Cranes of Ibykus], by Friedrich Schiller, is also what you can term the Nemesis Principle. If you look over the last four weeks, I think that Nemesis is now the principle which is now dominating the course of history: the Chilcot Report has been released — an indictment of Tony Blair, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney for "aggressive war," a real crime under international law; the 28 pages of the original Joint Congressional Investigation into 9/11 have been released after years of a struggle to force their release. Everything that the 28 pages says is an indictment of this entire Anglo-Saudi-Bush-Cheney-Blair system.
I think it's worth remembering that the Chilcot Report and the 28 pages are addressing exactly the same moment in history, when Bush and Cheney and Tony Blair were lying about weapons of mass destruction, to so-called "justify" an aggressive war in Iraq. It's the same time they were suppressing the truth about their friend, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, channeling tens of thousands of dollars into a support apparatus made up of Saudi Intelligence agents inside the United States, to wage the worst terrorist attack that has ever occurred on U.S. soil.
Also, the HSBC Report. Right on the heels of the release of this report by the House Financial Services Committee, top HSBC executives have been arrested and thrown in jail in New York City. And you have the fact that Glass-Steagall — which will bring down the entire Wall Street phony money apparatus — has now made its way into both of the major party platforms.
If you look at the directionality of the complete collapse of this trans-Atlantic system as it is conceived of today, this is not something which can be controlled by those who sowed the seeds of this collapse. It's not something that's being controlled by George Bush, or Barack Obama, or Tony Blair. It is coming down on their heads as well. I think, maybe, another term that you can conceive of the Nemesis Principle, is the colloquial American proverb, "They reap what they sow." That is what is coming to bear right now. The issue is: they will bring down the entire system along with them.
The critical intervention of the recent two weeks by Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche, to act on the Herrhausen Principle, [is] yet one more expression of Nemesis or the Erinyes, the still un-solved assassination of [former Deutsche Bank Chairman Alfred] Herrhausen: to invoke that principle and to say: We're going to use the leverage of an intervention with Deutsche Bank as the vector, to completely reorganize this entire financial system back towards the productive powers of labor, the identity of human kind as a creative species, and to use the Hamiltonian principles of credit as Herrhausen was explicitly discussing them at the time that he was assassinated; and to transform — axiomatically — the entire foundations of this collapsing trans-Atlantic system, to bring the United States, to bring continental Europe into the New Paradigm that's being expressed by the win-win New Silk Road program of China, of Russia; and to act on the solutions that were put on the table at that historic and very prescient conference in Berlin four weeks ago.
With the release of the 28 pages, with the political hegemony now that Glass-Steagall has, with both party platforms now containing this officially, and the vindication of the fact that Mr. LaRouche was absolutely right in his indictment of Blair, Bush, and Cheney at the time, as war criminals, with the release of this Chicot Report, the authority of the LaRouche movement and the hegemony of our leadership could not be any more clear, and I think now is the time, as perhaps, agents of the Erinyes Principle, to say, "Now the time has come for a complete reorganization of this system." And to use the fact that the leadership was very clearly expressed at this conference four weeks ago, to say, "The solution is very easy. It could occur overnight. The only thing that is required, is the decisive political action here in the United States, to have a clean break with the policies of the last 15 years, of the Bush-Cheney-Obama-Blair regime." And to say, "This is no more. This is going to be explicitly and publically denounced for what it is, and we are now going to adopt an entirely new axiomatic set of principles in order to bring the trans-Atlantic world into this New Paradigm."
This is very clearly made, I think, in the lead statement that is on the website for today at LaRouchePAC.com: "Their Day Has Come, — And Gone!" Diane, you recorded a statement yesterday during your big rally at Columbus Circle in Manhattan, which I think also directly gets at this point — the petition that you have written that's being circulated. Where do we go from here? What are the next steps, following the release of the 28 pages? And also this critical intervention around the reorganization of Deutsche Bank.
I'd like to say that, just to start off the discussion.
DIANE SARE: We're at a really amazing moment. I think it's important for Americans in particular to reflect. This is a very hard time for Americans, because our nation is at the moment on the wrong side. We have a killer, still, for President. We have not yet brought all these characters to justice — Bush, Cheney, Obama, and some of the others — although we're definitely moving in the right direction with the 28 pages released, and with Glass-Steagall being in both party's platform, regardless of where the candidates may stand on it.
