Policy Committee Show, December 12, 2016
Join us at 1:30 EST for our weekly discussion between the members of the LaRouchePAC Policy Committee.
DIANE SARE: Good afternoon, and welcome to the weekly LaRouche PAC Policy Discussion. I'm Diane Sare, filling in for Matt Ogden, and I'm from Manhattan. Today is Monday, December 12, 2016. We are joined here in the studio by Megan Beets from the LaRouche PAC Science Team, and over Google Hang-outs Live by Bill Roberts from Detroit, Michigan; Dave Christie is joining us live from Seattle, Washington; we have Kesha Rogers joining us live from the home of NASA in Houston, Texas; we're joined by Michael Steger from San Francisco, California; and Rachel Brinkley from Boston, Massachusetts. We did have a discussion with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche earlier today, and we've been following reports over the weekend of the latest moves by President Barack Obama on behalf of his owners in the British Empire to try and do everything he can to sabotage the incoming Trump administration and the policy direction and policy shift that is underway in most of the planet right now.
What I'm specifically referring to today is Obama's demand for a thorough investigation which is going to be headed up by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, whose own integrity is somewhat questionable, to find out whether the Russians somehow had influenced the outcome of the US elections. As people may know, Jill Stein — who suddenly raised millions and millions of dollars which she did not raise as a Presidential candidate, to do a recount. There have been vote recounts going on. In the case of Pennsylvania, this was thrown out by Federal Judge Paul Diamond on six grounds; but he said that the suspicion of a hacked Pennsylvania election "borders on the irrational". He said there is no credible evidence that any hack occurred, and compelling evidence that Pennsylvania's voting system was not in any way compromised. In the case of Wisconsin, with 95% of the votes now having been recounted, they have discovered a whopping 25 extra votes cast for Hillary Clinton — who still would be losing this election by 22,000.
I would like to add — and there will be more discussion — but if you take their argument on the face of it, that somehow Russia, and we have yet to see any evidence that Russia was behind the WikiLeaks exposé of emails from John Podesta and so on; their argument seems to be that if they could have kept the American people from knowing what Hillary Clinton was really like, that perhaps Hillary Clinton might have won the election. Now, that is not really a compelling case; and if Hillary Clinton had had her wits about her and not completely succumbed to being a stooge for Obama, I don't think she would really want to be in the position of making that argument that the only way she could have won the election is by making nobody knew what she represented. So, this is completely absurd on the face of it. It absolutely is going to backfire in the face of these people; because the truth of the matter is, as Lyndon LaRouche said the day after the election, what happened in the United States was not a local result. What happened in the United States was part of a global dynamic which has been shaped largely by the President of China, with the One Belt, One Road policy, and by President Vladimir Putin of Russia, who formed an anti-terror coalition and has now been remarkably successful in liberating the city of Aleppo, which had been taken over by ISIS. Although Obama and company are trying to sabotage this and trying to get any relief they possible can to support the last remaining so-called "moderate" Syrian rebels, who only saw people's heads off with knives and things like that, Russia actually has the upper hand here. So what these characters are trying to do, cannot possibly be successful in the global context, but it is extremely destructive and maybe disorienting for the American public. So, we definitely want to get the truth out on this matter and make our strategic situation clear to the population as a whole. And clear on where we actually stand, which is at a moment of great potential; perhaps the greatest potential our nation has had in many decades to break a 50+-years long era of Dark Age and post-industrial decline.
So, I think that's where I'll stop.
MICHAEL STEGER: Well, I think it's worth going back in context a little bit Diane with what you ended with. This organization had shaped a unique period under Ronald Reagan's administration. Under Lyndon LaRouche's leadership, we had shaped an entire orientation where Reagan was offering a direct collaboration with the Soviets from the most advanced scientific, economic platform thus far conceived; around the SDI, the laser-based satellite platform of space exploration. Given a number of different aspects, but that direct intervention by Reagan, by LaRouche, by this organization, shaped to a large extent the fall of the Berlin Wall — which Mr. LaRouche uniquely forecast — and a kind of opening politically of potential for collaboration for both East and West. Unfortunately, the United States was imposed with a Bush, Sr. administration which was absolutely insane; this was Dick Cheney, this was what became the neo-cons, the hard-core perpetual war state which we have seen since 9/11. But soon after that, in 1992, we had a change in the Presidency. Mr. LaRouche was still unjustly imprisoned, but you have an orientation from Bill Clinton which made it possible to re-ignite the very policies which Lyndon LaRouche had shaped and led during the 1980s.
