LaRouche PAC Policy Committee, June 9, 2014, Transcript
June 10, 2014 • 5:47AM

Watch the video here, or listen to the audio here.

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon, it's June 9, 2014. My name is Matthew Ogden, and you're watching our weekly discussion with the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee. We're broadcasting via Google Hangouts on air today, and we're joined over video by Kesha Rogers, joining us again from Houston, Texas, who is also with Bill Roberts; Dave Christie, who's joining us from Seattle, Washington; Michael Steger, joining us from San Francisco, California; and Rachel Brown, who is in Boston, Massachusetts. And here in the studio, I have Diane Sare and Mr. LaRouche.

So, Lyn, I know you have some things to begin with.

LYNDON LAROUCHE: Yes, we had a real goofup in terms of our internal organizing process. I had laid out, as of Sunday, I had laid out four points of policy, which were to be sent out as an emergency report for organizing this week, and somewhere in the works between the time, say, about between 3 and 4:30 o'clock, somebody screwed the thing up, removed what was already on the screen, substituted a completely nonsensical business, and never did get a competent report of the four points. The first two points where accurately represented, the opening, and the first two points. The fourth point was not identified as the fourth point, when it was made, and it was accurate. The third point was garbled, and it was garbled, in the initial express that I saw last night, and it was garbled in a new way, in the third area; so someone inside our own monkey house in Leesburg, had actually screwed this thing up, despite the fact that the precision of this statement was extremely important.

The point is that, somebody put in this crazy, irrelevant nonsense, to eliminate the third point that I made. The point is, that as I had actually stated in my own statement, that like Franklin Roosevelt, in terms of his recovery, the initial recovery had two aspects: one was like the WPA and PWA policies, was to provide employment and backup as security, for people who otherwise would be totally unemployed, on government programs. And secondly, the fact that we would go for high energy-flux density improvement in our productive capabilities, which would enable us to win the war, in World War II. So this third point, which is crucial, which means that, the society works on the basis, as today, we have a lot of poor people in the United States, who are practically in the same class as what Franklin Roosevelt had to deal with, when he walked in on the Depression.

We're now in a Great Depression: The Depression was caused by the two recent Presidencies, the Bush-Cheney Presidency and the Obama Presidency. These two measures, have willingly destroyed, with calculation, have destroyed the United States economy. There has been no net increase in productivity per capita in the United States, since about the 1971-72: None! The whole problem has been, exactly that.

Wall Street, the British Empire, Wall Street, and crooked Presidents, like Bush-Cheney and Obama, these crooks, who are virtually traitors against the United States, have caused this problem. Therefore, we have to go back to a Franklin Roosevelt precedent for his recovery while he was President, during the interim when he was actually President; once he was dead, the United States went into a very bad policy, evil policies, actually. British-run policies.

But the key thing, is you always have to take your whole population, you have to defend the dignity of that population, by offering employment and remedies where remedies are needed. You must then, after providing a basic sustenance for the entire population, you must then accelerate higher-technology production and by increasing the ratio of higher-technology production in terms of employment, you can build a recovery for the United States — then, as now. Now, would be much tougher, because the situation's much worse than it was, that Roosevelt found in the 1932-33 period.

But, the point is, that without a commitment to a higher energy-flux density approach, to increasing the productive powers of labor, by getting rid of all the Green stuff, but that's only the elimination; that's you flush it down the toilet. The Green stuff goes down the toilet.

Now, this thing on coal, on carbon, this is a program of genocide against the people of the United States!

OGDEN: Yep. Some states get as much as 50% or more of their energy from coal. And so, shutting that down, would kill the people in that state.

LAROUCHE: Well, you find a column in the New York Times this morning, which has a lead in there, which is a complete fraud. I know the writer in a sense, I've followed him for a good bit: He wouldn't do a thing like that, except he's being bullied to do it!

OGDEN: Krugman?

