Weekly Report · Jan 22, 2014
January 23, 2014 • 1:00PM

The audio of this week's edition of the Weekly Report featuring Mr. LaRouche, Natalie Lovegren, and Creighton Jones; runs about an hour


CREIGHTON JONES: Good afternoon and welcome to the recent edition of the New Paradigm for Mankind. Today is Jan. 22nd, 2014. My name is Creighton Jones, I'll be hosting today, and joining me on the program are Natalie Lovegren of our Scientific Research Team and as always, Mr. Lyndon LaRouche.

Now, today we'll be taking up the reemerging strategic implications of a light matter, that of helium-3, and the implications of the recent landing on the Moon by the Chinese, and what they've been saying very publicly, is an intention to mine the Moon for such elements as helium-3. Now, helium has many uses beyond just being able to float birthday balloons or allowing children an opportunity to transform their voice into a weird transvestite state or something. But it has a much more useful and future oriented purpose to it.

Now, as we've reported, for Harrison Schmitt, a pioneer of the space program, former astronaut who himself had landed on the Moon at one time, has said that the Chinese have made no secret of the fact that their landing on the Moon is not simply just a sideshow, something for propaganda purposes, but is part of a very long-arcing strategic policy, a policy which includes the development of the Moon for mining among other things helium-3, which is an ideal fuel fusion, which Natalie will get into in much more detail in just a moment. But it's important to really contrast the two different directions that we're now seeing coming from China, as opposed to what we've been seeing coming from the United States. And as has been the rate of disaster and collapse from the United States has really accelerated under the Obama administration, in particular in regards to the space program, and the fusion energy program.

Now, just to look at the recent history, in 2004, the United States put forward a pretty robust idea of what should be the space program for the U.S., moving forward. And this was coming in the wake of the Columbia disaster of '03, and so there was an attempt to say we've got to get the space program back on a positive footing, we've got to bring back the morale to NASA and to the population. And the way we're going to do it, is we're going to go back to the Moon. That was the policy that was put forward in 2004.

And it was a pretty comprehensive strategy, of sending robotic instruments to the Moon, searching the Moon for areas of strategic resources including water, and the intention was that we were eventually going to send human beings back to the Moon, for exploration, we were going to set up permanent bases on the Moon, and we were going to do this as part of an overall strategy of just continually moving out, and extending our human influence into the Solar System. And that was the intention. It was reaffirmed again in 2008, with the 2008 Congressional NASA authorization act, which reaffirmed this commitment to the United States again becoming a leader in the world for space exploration, with the first focus being a return to the Moon.

That was all killed, once Barack Obama came into office. Obama came in, and one of the first things he did in regards to NASA, was he set up this so-called blue-ribbon commission, the Augustine Commission, that was headed by space pioneer Norman Augustine, who came back and said, look, if we want to continue this policy, this mission of the Moon and everything we've elaborated over the last years, we're going to need about an extra $3 billion and we can make this happen. And the response from Obama was, "Kill it! We're going to kill it! We can't afford it. We can afford trillions of dollars going to bail out the worthless banks, but no, we can't afford the space program."

Now, for Obama, as we've come to understand, it wasn't simply just about a money issue. It was really an anti-human issue, it was an anti-science issue. And so Obama said, kill it. Then, in 2010, you had this crazy speech, where he went to the Kennedy Space Center, giving a speech before a number of people who were on the verge of losing their jobs because of the shutdown of the Shuttle program, which was supposed to be replaced by the Constellation program; we were going to have a new, the Orion vehicle, the Ares rocket, which were going to, again, give us the capability for low-Earth orbit, to be able to get back to the Space Station, and eventually this would become part of our Moon exploration program. So in front of the people who — that's been killed. Constellation's now dead; these people are all now losing their jobs, because of the shutdown of the shuttle program.

Obama goes before them, gives a speech and says, oh, don't worry — the Moon? been there, done that, who needs to go back to the Moon? Really, what we're going to do, we're going to go out, we're going capture an asteroid! What asteroid? We still don't know — completely vague plans, just somewhere Obama pulls this idea out of his hat, saying "we're going to capture an asteroid, who needs to go back to the Moon? Yatta-yatta."