I was just reflecting on something Mr. LaRouche was describing many years ago, about a moment of change, a revolution, when things don't exactly go as expected. You turn the light switch, and the water starts running; or, you think you're turning on the faucet and the heat comes on. If you're thinking about what's happened in the last weeks, for example, the Brexit vote, which came as a great shock to many people, and many other people were very cynical, who would say, "Well, if they can control the vote on everything, how come they couldn't control the vote on this?" Because the institutions themselves are so deeply divided and in such an uproar. Or, "Why couldn't they keep the lid on the 28 pages any longer?" Or, "Why did the truth come out about Tony Blair?"
Or, take events like this attempted coup in Turkey, where every kind of wild conspiracy theory was being bandied around. LaRouche has pointed to Putin and Putin's role, who really seems to have had a very level head through all of this.
I think the way to remain sane, and to also ensure that one is taking a correct course of action, is to really think about the future. Mr. LaRouche had said this to us on the Policy Committee a couple of weeks ago, that it's time for Americans to assemble themselves, and re-consider their destiny. Perhaps we're not going to understand every detail of why certain things are occurring, or what's behind everything that occurs in the moment, but it is a time when we should consider where we really want our nation to go. What was the intent of the founding fathers of this republic? What was the intent of Alexander Hamilton? What are we prepared to commit, to ensure that our nation actually gets off of a trajectory of self-destruction, and perhaps annihilation of the planet, and moves in a direction which would be in keeping with what Alexander Hamilton or John Quincy Adams or President Kennedy would have intended?
I think this is very personal. I also think it's very important, because you had another one of these mass shootings today in Munich, Germany. People tend to get unnerved, or they say things that are criminally insane, like "This is the new normal. We just have to get used to it, and expect that any time you go to a public place, someone might have a bomb or start shooting people." I don't think that's really how mankind should live.
The conception of the future, and the conception of a certain faith that there's a principle of Justice in the Universe — these things are going to be absolutely key for us to navigate this period and to successfully maneuver ourselves into the New Paradigm which is emerging so dramatically in China and in the nations China's collaborating with.
MICHAEL STEGER: In that context, both the 28 pages and the Glass-Steagall fight that we've been waging out, in some cases over a decade, really in both cases a mobilization of the political process in the United States, it reminds me of a similar intervention we made in 2004-5, specifically on the question of Franklin Roosevelt's legacy. What you see in this process, both with the Glass-Steagall and the 28 pages, is a resurgence of what is the last truly defined sense of higher justice within the United States from a government, which really was comprehensive, from Franklin Roosevelt's standpoint. It was not just the foreign concerns of security or the financial crisis; it was clearly the actual well-being and future-orientation of the population as a whole.
With both these campaigns that we have waged, you now see a coalesced grouping of people who don't necessarily associate themselves with the higher mission at stake, but yet are clearly participants in that higher mission: if this nation and the western civilization can actually find itself capable of joining in the development and collaboration of Eurasia.
I think that's kind of a very clear point. That's something that's coalesced. There is a momentum, there is a morale of potential victory. This "perp-walk" of this HSBC executive: now here's a London banker, British subject, grabbed by the police at the gate of trans-Atlantic flight, and marched into a Brooklyn jail cell for the evening. I hope we have some pictures of that, because the American people should get a sense of what this was.
There's a certain retribution that should be handed down, but I think most importantly — and what Franklin Roosevelt really truly grasped, and perhaps both John and Robert Kennedy had a sense of, as they became leading figures — was this future orientation over the society. What this conference made very clear, is that [we're] moving now into a complete transformative moment in history, [where] the capability and potentials for mankind's development are more clear than ever. This process, the discussion we're leading, is essential, both in the United States with those campaigns, but also internationally.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: Well, I think this puts the whole Deutsche Bank flank that Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche have defined, in its proper and important context, because that is the issue: How do you create the future? We've said that when this was first launched, there was a lot of populist rage against it. "Why are you trying to defend the banks? Screw the banks! Let it all come down." We don't want to let it all come down. We don't want a return of the 14th Century Dark Age. We need sane, qualified leadership; and I think that what we're discussing here, in terms of how do we move out of the present situation into a stable position as Franklin Roosevelt did. How do we mirror and recreate that type of an organization process again now, in a far worse situation, quite frankly.