LAROUCHE: Yeah. He wouldn't lie like that! he wouldn't like on that point. He being bullied!

And so therefore, the point is to realize, two things: We must not have members of our own organization, scheming, to do what they did, to misrepresent my intention, in the report I made. Whoever's responsible for that ought to be called to account. That must not happen. Whoever did it was wrong; they were wittingly wrong, because the changes they made, when I said, "this is what I'm writing, don't change it," — they changed it! And they obliterated it.

So the first two numbered points, of the four points, were stated. The third point was eliminated, with double-talk. And the final point was stated. But the in-between, the crucial thing is how do you get from the theory to the reality, and that's the third point. And that was what was suppressed. So therefore, whoever did that in our organization in Leesburg, requires a public apology to the entire membership of our organization, and readers in general.

DIANE SARE: I think this is absolutely crucial to put on the table right now. And also, I was thinking of the behavior-modification of the American population, since what you identified as the "colored revolution" in the United States, this 9/11 attack. Because, in a sense, people, and it was building since the assassination of Kennedy, the Warren Commission cover-up, and then Bobby Kennedy's assassination, but particularly, since 9/11, you can not even have a discussion. People are not supposed to even disagree, in public, so there's no discourse.

And I was reflecting on this question of energy-flux density, versus just saying "anti-Green," because what you have from a lot of Republicans, is they claim they don't like the environmentalists. But why don't they like the environmentalists? They don't like the environmentalists because they stop projects that would make money. But it's not because they have an understanding of the question of relative potential population-density, or energy-flux density.

LAROUCHE: Well, they're British. The whole thing is British. Wall Street is a British entity. And you have opportunists of all breeds and types, four legs, six legs, whatever they are, or one-leg, and they will toe the line! But this is a question of science.

Now, there's a generic problem here, is what was done, at the beginning of the 20th century, that the idea of science was eliminated, and has been effectively eliminated from the public policy of the United States ever since, as well as from Europe. In other words, science has been banned, as a matter of public policy, during this period, and the key figure in this, of course, was Bertrand Russell. Tony Blair is merely a miniature Bertrand Russell. But he's probably as evil as in his intention, but he's not as systematically skillful, as Bertrand Russell was in being a Satanist.

So therefore, the point is, our organization is one of the few organizations in the world, which has and can present a clear understanding of what this problem is, and what the solution is. Most members of the Congress have no idea whatsoever, what this is all about. And they don't want to know! Because what they're doing now, is they say, "Well, I can spin it this way; you can spin it that" and that is the way the policymaking is done in the Congress presently, in terms of the system of government — who can spin which? You have the Republican spin, and they have different kinds of spin Republicans: You can see all these head spinning in various directions. And you have the Democratic Party spins. And they all say, "we're spinning. We are saying something to fit our convenience, our opportunist convenience." They don't tell the truth!

Now, for example, the key to this was the introduction of what is called "anti-Classical music." Which actually began, significantly, with the death of Johannes Brahms, when he went out of business. So, people today, do not know what music is! What they call "music," is not music! Music is almost an antiquity, it's something you get out of the closet, if you can perform it, you're considered, well, unique, but it's not popular. But the "popular" music is bad. It's not only bad mentally, it's bad for your healthy — truly!

So therefore, the question is, because, take the case of music as we've demonstrated in things we've put out publicly, that the principles of physical sciences and the principles of Classical musical composition, are synonymous; they are identical. They're absolutely identical.

OGDEN: Absolutely.

LAROUCHE: Therefore, if you don't like Classical music, you do not think as a scientist. And that's been the problem. So, therefore, you go back to the so-called arithmetic scheme of music, you take the arithmetic interpretation of musical composition, and you produce this junk, which people admire. When people admire junk, what the junk is, it is in their brain, it's in their mind! That's where the junk lies! And without Classical musical composition, you realize that the person who doesn't like Classical musical composition, as a mode, is actually incapable of thinking creativity, incapable of thinking scientifically. That is what has been done to our population!