As we've tried to investigate, it's completely unclear where this idea even came from. I spoke to the heads of the various departments at NASA, and none of them could say where this policy came from on the part of Obama. They don't even have an idea. Some indications are that this may have come from this woman, Laurie Garver, who when Obama came in, he appointed her as the deputy director of NASA, and this woman has absolutely no real background in science or space exploration. Her degree is in political science and economics, and she sort of weaseled her way into the space field, but really with this ideology of privatization: market-driven forces are going to dictate how we approach science. And really, she pushed the policy, which was to dismantle NASA, and effectively just open up that government money to private contractors.

And if you look at her pedigree, that's her background; she comes out of the private sector, and is also how she earned her name "Carver" — her name's Laurie Garver, but otherwise known as Laurie the Carver, because that was her job, to carve up and destroy NASA.

And so that's the policy you had from NASA, which is no mission, and abandoning our intention to go back to the Moon and expand our presence into space, and to take up a policy which serves no other function than to funnel U.S. monies into private hands, and in effect destroy the U.S. space program. Which is very consistent with what we understand of Obama, and you look at other appointees of his, like his science czar John Holdren, right? This is the guy who coauthored a paper once, calling for the reducing of the world's population by putting drugs in the water supply to sterilize large portions of the population. That's Obama's science advisor. So it gives you an idea of what kind of person we're dealing with.

And it's been starkest under Obama, but it's been part of a trend, really in the United States since the '70s, in terms of the space program, where we've seen the budget of NASA collapse from, at its peak about four a half percent of GDP, down to now, it's about 0.7% of GDP actually goes toward the space program.

You parallel this with the collapse, then, of the funding for fusion, the frontier of energy development, the next platform for what should be our energy policy. That also peaked in the '80s and has collapsed ever since.

So the U.S. has been on a trajectory of collapse, really since the assassination of Kennedy as we've continually made the point, and it's only gotten drastically worse under this current Obama administration.

Now, you look at that in contrast to what we're now seeing emerging from the Chinese government, and I think it's important to just get a sense of their strategic outlook, if you look at their most recent appointment to head their space program, this guy Xu Dazhe (and I'm, again, probably butchering that name). But the important thing is, is that not only in 2014, was he put as the head, the director of the Chinese space agency, but he's simultaneously the head of their Atomic Energy Authority, and he's the head of their science, technology, and industry development for the department of defense. So you've got under one head, someone who's overseeing the space program, their atomic energy program, and major aspect of technology in defense.

So you see, for them, there's a certain unification of these ideas, of this policy. And I think it's most exemplified by this recent landing on the Moon and the fact that they've made the point that their intention, in landing on the Moon, is not just to "go there to go there," but to go there to develop the Moon, to develop Moon bases, industry on the Moon with the real focus on the development and exploitation of the abundance of helium-3 on the Moon: That's the direction the Chinese are going on in, forward thinking, the next frontier in energy development, the expanding of man's presence into space, contrasted to the United States, which is in utter disarray, has seen a collapse of our space and other scientific industries, and is right now on the verge of, if not total economy collapse, a desperate attempt to get out of that, on behalf of the oligarchy, as Mr. LaRouche will get into, I'm sure, with the move towards a threatened World War III type of showdown.

But for now, to give people a better sense of exactly what is the value of said helium-3 on the Moon, and the implications of it, we've got Natalie who's going to go more into depth into exactly what we should understand as to the intention and potential that exists with this landing on the Moon on behalf of the Chinese.

NATALIE LOVEGREN: All right, well I think it's important to first situate this philosophically, because, as we've been discussing in recent reports, in recent weeks, the issue is the historical fight between Prometheus and Zeus, and what you just described with the breakdown of NASA, with the attack on the fusion energy program in the United States, that is the result of the Zeus tradition taking over in the United States. What Obama has done to kill the space program and so on, is the oligarchical principle at work. And we have on the other hand, the Promethean nature of mankind, and we can see that in the tradition of John Kennedy.