What Lyndon and Helga Zepp LaRouche have pointed to around the Deutsche Bank situation, I think is key and indicative as a model, but a critical and necessary intervention, but also a model for the type of reorganization we need. The system is bankrupt; you need sane leadership to come in to say, "Let's reorganize this thing. Let's keep the institutions functioning, as Franklin Roosevelt did. Let's figure out what of these phony fictitious assets need to be set aside and forgotten about; this entire insane derivatives bubble." But let's use the institutions as they were created to be used; as Herrhausen understood. One of the last, if not the last, high-level banker who actually understood that. Hamilton understood it; Franklin Roosevelt understood that we need these institutions to facilitate physical economic growth; increases in the productive capabilities of society, increases in the productive powers of labor. It's absolutely necessary that we reorganize the financial system to be able to do this, and not let it come down in some chaotic, catastrophic breakdown; which is the threat looming now.
I think this needs to be seen as part of a unified perspective, because we're also discussing all these break-outs around the issue of these wars of aggression, the terrorism. Really this is part of the same breakdown process. When Lyndon LaRouche uniquely said in 2000 that we're heading towards a Reichstag Fire event with the incoming Bush administration, forecasting what became 9/11; one of the major issues in his assessment was the breakdown of the financial system. These are not separate issues, these are part of one and the same issue. What we're seeing now as the potential to really eliminate this Anglo-Saudi geopolitical irregular warfare terrorism apparatus, is part of the same thing as retaking over the financial system of the trans-Atlantic system and re-orienting it to a true Hamiltonian, Franklin Roosevelt, patriotic orientation. So, we can actually ally, what was presented at this Berlin conference, ally with China, with Russia, in the creation of this win-win perspective; this collaborative paradigm. But the convergence of these issues, I think is critical; because this is not terrorism here and financial system there, this issue, that issue. It is how do we look at the situation as a totality and intervene to take the necessary steps to move out of the situation.
OGDEN: Absolutely. One of the things Viktor Ivanov, who was the anti-narcotics czar of Russia, said very clearly [was] if you want to shut down drugs and terrorism, you need to have a global Glass-Steagall. What Glass-Steagall is going after is exactly what HSBC has been engaged in for decades. LaRouche knew that originally when he wrote Dope, Inc.; saying don't give these guys a charter in the United States. Don't let them operate in the United States; this is a drug and terror money-laundering bank. That's exactly what their DNA is. I think realizing that these are not all separate issues, but these are one and the same: what the Chilcot Report is implying; what the 28 pages are just the tip of the iceberg about; what Glass-Steagall is intended to shut down. This is the failed system, and you need to have then a solution that you replace it with. Diane, that's what I think was so important about — I mean, you just said this. The reaction which the American people could easily fall into in the present circumstance, would be mass demoralization; fear of random acts of terror, just sheer emotional exhaustion because of the struggle to survive on a daily basis economically, the heroin epidemic that is touching so many families. Just disbelief about the place that we've come to as a nation in terms of political candidates and the political process.
DENISTON: I don't know if they deserve that term, even.
OGDEN: You could face widespread demoralization. On the other hand, you need to have leadership; and that leadership includes a certain faith in humanity, faith in mankind and faith in a higher principle of natural law. This was very much what was probably on Friedrich Schiller's mind when he wrote that original "Cranes of Ibykus" poem; realizing that you had a demoralized population in France which failed in the face of a great opportunity of that moment. This was the circumstances in which Helga LaRouche has raised this continually over the years. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989; the great opportunity that was presented there. The great opportunity that we have in front of us now. So, that element of a faith or a sense of higher justice absolutely is the critical element. Why do we have these beautiful concerts that accompany every great international conference that the LaRouche Movement sponsors around the world? The Berlin conference ended with an absolutely unbelievable Classical music concert which included a dialogue of great cultures; from China, from Russia, from Europe. We're building toward a series of very significant concerts in New York City. All of those are critical to have a taste of the beauty of what the New Paradigm represents, in order to re-moralize a people to have a sense of that faith in the goodness of mankind.