OGDEN: Johannes Kepler never could have discovered the Solar System, the principle of the Solar System, without the human singing voice and polyphonic Classical musical composition.

LAROUCHE: Exactly! But this has a deeper root to it, also. This is the Promethean conception.

SARE: Also, it was really explicitly mathematical: If you think about what happened after Brahms, you have Wagner, this whole emotional orgy idea, and then, Schoenberg, which is totally mathematical. It's a system, use the 12 notes, in order, and they always stay in that order. A computer! And then you have explicit people, and this is what the so-called "Classical," that they teach at the conservatories for the people who are the elite. This guy named Babbitt, where every pitch has its own dynamic, with the result that a computer can perform more correctly than a human. So it's so explicitly anti-creative, I mean destructive, of what it means to be a human being.

LAROUCHE: And that is the key to the whole problem. Because if we can not get across a scientifically sound approach to a solution for this problem of the planet, today, you have no solution for the planet! That's the point! So therefore, this is a purely — this operation, the 20th century and what's come out of it now, has been essentially a Satanic phenomenon! That's the intention, that's the effect. And the question is, are we going to save the human species, or are we going to tolerate this Satanic thing before? Because Obama's actually a Satanic figure. He meets all the requirements. You know, Satan was originally Zeus, that was the Greek name for Satan. Then the Roman name Satan: It was just a matter of going from Greek to Latin, essentially. And what happened in Europe was a Satanic formation.

When you go to the Renaissance, you take — all science, competent science, and modern science, began with the Renaissance. And the first follower of the Renaissance was some young people, who actually did understand, and followed. So you had modern science had an continuity, actual physical science, which continued up into the beginning of the 20th century. The 20th century has been the burying ground of science, and morality, alike.

DAVE CHRISTIE: You know, much of what actually was done on this front, whether it be the attacks on Leibniz, whether it be the attack on Kepler, or alternately the promotion of people like Newton, is, you take away the sense of causality. And to me, it's a political attack, or a philosophical attack. Because if you can reduce things to the mathematics, you know, Lyn, you've referenced your attack on Euclidean geometry by a reference to the I-beams, of the circular cuts in I-beams, which takes a certain weight out and thus gives it strength in terms of an overall support apparatus, which in a sense is an expression of least action; but that's the true source, of then, what you get of the reduced mathematics. And this was the big attack and the promotion of Newton, was to say, "well, we can just reduce it to empty space and just the mathematics." Whereas somebody like Kepler, said "No, this is not empty space." And there was a discussion on light and magnetism, and the relationship and so forth, but that there was a physical cause which generated then, what people saw as these so-called formulas. But every time that there's an attack, on the physical science, and a reduction to mathematics, is an attempt to destroy the sense of causality, the sense of discovery, the sense of an unfolding, as a way to eliminate mind out of physical science.

LAROUCHE: Absolutely.

RACHEL BROWN: Also, on this question of the change in science around the turn of the century, it is very interesting that the breakthrough in a sense, that Vernadsky represented, because he was coming at this time of the attack on science and positivism, and the attack on Planck and Einstein; and he came up with something that was totally different and really did flank the positivists. Because he took this empirical observation of what's happening on the planet, and used the facts themselves to demonstrate a geometry. And then said, look at the underlying principle which is causing this. There is a principle of life, there is a principle of mind.

And so, in a sense, he did continue, or take up what Riemann did in his habilitation dissertation, that we have to get out of mathematics and go to physics. And he just also was really conscious of this idea, where he looked at the development of mankind from the 15th century to the 20th century and our mastery and power of printing, of electromagnetism, chemistry. And he said, look at the increase of the power of mankind over the environment, this is a principle.

So, we definitely do have, therefore, to take up, I mean it was put there, right at this turning point, when science was being attacked, when world wars began, and we've been in this decline since then. But he did give us this higher standpoint to bring these questions back into the right perspective.

LAROUCHE: Yes.