Over the weekend, we watched the 1988 "Woman on Mars". Mr. LaRouche has recently said this was the forefront of his scientific investigations on the questions of economic science; and that what he and Krafft Ehricke shared was a positive affirmation of human development and population growth to serve the actual scientific means of mankind's further exploration. That's what the space program represented; that's what this Mars program represented. And it should have been ignited; this US-Germany-Russia shared orientation toward space exploration. Taking the scientific cadres of these nations and deploying them, the way people in Germany like Herrhausen who were moving in this direction; and the scientific cadre of the Soviet Union, though perhaps far below what it might have been earlier, was still far better then than it is today. The question of a scientific driver of advancement of mankind should have been the spirit that captured mankind. That was the spirit of the fall of the Berlin Wall around the Ode to Joy. And to a large extent, even this organization failed to meet that standard.
I think what stands out today is, that's what we can't miss today. We can't miss the moment. Russia and China have taken on this fascist program coming out of Obama and the British, directly now. The United States has voiced its very clear opinion: We reject these fascist policies. Sixty-five percent of the Democrats want to work with Russia on defeating terrorism in Syria. It's now a chance to pull together an orientation of the great nations around this kind of scientific endeavor; and the kind of economic development program that Mr. LaRouche so clearly captured throughout the '70s and '80s. That's what we can't miss! That's what this entire organization and this nation have to be oriented around. These heel-biting Nazi operations by the Washington Post, New York Times establishment which were discredited and debunked around the election; the American people rejected this. There has to be a clear mission and leadership towards this kind of policy. I think if we have that, we can be ultimately successful right now in a very short period of time ahead. We've got to get Obama out; if it's not sooner, it's at least within six weeks if we do our job.
DAVE CHRISTIE: Just to follow up, I think the question of Putin's or Russia's involvement absolutely they were involved in shifting the election; but it's not the way that it's being discussed. It's by telling the truth. Especially Putin; what he has done is put a truthful or a principled notion of how nations should interact. You go back to what he posed at the United Nations General Assembly last year, calling for a global coalition to bring the nations together as we saw in World War II to defeat the Nazis; to do the same thing to defeat terrorism. Clearly, the fall of Aleppo or the ability of the Syrian government to regain control of Aleppo is part of what Putin has done to solidify that there's going to be a new notion of statecraft; that there's going to be principle now re-established amongst nations, and this terrorist scourge which has been funded and backed by Obama and the British — as has always been the case with this terrorism — to use it as a form of irregular warfare against nations. This is just one aspect of what Putin has done and Russia has done to say this is the actual truth of the situation.
I think what the American people have done through our work on the 28 pages, our work on the JASTA fight, is truth is now coming to bear in politics. I think the question of what Russia has done is not through some — it's been completely out in the open what they're doing; which is to pose the issue of what is actually going on and allow the American people to make that decision. So, that's what they rejected by the election of Trump; it was really an immediate rejection of Obama represented and the British.
I think the potential to bring a new standard for international relations and the assertion of principle in international law is interesting with some of these people that Trump is putting into the positions. One of the Secretary of State nominees, this guy Tillerson, the former CEO of Exxon; the fact that he's very close to Vladimir Putin. You also have the Governor of Iowa as the potential Ambassador to China; a close personal friend of Xi Jinping. So, through these appointments, we are getting a sense of what the potential actually is to consolidate what Michael was just going through; what Mr. LaRouche has been fighting for, which is to bring the Eurasian nations into a collaborative relationship with the United States for a new era of Pacific orientation, versus this failed, dead trans-Atlantic system of Wall Street and London. I think the key to that collaboration in the future, and what we have to fight for to bring it towards, is not just collaboration around the Silk Road and infrastructure development and so on; but has to be towards the space program. We have to assert that mankind is no longer under the grip of British geopolitics; but that the relationship between nations has to be from a universal standpoint. There's no better domain to explore that than space exploration.