So, I just wanted to start with a quote that illustrates the thinking, the two choices that mankind has to make. And this is a quote by the chemist Humphry Davy. He says: "Man, in what is called a state of nature, is a creature of almost pure sensation. Called into activity only by positive wants, his life is passed either in satisfying the cravings of the common appetites, or in apathy, or in slumber. Living only in moments he calculates but little on futurity. He has no vivid feelings of hope, or thoughts of permanent and powerful action. And unable to discover causes, he is either harassed by superstitious dreams, or quietly and passively submissive to the mercy of nature and the elements. How different is man informed through the beneficence of the Deity, by science and the arts! Knowing his wants, and being able to provide for them, he is capable of anticipating future enjoyments, and of connecting hope with an infinite variety of ideas. He is in some measure independent of chance or accident for his pleasures. Science has given to him an acquaintance with the different relations of the parts of the external world; and more than that, it has bestowed upon him powers which may be almost called creative; which have enabled him to modify and change the beings surrounding him, and by his experiments to interrogate nature with power, not simply as a scholar, passive and seeking only to understand her operations, but rather as a master, active with his own instruments."

So, keeping that in mind, I want to go through the story of helium-3, what has developed, the work that was done in the United States, that the Chinese have now taken up. We've abandoned this tradition; the Chinese are now going in this Promethean tradition, you could say. So, our first stop is the University of Wisconsin: There's a Fusion Technology Institute there, and back in the 1980s, fusion scientists there were trying to figure out what were the most effective fusion reactions.

So, fusion is the process by which you have light elements that are forced together, their nuclei are forced together, so you get products of heavier elements, and then a great energy release. So I'm going to go through some of the reactions briefly: What they were studying were different isotopes of hydrogen: These are deuterium and tritium, and the products that they would give in the fusion reaction. So, in the first reaction you have, deuterium and tritium: They're both hydrogen isotopes; tritium is a radioactive hydrogen isotope and in that type of a reaction, when you force these two hydrogen nuclei together, you get a neutron, you get helium, and you get a big burst of energy. A similar situation in the reaction in which you use two deuterium isotopes, also hydrogen.

You can get a couple of different options here: either you get neutrons and helium-3, or you get hydrogen and tritium. Now, the interesting thing, the key point here that they were looking at, is the distinction between having neutrons in your reaction and having other, positively charged particles. So, if you now look at the helium-3 reactions, you have only positively charged particles. Why is that important? That's important because if a particle has a charge you can control it in a magnetic field. And also electricity is nothing more than a current of charged particles. So instead of having to convert heat into electricity, you are getting electricity directly out of the plasma. Another problem with the neutrons, is, because they are neutral, they have no charge, you can't control them, and they tend to bounce around and destroy the reactor walls; this is a big issue of how to protect the reactor walls from energetic damage from the neutrons.

So, for these two reasons — you get a higher order of power, because you're able to have direct energy from the charged particles, rather than if you take the energy from neutrons, it's kinetic energy, it's energy of the motion, it's heat energy. So you then have to convert that heat energy into electricity; it's an extra step.

So these scientists figures out, well, wow, if we use helium-3, we're getting rid of one of those neutrons from the helium-4 — this is an isotope of helium, meaning it has one less neutron — and so the reactions give you only these charges particles. So, where do we get helium-3?

JONES: You have a lot more control with the helium products.

LOVEGREN: Right. You have more control, and you have direct electricity; so this is more efficient.

Now, these scientists asked, "where can we get helium-3?" It's a very rare isotope on the Earth. If you take all of the natural gas out of the Earth, you would only find about 200 kg of helium-3 trapped in the Earth, so this is clearly impractical. The other source is the decay of tritium in thermonuclear weapons. But, still, the United States has about 500 kg worth of helium-3 as a result of that. So that was also not a feasible option; you can use it to get the program going, but for continuous energy, it's not viable.

So these fusion scientists, being fusion scientists, remembered, "Wait, the Sun is a giant thermonuclear reactor. The Sun must be producing helium-3." The reason we don't have helium-3 on Earth is because we're protected by a magnetic field.