OGDEN: And I think the other thing is that this impulse to substitute mathematics for physical science, breeds a belief in money — money as opposed to physical economics. And that's exactly the disease which we have to cure. That's the disease that has destroyed the United States economy.

LAROUCHE: The right term for it, is bestiality.

OGDEN: Right: That happens on Wall Street!

LAROUCHE: Bestiality! Or, "practical" is often a term for bestiality. I'm practical, don't bother me with the truth, I'm practical. And we've had this thing in our own organization, people who would always try to say, "well you got to be practical; if you want to be influential, you've got to be practical, you've got to vibrate with the turds," or I don't know, whatever it is... [laughter]

No, the idea that life, human life in particular, that life is a universal physical principle, and that anything else is nonsense. Vernadsky of course is very clear in this thing, he's absolutely clear. There could be things that could be added to what he accomplished, because there were limitations to what he was able to do in his lifetime. But if you look at his work, the directionality is very clear: That sense-perception is false. Sense-perception is not truth. We're aware of sense-perception, because of its origin in our biology, so therefore, we react on biological responses, to what we call sense-perception. But we become human, when we stop acting like animals, because animals act on sense-perception. The intelligence of animals is always a form of sense-perception, of that is, a higher or lower kind of sense-perception. The human mind does not operate on the basis of sense-perception. And therefore, people who operate only on sense-perception have no true mind. They're animals. They are able to act as human beings, as an animal could act as a human being.

OGDEN: Right. Because it's just a biochemical phenomenon. It's not creativity.

LAROUCHE: Exactly. And that's the issue that's going to whether civilization exists of not. And all the idiots who think you want to be practical, are actually intending toward suicide. Because that's where it will lead them, it will lead them to death. And the adoption of a policy which leads mankind to death is an act of suicide.

SARE: Well along those lines, I brought this — I was very struck. You know, we have this conference of the 30th anniversary of the Schiller Institute coming up, and the title is, "An End To War," And with the work on the color revolutions and Putin's declaration of war against war, a friend of mine found a speech that Gen. Douglas MacArthur gave, just after the surrender of the Japanese, which is quite extraordinary, and I just want to read it, because I think it's very, very powerful.

He says, "A new era is upon us. Even the lesson of victory itself brings with it profound concern, both for our future security and the survival of civilization. The destructiveness of the war potential, through progressive advances in scientific discovery, has in fact now reached a point which revises the traditional concepts of war.

"Men since the beginning of time have sought peace. ... Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. We have had our last chance. If we do not now devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years, It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh." [as written]

LAROUCHE: Very appropriate. Right to the point.

KESHA ROGERS: Mm-hmm. I think that is the essence of the fight, for why we have to get rid of this President, and I think impeachment is well overdue, because I think a lot of people want to put emphasis on single issues, of all of the different crimes, individually, that Obama has committed, but as you've emphasized in your latest discussions, the real question at hand is the threat of war, and what this President represents to carry out the interests of an Empire, whose whole intention has been to commit cultural warfare against nations. And you look at this colored revolution, and what this really represents, as anti-science, as anti-mind, as the anti-Westphalian principle that actually goes against this idea of nation-states, and the sovereignty of nation-states, working together in the common interest, to actually rid and to create an obsolete sense of war, to do away with warfare. And that's really what was just presented in what you just read there.

And that's been what our — just really thinking about what our campaigns have represented and why these campaigns, as we discussed last week are the only policy that actually emphasizes where the direction of the nation, of mankind must be, where we must go, and why it's going to be through these policies, and these four-point solutions that are going to be the only source that is going to allow for a real Presidency to emerge out of this destructive policy we're seeing with Obama.