I think this is the potential that exists. Have we fully consolidated it? No. But is the potential there? Absolutely; and I think we have to just take that sense of potential to the American people and recruit them to that mission.
SARE: I think it is also worth reminding people what has occurred worldwide in the last months. We had the Brexit vote in London, which everyone tried to say maybe it was rigged; maybe it's just a bunch of racist, anti-immigrant people. No, it was because the euro system was a failure. You could not put these nations under a strait jacket. Similarly, it was just a week ago yesterday, the Italian referendum; 60-40 that they do not want the European Central Bank running a dictatorship in Italy by nullifying the power of the Parliament through the Prime Minister. It's not going to go; and the population overwhelmingly rejected it. You had the French Republican Party primaries, where they elected François Fillon because he wants to work with Russia. Then, you have Duterte in the Philippines, who is saying no, we're not going to have a joint military relationship with the United States to start a war with China; I can do my own negotiations with China. He's declared a war on drugs; he wants to shut down the drug trade in his country.
So, what happened in the United States is not a unique, American phenomenon; it is global. There is a dying corpse of this rotten Wall Street-British Empire system. Who knows? We've been hearing about Monte dei Paschi bank in the last days; is there going to be a bail-in? Is everybody there about to lose all their money? They are discussing if they can prevent a run on the bank, etc. So, this system is done! And the reason why they're letting out these shrieks, which are really absurd, about whether Putin somehow controlled the outcome of this election, is because they are very desperate. If the United States shifts its orientation — as Erdogan has done, as Abe seems to be doing, as the Philippines has done, those nations are much smaller than the United States. Japan is fairly significant; but if the United States shifts, then it is really the end of this British imperial system.
MEGAN BEETS: Right. And that recalls to mind something that Lyndon LaRouche said back in 2014 when the BRICS nations first consolidated themselves as the kernel of a potentially new paradigm. He said this is an extremely important development, but this will be a process of discovery; the New Paradigm is not something which is prepackaged and premade or is a replica of something we've had in the past. The New Paradigm for mankind is something which is completely new and has to be based on a new discovery process of a new meaning for mankind. I think Dave, what you brought up about the space program, that is absolutely crucial. Because at this moment, if we succeed in the West in rejecting this British Empire, death collapse policy, and join in with Russia and China, that means we're going to have to start working together to discover a real principle of what the common cause of mankind is. What the role of mankind in the universe now is, with these new powers and technologies and discoveries that are now in mankind's hands. It really means having to address the kinds of questions that began to come to the forefront in the 1960s space program. If man is actually an extra-terrestrial species, what does that really mean about mankind, and how should we organize our activity and collaboration here on Earth?
KESHA ROGERS: Yes, and I think it's important to go back to Mr. LaRouche's response in the aftermath of the election of Donald Trump, and organize the fact that this was a global interaction; this was caused by interactions of global relations, and now has put forth a commitment to a new system of international relations. But I think it's important, as Mr. LaRouche has indicated, and really what you just expressed, Megan, in your remarks is what is this new system of international relations going to be based on? It's going to be based on a new conception of the identity of who we are as a species as human beings. Human beings within the universe, human beings within the galaxy, and I think that one of the speakers for the New York meeting expressed it very well this weekend. He said it's going to be a new system of people-to-people relations, where you actually have a different conception of the relationships; not just of different types of bargaining or treaties, agreements and so forth among nations. But how do we interact as human beings with other human beings? So, therefore, human beings have a restored commitment to the progress of humanity; not to the progress of each and every human being for themselves. This is the problem that we've had: The control of an imperial British Empire has pitted nations and people against each other; has taken away this quality of what it truly means to be human, and what is our imperative to explore, conquer, and go and investigate the next rounds of space. This is the new system of international relations that Mr. LaRouche is speaking of and has been fighting for, as has been described, for well over 40 years, really gets at a conception of what it is that mankind is responsible for, for advancing the creativity of mankind throughout the universe. This is what the enemy is afraid of; because we're so close to achieving that. The collaboration of the United States with Russia and China around the exploration of space has to be a restored and renewed commitment by this nation.