SARE: Well, not exactly on the music question, but I think it's also really important to be concrete with people; because Americans — like many people in the West — have gotten very brainwashed about the idea of money. They think that money per se has an intrinsic value. And when you talk about Deutsche Bank, for example, or you talk about what it would look like to reinstate Glass-Steagall here, because what we're saying is emphatically that we don't have a scheme to bail out the derivatives obligations of Deutsche Bank; that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about capital, so the bank is put in a position to be able to issue credit to be stable and to create an opportunity for the future; for collaboration with Russia and China, for great projects and infrastructure and science, and to be an institution that people have faith in. Similarly here, if we were to reinstate Glass-Steagall, the first thing that you would discover is that everything that people thought had so much value with all this money, really didn't amount to anything. What people might think they have in their pensions, or the stock market, would all be greatly diminished. That's why the immediate next step is this question of national banking and Hamiltonian credit; because what you would have to do, is be able to put credit into those things that would generate growth, that would actually generate an increase in productivity of the population.
So, you take something like the legacy of Krafft-Ehricke, the question of the space program — man's mission in space; we said we actually have to have a banking system that supports us figuring out whether it's feasible in the not-too-distant future to have a manned mission to Mars, or something else. What would be involved in that? And what you would discover is, unless you did something about the transportation grid in the United States, there's no way you could get the bits and pieces and dialogue between the scientists to come together. In other words, it would force an up-shifting of the entire means of society's functioning.
If we wanted to develop fusion rockets — we took a trip here to the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab; and they're on the PSE&G power grid like all of the residential power. But when they're conducting an experiment, I think they by themselves are using about as much electricity as the entire rest of the state combined. It's a massive amount of power to do these things. So, if we were actually try and do this with our power grid right now, we'd just blow out the grid. We just would not have the electricity to continue to let people have air conditioning or run their blow dryer or their dishwasher, and figure out how we're going to launch advanced technology to outer space.
So, what you're talking about very concretely, are the means by which you increase the productivity of the population. And that in turn inspires a real quality of optimism, because when one knows that you're going to produce, or you're going to create something that will live on after you, or you're discovering a principle which will mean something to future generations, then you have a real sense of the value in your having lived. And today, I think people have been very much robbed of that; in fact, in a sense — and probably this is why there are so many suicides — what people see is that in the United States, the standard of living is collapsing, the ability of people to be productive is collapsing. So, you say the sum total of my existence is that we're worse off than we were before; and that idea frankly is Satanic. It's anti-human. So, we have to reverse it.
I think we can; I think we're at a moment where we can. I think part of the reason we're getting a phenomenal response on the music, with people joining the chorus. People joining the chorus recently, there is absolutely no standard type of person who is joining the chorus. It is people who have never sung in their life, who cannot read music, who cannot match pitch even; to people who have professional training, conservatory training. And they all come together and have a certain quality of inspiration to work on this mission. So, I think this is what we actually can do. And what I was saying in the statement yesterday is that my sense — especially after being out at Columbus Circle in Manhattan — is somehow people are missing this. They've become so pessimistic that they're not actually seeing the enormous potential that exists. We've all heard the fable about the goldfish that's swimming in this little teensy bowl. You get rid of the bowl, and you put the goldfish in the ocean; and the goldfish keeps swimming around in this little tiny circle. In a sense, a lot of our friends in the American population are behaving as if they're stuck in this little teensy world; when the reality of that world has shattered and there's something much bigger that we can be a part of. There are certain concrete steps that have to be taken, but with proper leadership we are in a position to actually do them.