CHRISTIE: Just to follow up on that, because I think the importance of raising these colored revolutions from the standpoint of the Treaty of Westphalia, that it really is — actually what was raised in some discussions yesterday, concerning what [Lord] Palmerston did during the middle of the 1800s, culminating in 1848, there was a whole series of these revolutions that were sweeping across Europe, which, really what Palmerston, who was an agent of the British Empire under Queen Victoria, was to prevent the outbreak of the American system, which was unfolding throughout Europe. People in Germany and so forth, were looking at the kind of economic development, coming out of the American Revolution, what Hamilton laid forward, and especially what John Quincy Adams was implementing, and this was beginning to spread as an idea throughout Europe, and had its own foundation there.

And they brought these revolutions in, and the revolutions were really based on a rejection of the nation-state, and a reduction of what it is to be human, into lesser ethnic or religious, or smaller identities. And a lot of what they're doing now, in terms of these color revolutions, at least from the outbreak of it, — obviously, you have the military element that comes in, that's the hard core of it — but in terms of what we saw with the Maidan grouping and these so-called "revolutions" of people coming out against corruption, it's often being manipulated through the social media, the social networking. Which really, what's at the core of that? It's you reduce what it is to be human according to your likes and your dislikes, and your grouping of friends. And it is, again, just this reduction of what it is to be human, to these smaller elements.

And I think the point on what unifies a nation, or what should unify a nation, is scientific policy. It is, Lyn, what you outlined in these four points, particularly this fourth point of a science-driver program, to unite people of the front end of where humanity has to go, or where your nation has to go, and therefore, the social relations should be organized around improving the conditions of life for the future. It's not just simply based on your likes, your ethnic background, your religious background. It has to be based on a universal characteristic.

LAROUCHE: Well, this goes into a very interesting religious question, because the whole idea of religion is often badly misrepresented. If you look at the case of the Renaissance, the Golden Renaissance, you see the lesson is made clear right there. What do you believe in? What's your God? Is your God sense-perception? Are you nothing but an animal? Because a person who simply believes in sense-perception, is by definition, essentially an animal, not a human being.

The human mind is a more powerful creation, and we know from science as such, from physical science as such, from its history, we know that the ability to create a state of mind, which enables mankind to increase its power in the Solar System, or on Earth and so forth, depends upon departing from enslavement to sense-perception. All competent scientists, are not dominated by sense-perception.

All idiots, and criminals, are creatures of sense-perception. They are animals: Their devotion is to an animal-like life. Now, how do to they do that? It's called animal pleasure and pain. And sex: for example, it's gotten now, that nobody knows what sex is any more! Sex has been made meaningless. It can be anything. You can have a sexual affair with a toilet bowl — I mean, what the hell difference does it make? Right?

But the issue here, and so therefore, you have a misunderstanding of sometimes, religious belief was, in terms of the other world. And the other world was not something mysterious, the other world was the real world. The other world is the world that the human mind is able to create in the universe, as an act of will by the human mind. And the human mind is an act of will.

And what happens is, you have simply, the running-dogs of Hell, of Satan, are out there, saying "pleasure, pleasure, pleasure." The principle of the house of the prostitution. And so therefore, we can say, that the Queen of England is running a house of prostitution. It's actually a religious house of prostitution, it's a devotion to prostitution.

OGDEN: Is that one of the houses on Capitol Hill?

LAROUCHE: I think — it may not be one of the houses, but I think a lot of the inhabitants of the property may be of that religious persuasion!

But the issue here is, actually, the uniqueness of the human mind, which is Vernadsky's principle, for example, the principle of the human is the only principle of mankind! What happens is, you have mankind, which is biologically developed to be a human creature, will go with the pleasuredom, and become a dog, a cat, a skunk. Hmm? And so therefore, you understand Obama's being a Satanic figure. You understand the Bush-Cheney administration as a Satanic entity, that is, with no redeeming qualities! Obama has no redeeming qualities. He's pure evil.

And when people say, "Well, you can not talk about the moustache, you bring up the moustache, you mustn't do that!" Why not?! Why not? If they don't like the moustache, there's something wrong with them! Not that we're recommending it, but the denial that it exists, — that this guy is nothing but a beast. He's not a human being. Or if he has human qualities, they're buried so far deep you can't find them.