And I think it's very appropriate to pay respect and pay honor to John Glenn, who was the last of the Mercury 7, the first class of astronauts for our nation. What John Glenn represented was not just an inspiration to the United States, but an inspiration to the world. It goes to the fact that when President John F Kennedy set the nation on the course and made the statement before a joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961, that we would land a man on the Moon and return him safely to Earth, this wasn't just a one-time mission that would take place off in the distance sometime. It was actually setting forth a platform of scientific progress and economic development which would leap forward in development for generations to come. What was the real first stepping stone to achieving that goal? It was: 1. John Glenn orbiting the Earth three times on February 20, 1962 in almost a five-hour time period. Many of us sitting in this room were not alive at that time; but the effects of what he represented continue to be our mission and our fight to restore to this nation once again.
One thing I was reflecting on, is that many of us on this discussion right now, had an opportunity to actually witness a second historic event with John Glenn later in his life. After serving 25 years in the US Senate, he later went back into space on the Space Shuttle Discovery, the SCS-95, at 77 years old. I know at time — 1998 — I was about in my second year of college.
So, we now have to restore a renewed commitment and mission for this nation that what we're talking about right now is ending a system of imperialism; ending a system of rejection to cooperation among people, among nations. Especially the United States has to commit itself again to development and cooperation with China as a first and foremost imperative; and Russia. The key to this is that Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws really highlighted by the development of his Fourth Law in the breakthrough in fusion development, has to be seen as the ultimate mission and commitment of this nation once again. To make sure that all of the Mercury 7 astronauts, and all of those who've died and gone on before, they're not just relegated to a museum to be admired from afar and that their work means nothing anymore; then I think we really better take this seriously. This imperial system has to be finished off; we have to create, as Mr. LaRouche is calling for, a new system of cooperation, of international relations to break this war drive now and cut out this insanity that is coming from the British Empire and those who are working on their behalf to set back the course of human progress. We have to move forward with the course of human progress.
SARE: I think our viewers should actually get on this website and see the latest video that was posted recently on LaRouche's Four Laws, because it is very clear that we have a potential for a great shift. The American population has been so beaten down and terrorized, one by the cover-up of the Kennedy assassination; it wasn't simply the assassination, but that the Warren Commission put the seal of approval on what everyone knew to be a lie, which created a certain kind of terror. Then Bobby Kennedy was assassinated. Prior to Bobby Kennedy being killed, you had Malcolm X, and then you had Martin Luther King. So, you had four assassinations in about a five-year period, and then you had a shift. And what was the shift? Everyone who's done brainwashing knows, an ideal brainwashing subject is someone who is scared; someone who is terrified. So, they brought in the Beatles and they brought in the environmentalist movement. What happened is, not only did people become deeply pessimistic, but they abandoned a commitment that our nation was famous for, ever since Alexander Hamilton, of the idea of actual growth. You see this in all kinds of papers and speeches of all of our greatest leaders. Abraham Lincoln's famous farm speech, where he talks about how to increase the yield per hectare of land. The complete fraud of Thomas Malthus; that resources increase geometrically, not arithmetically if you make a scientific breakthrough based on principles. So, what you had after — we're now 53 years after the Kennedy assassination — is that people are really not thinking straight. So, while there was a great relief at the defeat of Hillary Clinton as being the defeat of Bush and Obama and the British Empire and Wall Street, what people think they want is too small. We should not be asking to have all the potholes on the Cross-Bronx Expressway filled in. They should be filled in; they could be filled in, frankly, with the dollar bills collected from the outrageous tolls from the George Washington Bridge.