Now, this gets into the issue of the solar wind. The Sun is constantly fusing light elements into heavier elements to create its energy. So all of these flames that you see — it's not flames, it's a plasma, it's a stream of charged particles, in the form of mostly helium and hydrogen. These are coming out into the Solar System and they will reach anything in its way. But if you look at the case of the Earth, the Earth is protected by a very strong magnetic field, so we don't get these products of the solar wind. The Moon, on the other hand, is completely exposed when it's on this side of the Earth. So the Moon receives the products of the solar wind.

The fusion scientists went down to NASA in 1986; they went down to Houston, and they wanted to look at the lunar samples, and they said, "we want to know if there's any helium-3 in these lunar samples." And the scientists at NASA said, "Yeah! Sure, there's helium-3 all over the place. It's in every rock, what do you want it for? Is it good for something?" And they didn't even know — they said, "we've known that since 1970 that there was helium-3, we didn't know it was good for anything." So you have this issue of specialization, people don't talk to each other, and they let 16 years go by, they finally make this connection.

Okay, now I want to get into some of the details of the Moon; here's another picture [artist's conception, from the Moon, of the solar wind being detoured around the Earth]; you can see the seemingly barren Moon, and the Earth with its magnetic field. I want to get into how the surface of the Moon is able to hold these resources. This is a famous print [of Neil Armstrong's footprint on the Moon], obviously, but the interesting thing about this, is look at the edges on the boot print. You can see that they're very crisp. Why is that? Because this lunar dust is extremely fine, it's much finer than even powdered sugar. It's made of the same things that we have on Earth; it's essentially sand, silicon dioxide, a little bit of aluminum. And the lunar surface has a very similar composition to the Earth, but there's a completely different weathering process. The Moon doesn't have an atmosphere; it doesn't have the magnetic field to protect it from the solar wind, so you have a process that's going on, where the Moon is exposed to these elements in a different way.

And the effect is — this is another issue of the weather: These are micrometeorites. Now, these type of meteorites, while they're extremely small, they're extremely powerful, very high energy: They're travelling 50-60,000 miles per hour. This one, if you take a mechanical pencil tip, the finer ones, you have between .5 and .7mm: This is a glass sphere from the Moon of about that size, the size of a mechanical pencil tip. Those holes in it, those are craters from the impacts of micrometeorites. Now, the size of the projectile, the micrometeorite is even smaller than that! So you have these very, very tiny meteorites hitting the surface of the Moon all the time, at speeds of over 50,000 mph, and what are they doing? They're just pulverizing the surface of the Moon. So you have a process whereby this glass is being formed, it's being smashed, it's being melted, it's being vaporized, and then it re-agglutinates with the other minerals on the Moon.

And here's a diagram of that process. So you have the solar wind, the micrometeorites, these are all just churning up the surface of the Moon, and making a very unique substance. Here's another picture of an impact crater from a micrometeorite. So the lunar dust particles come out to this jagged, abrasive, extremely small particle: This is so irregularly shaped that if you had a sphere the same size diameter, the lunar dust particle would have eight times the surface area. So they're extremely irregular.

Now, this was a huge problem for the astronauts that went to the Moon, because this stuff just stuck. You kicked it up, there's one-sixth gravity on the Moon, there's an electrostatic charge all over the Moon, because of this charged solar wind, and so then the dust is a huge nuisance; not only that, it's scratching up all of their equipment. Maybe some people have seen the video where Harrison Schmitt is falling down all over the place. He had a camera on the front of his suit, and he would fall into this highly abrasive dust, scratch up all his lenses, and the guys on the ground were like "Brush off your lens! Brush off your lens!" It didn't work.

But there's a secret to this lunar dust. It seems like a really huge hassle, but if you know the secret to it, it is actually one of the most valuable raw materials that we have ever found out about. The secret is that the dust is magnetic: You can see a picture here, this is a sample from Larry Taylor at the University of Tennessee; he is the lunar geologist who — he was on the ground in Houston in 1972, when Harrison Schmitt, the only scientist who went to the Moon, was on the Moon. So they were in collaboration as geologists. And over the past 30 years, they, in collaboration with the fusion scientists at the University of Wisconsin, have made some enormous breakthroughs, on the nature of this soil, what this means for helium-3, what this means for mining the Moon.