OGDEN: Well, the point that you made on Friday, is that he's been conducting illegal warfares across the globes, since he became President in 2008! And it's a continuation of what Cheney was doing, which is the implementation of the Tony Blair color revolution doctrine.

LAROUCHE: I was in the middle of that thing, on the British side against Tony Blair. It was a war I fought together with some leading forces in the United Kingdom at that time. We lost. And Cheney was the instrument who did it. I mean, Cheney actually should be in prison.

ROGERS: And George Soros!

BROWN: This color revolution flank that was put out by Putin really is a flank, because while he was in France, dealing with all this media propaganda that, "Russia is the one committing the violence in Ukraine..." all this type of stuff, meanwhile you have this military conference going on, which is documenting the fact that since 1991, there's been an ongoing policy led by the U.S. and Britain, using the UN to cause these color revolutions, overthrow regimes, use military action, it's just an overt change. But that this isn't something that has anything to do current actions: This is an ongoing policy — you know, he nailed it. And therefore, this is just another shot at the whole apparatus behind Obama, not just Obama. But this whole apparatus behind him is sinking.

Anyway, that's why it's important why you're putting out the four points, because we really on the verge right now of the ability to put through this new system, these corrective measures, that we need right now.

LAROUCHE: That's the characteristic, see, of being an old man: The old man who's wise, knows that all these charms, so-called of sense perception, are really deceptions. Because if you want to find out what the powers are that change the Solar System, can change the conditions of life on Earth, the old men generally are the best people, if they qualify as old men of that type. Because you realize, that you're living a short life, in terms of what history is, and therefore, you devote yourself to purposes which are immortal. That doesn't mean, beyond death as such, in a literal sense, it means that they're moral: that you're doing something in life, and you're doing because it's important, and you know what is good, as opposed to what seemingly pleasant, or charming.

OGDEN: Well, the quality of what Douglas MacArthur said in what you read, that is the wisdom of an old man, which we know influenced John F. Kennedy, who was a young man, but he had the access to the wisdom of Douglas MacArthur.

LAROUCHE: Yeah. And he really consulted him, extensively. No, but that was the point, what do they do? So, the enemy comes along and says, "you got a leader there, the leader is effective — he's too effective. Should we kill him? Can't we do something else to get rid of him? Can't we defame him?" And you find the people who are doing the defaming, are the ones who are destroying themselves and their children and grandchildren. And that's the truth of the matter.

So therefore, there's a complete lack of morality, in the political-economic process of the United States today. It's an uphill fight, to defend humanity, against the bestiality of the so-called right-wing: the pleasure-seekers, the wealth-gatherers. What's wealth? What's money? Money has no intrinsic value in the world, none! There's no intrinsic value, whatsoever.

It's the human progress, which is a matter more of chemistry than money!

CHRISTIE: You know, probably the biggest absurdity of this, as a statement now, is the fact that the Europeans are prostitution, drugs, as part of their GDP! As if those were elements of productive society!

BILL ROBERTS: Well, it's a post-industrial, buddy!

LAROUCHE: But it doesn't know how the sex mechanism works! The begetting part is confused!

ROBERTS: I was going to say, you can really see the whole gameplan for the 20th century for all the manipulation in the works of Russell, the whole theory of Satanism, because you have the denial of science, replacing science with mathematics, saying there's no causality. The whole idea of the post-industrial society that comes along with that, which is to say that, really all of this modern, industrial directionality for society, science-driven industrial progress, Russell said, this is just providing a degree of optimism that can't be sustained, we've got to get rid of it. He said explicitly, Detroit has to be destroyed, we can't have every person thinking that they can have a wristwatch or a piano, for the enjoyment of their family.

And this was the same Russell, that first was committed to thermonuclear war against Russia, but then, promoted the war opposition, the Vietnam War opposition, which is sort of, in a sense it's the same thing as the color revolution, manipulating a social reaction to something.