OGDEN: I just wanted to respond to one thing that you brought up right in the beginning there about how there needs to be a concrete approach to changing people's concept of economics. This is absolutely the Franklin Roosevelt element, but he was explicit; he said, "No longer is it the effervescent pursuit of profits, but it's the thrill of creative effort." The paradigm shift between what came before Roosevelt and what he ushered in on the day of his inauguration, was driven by that principle; the Hamiltonian principle. Driven by the idea that there's a concept of the productive powers of the human species which is a completely different measurement than what you think of when you talk about money. This gets at the root of what we've been discussing over the last few weeks with this Herrhausen legacy. It's not coincidental that at the same time that Mr. LaRouche was making his 1988 speech at the Kempinski Hotel, forecasting the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reuniting of Germany; which frankly came as as much of a surprise as the Brexit vote. Who ever thought that Europe would just be completely disintegrated the day before that happened? Even as the vote tallies were coming in, it was the same kind of "nobody saw it coming" moment.
But it's not a coincidence that at the same time that was occurring, you had Alfred Herrhausen — who was experiencing himself a sort of transformational change in his understanding of what really drives economics in the first place. I was reading some of the writings that were published in English; and one speech that he delivered just shortly before his assassination, begins in a fascinating way. Showing you that he uniquely was ready to reconsider the entire axiomatic foundation of what the postwar Bretton Woods system was based on; understanding that it was driving itself towards a breakdown crisis. This is just the beginning of what he said. The speech was called "The Time Is Ripe"; so he began by saying: "The time is ripe; ripe for a new and broader approach to resolving the international debt crisis, with which major parts of the world have been concerned since 1982. And this new approach must take into account the meanwhile changed nature of the problem, and be based upon the structure of the realities now confronting the several participants in their various roles. This applies to creditors, debtors, governments, and to the Bretton Woods institutions — the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund."
Then he goes to discuss his proposal for either a moratorium or a complete writing-off of the debt of the Third World and a new idea of directed credit towards the industrialization of Poland and Eastern Europe. This is the kind of Damascus Road conversion or you could say "Herrhausen Moment" that we need to inspire among similar leading layers in our society today; to realize this thing is gone. There is no saving the system in its current form; you can no longer put band-aids and piecemeal solutions. You need to reconsider the time is ripe for reconsidering the entire idea of what we had previously considered the axioms of this sytem.
So, in the same way that the 28 pages, the Glass-Steagall fight, the Chilcot Inquiry, these similar threads; we also need to have a victory moment on this idea of the Hamilton principle and the creativity of mankind as the true measurement of economic value.
DENISTON: I would just again reference people to Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws document, which he had issued I think two years ago now. We re-featured it in the context of these developments of recent weeks. It's a very concise, but very dense presentation of exactly this issue. I think for our situation in the United States, that still stands as the essential policy document to complement what needs to happen in Europe around Deutsche Bank, around the breakdown over there and the intervention needed. To complement with that with actions in the United States; Glass-Steagall being part of the party platforms is a good step. But as you're saying, it's just stopping the bleeding; and if we don't actually move with the full credit system and the reorganization of the banking system as a whole and actual knowledge of where to invest this credit. It's going to take serious work after decades of a post-industrial, post-productive, increasingly insane economy, to actually begin to rebuild a productive base again. This is going to be a serious program that's going to be required; and Mr. LaRouche's document there is the reference point that people should be looking to. Obviously, we have it linked here in the description of this video; that should be circulated, read and studied, and understood in detail. That is our roadmap at this point for this full recovery program; centered around a unified conception unique to Mr. LaRouche about the real science of human growth, human progress, human creativity. His work is essential at this point to overcome the deep depths of the crisis we face in the United States. We need an even better insight into the science of human economic progress that he's provided with his work.
SARE: I met a woman yesterday in the organizing who said, "Well what do you mean Glass-Steagall? We can just do work on Deutsche Bank; we can just do more quantitative easing, that's what they've been doing. You just issue the money to cover their obligations." And she was serious, so it does show the kind of job we have to do.
DENISTON: Yeah, it worked great for Germany in the 1920s, right?