Now he made a very important discovery: you see here, somebody holding a hand magnet, and you can see the dust stick to that magnet. Why didn't they think of this before? It's magnetic, why is it magnetic? First they thought, well, maybe it's because the meteorites have iron and they're getting iron... but wouldn't it be iron oxide and...

What happens is, there is very tiny particles, much smaller even than the micrometeorites, these are on the nano-scale, so, a thousand times smaller. These particles of elemental iron are suspended in the lunar glass. So all of those little white specs, that's nano-phase elemental metallic iron, which is magnetic.

LYNDON LAROUCHE: Oh God, this is well-known. This is nano-engineering.

LOVEGREN: Right. So when they figured this out....

LAROUCHE: The Italian scientists were doing this in China, with the reinforcement of steel production. They would just process it with this stuff, and strengthen the whole steel structure.

LOVEGREN: So it's very strong! And there's a lot of implications to this. Now, the obvious one, the magnetic properties, well, that just deals with the nuisance of the dust.

LAROUCHE: That's how the strengthening process, the nanomization of metal.

LOVEGREN: Right! So, what does it do? They experiment with it — and this is how it becomes magnetic: The solar wind is creating this magnetic iron. You have the solar wind sending in hydrogen; the hydrogen reacts with the oxygen in the iron oxide, and it weathers these particles more, and it creates the elemental iron.

LAROUCHE: In other words, they're working for us — we just don't know it. [laughter]

LOVEGREN: Right! So, now, think about this whole process in terms of this new discovery. [Chart, Weathering of Lunar Soil] They found out that iron is able to be vaporized on the Moon. We didn't know iron could do that, that's amazing.

So what are the implications of this for mining? The other important discovery that Larry Taylor and his colleagues made at the University of Tennessee, they're scientists, real scientists, so they like to play; and they're also in the United States, where we like to play with microwaves. So they thought, I wonder what would happen if we put some lunar soil in the microwave? So they did, they just put it in the kitchen microwave — and what happens? It melts in a little over a minute! Which is amazing, because iron melts at 1500 degrees. And the other thing is, everybody knows you're not supposed to put metal in the microwave, so... what's going on here?

This is an issue of the difference between a bulk metal, which is if you take a solid piece of metal, it's opaque to microwaves; the microwaves just reflect off of it. But, if you take a powdered metal, the microwaves are absorbed, because of the difference in size, and you have an effect where you have a very small particles of metal acting as conductors that are layered with a dielectric, which is an insulator. So in the case of a powdered metal, it's the metal particles with the air in between and in the case of the lunar dust, you have these very small pieces of iron with layered with glass which is your insulator. So you get this effect with the microwave energy, where you take a very small amount of energy — this is a normal kitchen microwave, and the energy is amplified by this coupling effect with that particular nature of this material.

One last thing: The implications for this, is that you can make concrete out of this. You're in two resources: All of your lunar soil, then, instead of a hassle, it becomes your biggest asset. You heat it up a little bit with low-energy microwaves, and you release the helium-3! So you get it up to 700 degrees Celsius, you can put some type of dome to capture... you capture the helium, heat it up a little bit more, you capture the nitrogen, oxygen, other volatiles that are going to be useful for making water, making air, and for other purposes.

LAROUCHE: And this is a characteristic protection, the magnetic field protection, of Earth from this crap.


LAROUCHE: Now we have to figure out how to handle the processing of that product into the United States, into Earth, for our use, for the helium-3 application to the question of achieving a fusion system on Earth, on the basis of a dialogue, in effect, in practice, from the Moon, which is the basis of the operation, and you connect the Moon resource to this resource inside the magnetic field of Earth! And that will give us fusion. And you control the transfer by consuming the product in fusion! And that's the way this thing that China is working on can immediately work.

That's a revolution — by combining these factors together, we have the immediate solution both of the strategic situation in the planet, and also the strategic situation of the ability to utilize and develop that capability! Both are available if people have enough brains to do it. This is miraculous; this is beautiful. Absolutely beautiful! A very beautiful argument, I must say.