And it's notable, also, that all of these color revolutions are based on sort of the post-industrial cities, where you have kind of a "tweener" middle-aged, tech-savvy, grouping, that's mobilized by Twitter, but it's an evolution of the same philosophy of this post-industrial — you manipulate the members of the post-industrial new generation, to then destroy further, society. So you can really see the evolution of this thing as a germ of this spawn of Satan, Russell.

So I think we have to have a transition now to a Vernadsky/LaRouche paradigm, in place of this 20th century Russell process.

LAROUCHE: We had a little Satanic problem going on inside our own Leesburg organization. We've got to find it out and track it out, because it must not be allowed to continue. That's the key thing here. Because we are capable of doing what we have to do. If somebody inside our own organization is trying to prevent us from saying what we have to say, then they have to be eliminated, or recreated in some way.

MICHAEL STEGER: Yeah. In reflecting on the campaign process in San Francisco, you had this frequent sense that the people you were talking to, somehow had locked themselves in a cage, and act like the other animals in the cage. And they would sit there and say, "why do you think you can be outside the cage? Why do you think you can be free?" And they would screech and they would wail and they would have all these complaints, and it was funny, they would come up, just on a basic question — say, nuclear power. And they would agree — "yeah! Windmills, solar panels..." I mean, if you want to take an area, an economic entity that's been destroyed, we are in a Great Depression, as you said! And that was a major theme of this campaign: We are in a Great Depression! This is not a "recession," this is not a recovery! And, take California is destroyed! It's gutted. We've got to go nuclear, you've got to go toward fusion. And they say, "well, you can't do that! 'cause people will never accept it, they've been so brainwashed off the fear-mongering they'll never accept it. Yeah, you're right, we won't survive if we don't do it, but look, you can't do that!"

And you'd sit there and be like, you're insane! You're sitting there, this is Satanic! You're acting like an animal locked up in a cage, and you've got the key, but you won't accept it.

And so, this question of Vernadsky, this perspective, this higher religious perspective, but a scientific one, but what Vernadsky's presenting, that you're presenting, you see how critical it is now, to a political discussion. Because with this bail-in program, this thing is coming down now, and it's clear! I mean, what you're saying, I mean, charging people for their bank accounts? How long are Americans going to accept the idea of their money getting stolen — I mean, it already is getting stolen by the banks. We all have that sensation. They already charge you money for a bank account. But the fact that they're going to start increasing it now, at an accelerating rate, people are going to freak! But if people don't get out of the damned Satanic cage, we're not going to solve the problem. I mean, we've got to provide that kind of conceptual orientation, because nuclear power, a WPA/PWA program of nuclear with a driver towards fusion, is the only way we're going to get out of this crisis. That is a real potential for the U.S. economy.

And so, that's kind of the characteristics that were presented, and there are definite ways to move forward.

LAROUCHE: Yeah.

OGDEN: I think the point that you made about, how do you move from theory to reality, especially after 50 years of net decline in the productivity of the United States, and two generations of degeneration, has to be a very real question for body who's serious about recreating the Presidency of the United States after the impeachment of Obama and the continued existence of the nation.

LAROUCHE: Yeah. Well, you've got to do some homework on our own organization. Because if we can't progress with the only policy, the only policy that would work, is that four point policy. That four point policy as I've defined it is the only possible solution for the United States. And anybody in our organization who's trying to destroy that four-point policy, by this kind of sabotage, is just going to be gone! They're out, unless they reform themselves, very quickly. That's the only way that you can do this. You can not tolerate that, at all. That is the intolerable. You insist on it, you're out! That's it.