STEGER: Well, that's the thing, too. The Americans have such a small view of history; so much of the here and now. Helga has raised this as a subjective factor; but so few Americans actually have a broader scope of what we're confronting. What's brought to mind is Lyn's often-made reference to the Bertrand Russell dominance of this last century. I think most Americans don't really conceive — and I think Alfred Herrhausen understood this problem — is that Germany never really ever had a chance to fully embrace itself as a unified oriented towards this level of scientific advancement. Apparently, at the major event after the Napoleonic Wars, it was decided Germany would not be able to become a nation; as Italy would not be able to. There was an attempt to not let these nations or these people become sovereign, unified countries. It was only unified in the late 19th Century; and what follows then is Germany is basically manipulated into a perpetual state of war. World War I, World War II, and obviously the dominance of the Cold War; all of which was a cultural outlook governed by the Bertrand Russell outlook of a Satanic view of man. Herrhausen saw with a sense of optimism, a chance to break from that. I think that's what's really missing in the American people today. The striking nature of the moment we're in.
Diane, you raised this question of how do you mobilize the population. For too many people, they're waiting; they're waiting for someone — "I'll know it when I see it" kind of quality. Just a lack of real understanding. But probably the best expression of this in history, in thinking of the various moments when there have been major upheavals, is really the American Revolution. The unique action by George Washington at that point, to clearly define a perspective of commitment of his own identity, his own fortune, his own honor, his own life; but really to shape an historical period. That really brought into bear Hamilton's policies and the whole orientation of the United States in terms of development. But the best way to move people is not to see when they're going to move; but to begin to move with a very clear campaign of what we intend to build and construct on the basis of Franklin Roosevelt, but really a much more advanced conception today because of the space program, because of what's developed. We're really at a moment of history where action of a quality of leadership is required; and to the extent we can make that clear, the greater chance we have of being successful.
OGDEN: Absolutely. That's the lesson to be gleaned from the developments in the recent period; that when we act as true leaders — in other words, not responding to events as they unfold over time — but setting the agenda for the future, history is shaped by that kind of leadership. That's very clear from the 28 pages. If it had not been for the decision by the LaRouche Movement in collaboration with others, to make this happen; it never would have happened. This is not history just sort of happening on its own; this is a mobilization of the system of government that we have, that was given to us. And it was a decision to force this into being. If we had not decided that we were going to force Glass-Steagall onto the agenda and say this is the defining issue, that never would have happened. I think you can go back even further and realize that what's happening now in China and the allied countries of China, with the adoption by the most populous country on the planet of the New Silk Road, the Maritime Silk Road; this entire New Paradigm of Eurasian development, directly came out of a decision that was made in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche to say: We are going to use this opportunity to put on the agenda what the future must become. The Productive Triangle; the alliance between Russia, India, and China as the three great powers of Eurasia; and the campaign to bring Germany and the rest of Europe into that. That is now reality; that was the future; that is now the present.
I think it's that kind of way of thinking that the role of real leaders is not to say what are the "objective circumstances" in the present to which you have to respond, and to stake some sort of political position on, yea or nay. The real question is, who has the vision to say this is what the future must become; and how do we set the agenda according to which history is then forced to unfold?
SARE: I think one thing that Michael and I were discussing earlier, that would shift things dramatically, is if Americans would stop pretending that President Obama has any legitimacy in the White House and doesn't actually belong behind bars for the crimes that he's committed.
OGDEN: Jacques Cheminade said it well in the statement he issued after the Nice terror attacks. He said, maybe the Chilcot Report should send shivers up and down some people's spines to realize they're not safe. What are the Chilcot Reports of the future going to say about you, the people who have been defending the terrorist networks in Syria — al-Nusra — to overthrow the Assad regime? Those who worked with Prince Bandar and the rest of the Saudi regime? The people who set up Al Yamamah in the first place? When Nemesis comes to judge you, where will you stand? I think it's that kind of principle of natural law and justice which Obama and the rest of that retinue — as Jacques Cheminade said very clearly — these are the questions which must be asked.
STEGER: Then there's a certain lady in France who's facing a certain threat of that at this moment. The director of the IMF now faces prosecution for corruption. This process is unfolding and I think the reality of it is, most Americans know Obama is probably one of the most evil and Satanic people on the planet today. The question is, not is he that; but is justice actually possible. I think we've entered into a period of time where things that people thought were impossible have now become possible. The question is, are they up to the task of acting upon that? That really seems to be the characteristic. We could have a major break on Obama; and some people may say, based on Presidential election timeframes, what difference would it make. Clearly, at this kind of moment in history, a very clear and decisive act against the President to expose his crimes; this is the President, by the way, who lauded himself on returning the United States to international law. It's just been made very clear by a massacre in Syria by US bombing; bombing which violates international law and Syrian sovereignty. The case is building to bring down Obama; and I think there's probably a little bit of concern in the White House that things might by changing. The question is, is there the guts and courage to act upon it. Like our friends on the 28 pages, are we willing to pull a Gravel and really take on the real moment in history?