What we should think about is, perhaps one approach is, where would our nation be had Kennedy not been assassinated? Would we have already landed human beings in a different solar system somewhere else? Would everything be powered by fusion, or by something more advanced than fusion? Certain modes of transportation, modes of communication that we take for granted will never change, might be very radically different. The way we produce food might be radically different. So, in a sense, what we have the opportunity to do now, I think Michael was getting at this earlier looking back at some of the missed opportunities, is for mankind to make a real leap in relations among nations, in culture, and in the way that everything is done. Therefore, when we think about what has to be done after we get Glass-Steagall reinstated and we have a Hamiltonian credit system and a national banking system, how do you create the conditions where people are actually experiencing — as LaRouche defined it — an increase in their ability to be productive? An increase in each individual's ability to contribute to the rest of society?
I think that's what we've got to get Americans to think about, or they're going to miss it. They're going to be asking for something less.
BILL ROBERTS: It's very true. Helga Zepp-LaRouche warned all Americans this weekend that we cannot be complacent; we cannot have some sense that we got a better situation as far as this immediate danger of World War III with this election. We really do have to see, as Schiller said, that mankind is made for something better. We had a very good example of this, this weekend in Michigan. We had a meeting, including some expatriates from Iraq and Yemen and our activists here, and the purpose was to highlight the work that's been done in Yemen by a group there that has endeavored to create the potential in the poorest country of the Middle East, to bring Yemen out of warfare and into participation with the China One Belt, One Road initiative. This has been a fight by a very small grouping of people there, in contact with our organization, who have taken the World Land-Bridge report and the translation into Arabic, and have fought to really establish a commitment among the people there — even in the dangerous conditions that they're experiencing. Constant bombardment by the Saudi regime; a completely genocidal campaign by the Saudis to bomb this country back into the Stone Age; to cut off their food supply. This grouping simply made a decision that they were not going to accomplish anything by simply trying to go back before the war and bring back some sort of old order or some sort of comfort for the upper classes of Yemen. They are actually demanding, if you look at their demands, one of these is that Yemen — which is the poorest country in the Middle East — should start contributing efforts toward mankind's endeavor to go to space, to colonize the Moon. So, I think it's just really important that if a country like Yemen can fight for these kinds of initiatives and making contributions to all of mankind, clearly we can have a higher sense of what our mission is than just alleviating the world of certain of the worst conditions. But to really have a revolutionary sense of what we in our own lives can fight for.
RACHEL BRINKLEY: Well, they gave Trump "Person of the Year" of Time magazine, but it really probably should have gone to Putin, given what the situation is in Aleppo right now and the turn of events. It is ironic that they're attacking Russia as the human race is being defended from terrorism with a major victory in Aleppo, led by Russia. What they're doing in this attack, claiming the election was influenced by Russia, is they really are attacking the citizens of the United States; and saying for some reason, they didn't know what they were voting for. Diane made the point earlier today; maybe you want to bring it up again. But the problem supposedly is the fact that once people found out what Hillary was really doing, they didn't want to vote for her; but why should they? If that's the best defense they've got, that's a problem. But the real point is that people knew what they were voting for, or at least they knew what they were voting against. What I found universally in discussions with people from all walks of life in the United States, is that they're happy with the election. There might be a few people who are still crying about it, or haven't quite come to terms with the change in the entire world. But I've spoken with people who should be opposed to Trump; and they're not. They say, "I don't like what he said about immigrants"; "I don't like what he said about this, but I see that there's a change. I see that the veil has been lifted." That is absolutely what this British Empire is trying to react against and tell people it's not going on. I think it is going on, and we just have to remind people of their power.