LOVEGREN: Well, I want to show one more design; Larry Taylor, this lunar geologist make all sorts of inventions based on this principle. This is a "microwave lunar paver." You have microwaves attached to this lawnmower looking thing, and you roll it over the surface of the Moon, and it paves the Moon, so you can create landing pads, you can create a place for observatories, because dust is a big concern for astronomers. You could smooth out a crater, put it inside a crater and make a satellite dish. You can make all sorts of things: You can make radiation shields: The lunar soil is the perfect radiation shield, so in this picture [artist's conception of lunar base] they have the dust concrete as part of the shield. And you have to know the interaction of the dust with the...

LAROUCHE: It all goes together, it all fits together.

LOVEGREN: Yeah! It's perfect.

LAROUCHE: So, now this means, we're no longer Earthlings if we do this.

JONES: You can make a nice roller skating rink...

LAROUCHE: If you can work from inside the magnetic field of Earth, and operate therefore interchangeably, in terms of chemical operations, with what outside the magnetic, or relatively outside the magnetic field, you now have eliminated the imprisonment of people as being Earthlings. Not only can they live outside the Earthling environment, in a certain way, but they can also trans-live in function across that barrier.

JONES: Krafft Ehricke would talk about the Moon as "our sixth continent."

LAROUCHE: Yeah, that's the wrong way to look at it. The way to look at it, is you look at it as what it is: The Moon is a satellite of Earth. So it's not a continent, it's a satellite of Earth. It's a necessary part of the Solar System, which has to be treated as an integrated function. You don't have to spill these things off as if they were separate — they're not separate parts! The Solar System has no separate parts in it: Everything in the Solar System is connected. That's what makes it a Solar System. How could it be a Solar System and live so long as a Solar System under the embrace of this great monster, the galaxy? That can only happen under that kind of shielding.

And this is rather a quasi-historic fact. Because the birth of the Sun itself, is an event known to have been a phenomenon of the galaxy; and it embraces the Solar System, the galaxy embraces the Solar System with a crushing control. It's a baby, which never is allowed to grow up. And the parent, the galaxy, is known for very bad temper! [laughter] As some of the system is.

No, this is of great strategic significance. It's of the utmost importance in strategic significance, and I think that some people in China, already know the secret! [laughter] I think the government of China, implicitly, therefore, knows the secret.

And what you've laid out here, in terms of this additional detail evidence on the Moon relationships to the Sun, and the relationship in turn, to Earth itself, within its own magnetic field, you've now laid out something which for the coming century or two centuries and beyond, defines a completely new role of mankind, of this nature. Which means that mankind is now no longer a bunch of Earthlings, but rather has galactic implications. Because in order to try to change the Solar System, or features of the Solar System which are characteristic of the Solar System, you have to control the damned galaxy! You have to come to a deal with the galaxy, which you can control yourself against its playful ways.

I think what we've put on the table, right here, right now, is exactly that kind of implication. It doesn't mean we've finished anything off, but I think the fact that these facts laid before us on the table, opens the gate to actually achieving a further development which will lead to an understanding of what we have put on the table right now.

Therefore, it's important, from a research standpoint, that the research process engendered by following through these clues, should be followed through to get more clue material in order to come up with a feasible application.

It's just like what I'm concerned with right now, this other subject, which I only typified by exhibiting this thing, and I should probably say exactly what it is, so we inform our audience here: What I've done is produced a magazine production, which in print form would be 100 pages; or in the initial form 100, in print form would probably be reduced to about 40 pages, which is perfectly feasible for a magazine of the type we produce weekly. And it would obviously be a dominant leading feature of that edition of the magazine. When you take the implications, it's the thing that EIR must do immediately: It's a policy question that they'd be stupid if they don't do it immediately. Anybody who wouldn't do that would be stupid, and should be blamably stupid; not just stupid but culpably stupid!

Because we're in a point now, looking at the application of this subject of discussion before this table now, we have a situation, in which most of even members of our own organization are stupid, when it comes to strategy. Our membership, in its best aspects, function as tacticians. They are able to apply a local situation to an interpretation of the use of the situation, in the context. Strategy does not operate like tactics. Tactics within the framework of the subjects of strategy.