OGDEN: Precisely. I think that's a very apropos parallel. Not only was it the fact in very large measure that Steven Lynch publicly threatened that they were going to have their Gravel moment; and come to the floor of the House and just read these into the public record that probably precipitated the decision that they had no choice but to release the 28 pages in one form or another. But also, it's a very apropos parallel, because look at what effect Senator Gravel had when he took the action to read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record. That precipitated the events that led to the impeachment and disgrace of the entire Nixon policy, the Vietnam War policy. What has now been revealed by the 28 pages goes far deeper than anything that was contained in the Pentagon Papers at that time. What this represents is the tip of the iceberg; and the fact that the people who have been involved in this are not satisfied. People like Congressman Walter Jones, Congressman Steven Lynch, former Senator Bob Graham, are not satisfied to just sit back and say, "Well, we just won a victory on the 28 pages." They all have been very clear; this is only the beginning. We know what this represents; this is the cork that has now come out of the end of the bottle. There is far, far more that needs to come out; this is the tip of the iceberg.
As we've said repeatedly, if you just follow the money trail from Bandar to the Al Yamamah deal, you'll see where these policies were originally born. It's very ugly; very bad news for the British monarchy and for the entire Bush/Cheney apparatus.
STEGER: Well, there's no envy of Obama here.
OGDEN: Michael, maybe you want to say a little bit about this event that you are going to be involved in this weekend in Seattle.
STEGER: It's indicative. We've got an event tomorrow in Lynnwood, near the Seattle area at the convention center there; and then another event in Belleview on Sunday. What we're seeing is an increase in integration between our activity and institutions who are looking to collaborate on Russia's and China's intervention today; specifically on this economic perspective. What's driving this entire process, this higher question of justice beyond retribution, is really mankind's great potential for development. The space exploration question probably best qualifies the real nature of mankind's potential and orientation. You see that orientation coming from China probably most and best of all; and of course, the collaboration with Russia. So, there are Russian and Chinese networks throughout the West Coast, both in Seattle and San Francisco and in Los Angeles, who we find increasingly working with us. So, there's going to be a collaboration on Saturday, hosted by Dave Christie here from Seattle, along with people like Mike Billington of the EIR staff, a number of speakers from the Chinese-American community, nuclear engineers, aerospace engineers from Boeing, people involved in US-China investment capabilities, the Russian perspective. And then something similar in Belleview, with the Belleview Chinese Chamber of Commerce on Sunday. So, you see a real potential. You're beginning to see the New Paradigm, the win-win orientation of the New Silk Road; it's creeping in. There are numbers of universities now holding events on the One Belt, One Road policy. I think the leadership of Japan has realized, as perhaps Erdogan has had a certain Damascus Road conversion; it is clear that with nearly 5 billion people and the largest growth potential mankind has ever seen, there's no way any nation can not participate in this orientation. I think these conferences this weekend will be a significant part of that.
OGDEN: Great. I think we'll definitely have some coverage of that, if not some actual video that people can watch. So, I think that is a very comprehensive discussion; it sort of touched all the bases. I would emphasize that Mr. LaRouche's initiative and Helga LaRouche's initiative on this Deutsche Bank remains a forefront item of mobilization. I think people need to take what has been said here and develop that in terms of communicating the credit principle as the foundation for an entirely new paradigm. We will continue to provide material on that. I think what comes out of this conference in Seattle this weekend will also make that increasingly clear. I'd like to thank all of you for watching; again, ask everybody who is viewing this, to please subscribe to the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel. This is LaRouche PAC Live; and we have live broadcasts many times a week, so you'll be sure never to miss one of these live broadcasts. Please also subscribe to the daily email, if you haven't already. You can get the LaRouche PAC lead directly to your inbox every day. Thanks a lot for watching, and please stay tuned to larouchepac.com. Good night.