STEGER: The precedent for all these attacks is the 1986 victories of LaRouche candidates in Illinois. The fact that Lyndon LaRouche directly combatted the whole press corps in Washington DC at the National Press Club. "They voted for me to stick it to Washington, DC. We organized the inner city African-American community, the industrialists, the farmers. They want to stick to you guys in Washington; and they've asked me to do it." He was attacked by the drug lobby — the same people attacking Trump today; the same people attacking Duterte; the same people attacking Vladimir Putin. We were attacked as a KKK, Nazi, white supremacist, racist. All of that's false; all of that's wrong. The whole program of the attack against Trump was the same waged against our organization in the 1986 election; and it just shows how desperate and panicked these institutions are. I think it just stands out how much when John Kennedy launched the space program, there was a still a scientific competence to the country. I don't think Richard Nixon would have done that; it was Kennedy's leadership. It was a unique quality; even Eleanor Roosevelt saw that. But when Bill Clinton came in, here's someone who was inspired by John Kennedy to get into politics; and yet, he didn't capture that. There was nothing in Bill Clinton's administration around a mission for the United States that anyone was left with. It was a dot.com bubble; it's a lot of Wall Street money, a lot of internet talk. No real scientific advancement of mankind. We missed the opportunity of 1989; it wasn't captured. I think this organization, you look at it, if it's going to come from anywhere, it's going to come from this association, from this process. I think that point has to be starkly made in terms of what role we have to play in this process; and not necessarily get caught in other tendencies. Not get caught in the trenches, fighting the same war we've been fighting. The situation is drastically changed; and we've got to take that up in the right way.
SARE: One of the ways that the opportunity of 1989 was missed — you raised the question of LaRouche in Illinois — was LaRouche in 1989; where he was imprisoned by Bush, Sr., by Americans loyal to the British Empire system, the balance of power geopolitics. It was at that time that he and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, crafted the extraordinary European Triangle; which then became the World Land-Bridge. Partly because of how insulated we are by this rotten US media, Americans are bereft of the sense that we have already won a large part of the war. Which is why the fight now is so intense, and the heat of the battle will be in the United States. I think that's why it's so important that Mr. LaRouche has put on the table the work of Alexander Hamilton; the work of Franklin Roosevelt; the work of Lincoln. There is a legacy, as much as you've had these British Empire traitors always trying to undermine our republic, there is a very strong tradition here; which goes back to Leibniz, to Joan of Arc, to Nicholas of Cusa. That, in a sense, is in the bones of every American; which is why I think we are very close to clinching this. It won't be over; it doesn't mean it's the end of the fight. It means the beginning of work on creating a New Paradigm. But somehow, that's what they're trying to crush; and it really is something. After all of these years of rock music and drugs and garbage, there is still enough of a quality of fight in the American people that if it does come down to a question of whether Russia meddled in the elections, the majority of the American people — as Michael said earlier — don't think we should have a war with Russia. They don't see Putin as the enemy; they know that Putin is fighting ISIS. They tried very hard to get us whipped up to support the Nazis in Ukraine; and you had people even in the US Congress who objected to arming the Azov Battalion and some of the egregious groups with the swastikas and so on.
At any rate, it's a very interesting moment. But Lyndon LaRouche's role has been absolutely decisive. There is a phenomenon of mass strike or revolution; it's Shelley, it's also Rosa Luxemburg, who wrote this paper on the mass strike. She talks about — at one point, it's kind of described as a current of water under the ice and snow; and it's hard to predict exactly at what moments it comes forth. You could call a strike over some horrible abuse, and three people would show up and it wouldn't work; but then in another moment, you say now is the time, and all of a sudden, the whole city is shut down and the population is mobilized. We are at such a moment where the population is not going to turn around and put their tails between their legs and crawl under their couches and say, "OK, I'm preparing for a war with Russia." That is not going to be the American response to this.
BEETS: I think it is what this discussion has been centering around, is that this really is a renaissance moment for humanity. But I think renaissance is not what most people believe it is — some flourishing of pretty art and culture that came out of nowhere and then eventually dies away. A renaissance really is the creation of a completely new and higher era for mankind; something which is completely contrary to the era which preceded it. It's not something which comes about automatically when the forces of history deem it so; it's something that is created by the willful action of leadership of people who have a better insight into the potential nature of man than their contemporaries. Lyndon LaRouche absolutely is that figure; and the work of this movement through the decades has led the fight to try to bring this into existence.