Now, many people unlike, perhaps, our national defense organization, the Joint Chiefs of Staff level, as in the tradition of great generals in our nation's organization; the greatest generals, in the world, in known history to date, like the great one who was a hero in Pacific Ocean theater, the greatest general in terms of strategic capabilities, on his own part, because he also was senior to Eisenhower! And Eisenhower was actually a product of the administration of leadership under MacArthur.

So therefore, the problem is, that practically no politician, except maybe a handful, inside the U.S. Congress or most of the other government institutions, most of them have no comprehension of the distinction of strategy from tactics. The ability to deal, which we're really faced with immediately — it could happen within days, or weeks, or slightly longer — but the entire trans-Atlantic part of the world is in the grip of the British Empire, the British Empire in its actuality, not some mythical description. That empire is now determined to do two things: First of all, its primary long-term objective, is to reduce the population of this planet Earth from 7 billion people approximately at maximum, to less than 1 billion people. Everything that the United States population has suffered, since essentially the assassination of President John F. Kennedy has been moving in that direction. That direction was already under way, at the point that President Roosevelt died. Since that time, the United States has been operating under the Truman administration on, under British Imperial direction, which was intended to destroy the United States itself by gobbling it up, as a mere appendage of the British Empire.

Now, under most Presidents since that time, with a couple of exceptions, the best Presidents of the United States since that time, have been either people who lacked understanding of this issue, or had a weak appreciation of its importance.

We've now come to the result that we've divided the planet into two general areas, with complications in each. The one side, which is the trans-Atlantic region, is essentially an extension of the British Empire, primarily! Because the British Empire owns the United States right now, in terms of its recent Presidents, especially the previous one and the present one, these are really pigs of something! They're merely errand boys for the British Empire. As all the Bush presidents associated with these guys represent.

So therefore, we have to step outside the problems of anything that a member of the Bush family, and I do mean the Prescott Bush family, specifically, in their influence since World War II period, their part in the World War II period: Prescott Bush was a key agent of the British, in a group of people who influenced and corrupted and controlled the United States since the death of Franklin Roosevelt.

So now, we're in a situation, where they are doing what they want to do, that is, the Green policy, and the Green policy is an intention to destroy the size of the human population of the planet. This is the key to the strategic, planetary issue!

Now, to understand what the planetary issue is, you have to understand the key. The other part is, that a section inside Eurasia as such, which includes Russia, it's mostly the Eurasian region, which goes from various satellites of the former Soviet Union, into all the way to the Pacific and into the Pacific. Now this region, typified by Russia, China, and also significantly India and so forth, constitute a Eurasian region, which in recent times, apart from the terrorist elements such as the Chechens and so forth, and the Saudis and so forth, apart from them, you have an area which is now actually growing economically, and sociologically, and culturally. In this section of the world, the Eurasian part, is now, as I say, is growing.

But you have, apart from the Eurasian part which is growing, in some degrees as in China, at an accelerating rate of advancement, as this project defines; so the Moon landing project now, under China's connection, as what you put on the table here, and you put on, jointly, this means that the means exist in Eurasia, such that Eurasia is rising per capita in terms of its productivity, and its general, overall productivity, while the trans-Atlantic region is rotting into death! You may have exceptions in some degree in Argentina and so forth, you may have pockets of things which are not actually rotting on the vine. But! The general thing is the United States, like the larger area of the trans-Atlantic region is rotting on the vine at an accelerating rate. That means that the British Empire which is the mother of this area, the British Empire is faced with the fact that its present policy, if continued, is causing their entire region of the world that they immediately control and occupy, to come into virtual extinction, a disintegration worse than that suffered by the Roman Empire in its collapse, as is typical of Zeusian formations, such as that.

But against this, you have the rise and consolidation of power, that is the power to produce, the power to live, the power to raise the standard of living to achieve things on behalf of Earth! On the one side the Eurasian sector dominates, growth! On the other side, the British sector, including its victim the United States, are dying!

So therefore, this contrast, between two thermonuclear armed sectors of the planet, the conflict is such that the only way the British side, Anglo-American side, the trans-Atlantic side, the only way it can survive in its present form, under its present conditions of policy, is to try to save its ass by going to a challenge of thermonuclear threats, and even thermonuclear warfare, on a planetary scale! This is the immediate strategic point of crisis of the planet's civilization! This is the only real strategy which defines what could happen. This is the only decision-making which is worth anything now!