I do want to bring back up, Michael, what you raised near the beginning of Mr. LaRouche's 1988 "Woman on Mars". There was a paper which accompanied this, which was called "The Science and Technology Needed to Colonize Mars", which is one of the most principled and thorough economic studies that I know of; where he addresses the fact that future generations of mankind will have minds which are much more developed and which will have a much greater grasp of principle than our minds today — if we do our job right. So, therefore, we can't foresee the exact problems they'll encounter; but what we can do, is ensure that they are equipped to face and conquer those problems. The way that you do that is to go back to the fundamental principle of human economics, which is the non-linear leaps and increases of the productivity of every individual; the increase of the power of every individual in and over nature. This is further development of the Hamilton principle; it's what Lincoln recognized in his own way. I would just urge our viewers: These are things that you can and must study to become competent to help us lead this fight today.
CHRISTIE: I think that's extremely important to consider, because, as Diane referenced, we're in this mass strike moment. It is very clear that the population is rejecting the evil; but they have a sense of a pathway forward based on what we've done. We defined every one of the so-called "issues" concerning this Presidential campaign. Remember, Mr. LaRouche had enormous pressure to get an endorsement in to the candidates; and Lyn said, "No, I'm going to stick to what the institution of the Presidency has to be organized around." The Four Laws was just a constant drumbeat that this is what has to be the orientation forward. So, every one of the issues that allows a pathway forward, whether it be Glass-Steagall, whether it be — as I mentioned earlier — what we did with the JASTA fight and telling the truth about what's behind these wars. The point is, without leadership of letting people know what the pathway forward is, there's no way for this mass strike to be organized around a coherent pathway forward. So, I think at this point, the question of making sure that we lead nations forward; again, with the space program as a critical feature of this; bringing nations together around that. But without this future conception, there won't be a pathway forward for this mass strike; and that now coming to bear as a political process is very critical, but the institutions and the leadership have to recognize that they have to actually provide a sense of imagination of what could be, in terms of the future development of mankind.
ROGERS: I just wanted to say, Dave, you just spoke of this theme or principle of the pathway forward. I think that really is expressed in this idea that we have commit again to giving true beauty of mankind; putting forth what is the true beauty of mankind, which is expressed through what Mr. LaRouche has really focused on in terms of the commitment to Classical musical composition. This is an expression which is indicative of the nature of all cultures, all peoples, and it is extremely important that people have access to that if there is going to be a pathway forward. Because the cultural degeneracy, the ugliness, the division amongst people, is not conducive to truly human conditions of what we are as human beings. This was a real expression as Diane and many of us saw with the fight going back to the fight around the JASTA victory at the time of the 15th anniversary of 9/11. That this evil, imperial system could be defeated; that the American people could be given an awakening of their sense of fight, their sense of mission, their true human identity. With the performances of the [mozart] Requiem, which moved and inspired people throughout this nation and people throughout the world, that is the sense of a mission and a sense of fight that has to be restored in the people. There's a higher conception and a higher commitment to beauty being restored to mankind. I know that this has really had a profound effect, just in terms of Mr. LaRouche's emphasis on the revival of Classical music, the commitment to Classical culture, and what Manhattan is doing in particular, and how it's reverberating across the nation. I can give many reports — I won't here — on the music work. I was, just before getting on this discussion, at a music event; singing before an audience at a community center here in the Houston area. The audience was profoundly moved and inspired by what we're doing. People have to have access to that beauty which is truly human.
SARE: There's nothing more beautiful than progress; progress of the human race. I think 2017 would be the 100th birthday of John F Kennedy; it would be the 100th birthday of Krafft Ehricke. We just lost John Glenn at the age of 95, so I think it would be very appropriate that 2017 becomes the year that the United States recaptures its identity and launches again into this extra-terrestrial imperative, as Krafft Ehricke. I would like to urge everybody who is watching to take the 28 minutes and watch that Four Laws video which is up on the website, and prepare yourself for the organizing. Unless there's something anyone else needs to urgently add or bring up, I think that should conclude our discussion.