All people, including members of my own organization, are incompetent for their failure to comprehend this reality.

And that is really the implication which follows on what we've discussed, in your discussion, the two of you, this morning. And that is the reality, which has prompted my production of 100-page, in print, of what is approximately 40-page insert as the leading feature, in the coming issue of EIR. If that does not happen, heads must roll.

And that's the commitment which I say publicly now, for the edification of both our members and the population of the world generally. A lot of people know these facts, they know them in their own terms, not necessarily my terms. But the facts essentially remain the same. And it's upon the basis of these kinds of facts, when duly considered, in their relative relationship to one another, and that's what's important, the relative relationship to one another of a system; and it's only when you think about the relative features and relationships of a system, that you have a competent concept of strategy. That does not mean just military strategy, it means global strategy in every respect.

It means the strategic response, to Earth's situation, within the immediately nearby parts of the Solar System, and the further considerations of the larger part of the Solar System. And then, what is our strategic relationship to this ugly creature, this Ugly Mother, called the galaxy! And we've got to start getting an educational program which uses these terms of conception in order to get out of this stupidity, which has been imposed by evil people on the soft minds of our own members! But the soft minds of the population generally, and of the world and the planet now.

This phenomenon which we have, between the initiatives which are represented, combined and respectively, of Russia and China, are now the core of this crisis. But we have to not only know this crisis, we have to speak of this crisis! It's not sufficient to speak of it, it's necessary to demonstrate the truth of it: And that's what I want from my organization, which I've been heading since 1971-1972. I want that organization, which is my organization, get off its silly back, and get back to business, our business! And our business is to be a factor of information and influence within our own nation and beyond, to save this nation of ours, these United States, from the piece of wreckage it's been transformed into by recent Presidencies! And save civilization, too.

We are the United States! I represent the United States! I don't have any efficient representative of the United States in power! I have people in the United States, who represent important power inside the United States, but they're not in charge; they're only auxiliary. We want a Presidency which is the leadership of the United States, not this garbage that's been foisted upon us by the British! And by Wall Street. We want a real United States back again, of the type that was originally intended, with the original Constitution and the implication of that Constitution and its experience.

And we in the United States must unite our people, by whatever means we can accomplish, to bring about a state where we, in the principle for which I'm fighting as a leader within the United States, providing a political and related strategic role of leadership in the United States, with other people who are strategic thinkers and patriots at the same time, are able to congeal a leading force which takes over the direction of the policies, the strategic policies of our United States, not only strategic in the military sense, but in the general economic and social sense.

We must bring about the kind of change in the course of civilization, which has been the intention of humanity, the Promethean intention of humanity, which can crush the evil, the intrinsic evil of the contrary view, of the Zeusian view.

That's my mission. And you see how it congeals, with what we're talking about. Because the idea of progress, what is really progress, in the existence of humanity is the overriding, strategic policy for everyone on this planet, who is sane and not stupid. And we in the United States are in the best position, to recognize the merit which is being expressed, respectively by nations such as, in particular, on a large scale, Russia and China. What China has done in the Moon project, the way it is looking at the Moon project, which is implicitly what we're talking about today, here, that is the future of mankind! And I am determined, by whatever means are possible, to bring about a leadership inside the United States, by an assembly of people, some of whom are already in office, in leading positions, or should be in leading positions of a higher level; and by that kind of leadership, established soon, very soon, from within the United States, we can provide the kind of international leadership, which instead of playing with thermonuclear war against each other, throughout the planet, can consolidate the viable forces, and the political and national forces throughout the planet, as sovereign entities, respectively.

And that's the original intention of the policy of the United States. It's the one we must realize now, and we just have to get our heads clear, so we figure out what that policy is, and what it should be.

I think this is a great day.

JONES: I think you've made it very clear, what the strategic outlook must be. And we've just encouraged all those in our audience to join us in making that vision a reality.

So we'd like to thank everybody for joining us today, thank our guests, and we'll see everyone again next week.