CHRISTIE: Well, and you see, this has become the discussion internationally, you know, the nations that are on their way, not just to survival, but for further progress, are going with your economic program, Lyn, you know the nations of Eurasia: China, Russia, India. Obviously China is going full flight forward on the Silk Road program; the fact that they're opening up the potential for the development of Africa with a high-speed rail network, explicitly saying, we know what it's like to live under the grip of a colonial system, so we offer you the financing for a high-speed rail network, to connect all the capitals of Africa, not from a colonial standpoint, but from a standpoint of equal potential in development!

So, I think that's the point: It's not just simply the projects, it has to be the outlook, and I think what was brought up on the Westphalia system, you know, Blair had explicitly in 1999, that the "age of Westphalia was over"; the age of nations being able to come together around a higher conception, around the advantage of the other, which was what the Treaty of Westphalia actually said, is that we were going to end the religious warfare, we were going to end the divisions of religious conflicts, based on an idea that your advantage is to my advantage, that concept.

So I think you look at what's going on in Asia right now, they're already moving on this in a sense, this four-point program; there's even a debate on a question of a credit system. You had the "pirates of the Caribbean" on one side, Chubais and Kudrin, arguing for the continued use of Russian oil money to be thrown to offshore islands to make money in the British monetarist system, versus, what Yakunin and Glazyev had proposed around the idea of a credit system.

So these are the fundamental issues, and the United States really was the origin of these ideas, and we have to now take the leadership again, as the only path forward.

SARE: The other thing the Chinese know about is the Opium Wars. And I just think that is one of the most Satanic — the number of people on drugs, nowadays, in the United States, I mean, why can't people think straight? They actually have physically altered their ability to think, and there is so little value placed on the human mind, and human creativity, that you actually have people lobbying for legalizing mind-altering substances as part of the economy.

LAROUCHE: And they're right! They're right. No, you see, actually, that there's a conflict now, between the trans-Atlantic culture, which is now dying, morally and otherwise, the trans-Atlantic world is dying, and it's dying now at an accelerating rate. And you find, on the other hand, that the Eurasian region has come through a period of a relative dark age, and is moving again, upward. You see the struggle in India, you see the struggle in China, you see the struggle in Russia itself. And you see other things: For example, what is happening in Egypt, under this former General al-Sisi, has made a great step on behalf of humanity, saying that we're not going to have a religious dictatorship in his country. This is a nation of the people of this country, and they have to be protected, and no specially privileged sector cult, can be allowed to run it. That's a very good idea.

So, what you're dealing with, therefore, you find that the war that's facing us, is the war of the forces of Satan, which is typified by the British Empire and its admirers, such as those in the United States, such as Obama, these are the Satanic forces. And we have all these other people out there, who wish they could have a good family life, who have those intentions, they are being repressed. They're being repressed by what? By the British Empire's control, through mechanisms such as Wall Street.

You think of the Wall Street factor? What's the power of government in the United States? It's Wall Street! Wall Street's going to go bankrupt, because a collapse of the U.S. dollar, Wall Street's out of business.

But the British intend that to do and Wall Street is an agent of the British Empire!

OGDEN: With the bail-in policy, last week, when the ECB announced that they were going to start charging negative interest rates for deposits, in the ECB, that is the bail-in policy. And that's coming to the United States.

LAROUCHE: Yeah. And that is one which is automatically accelerating. What they try to do, is they try to take a ratio business, where their relative assets will be diminished less rapidly than those of the ordinary people. This is the way to eliminate a population: This is the Queen's intention, the Queen of England's intention. The best thing you can do is, make sure you obliterate Westminster, or something like that. Because this is the point, as long as that kind of Satanic force, which is typified by the Bush-Cheney administration and the Obama administration, these are Satanic forces. And that's the only way you can understand them.

But you have to understand what pleasure is, the idea of pleasure, and profit, as against humanity.

OGDEN: Mm-hmm, that's the Wall Street principle.

LAROUCHE: Exactly. You used to have this, the Horatio Alger stories. I don't know if you ever ran across those...

OGDEN: "Rags to riches," yes!

LAROUCHE: Right. And that was actually a good example of the Satanic principle. And that's what we have to fight against, and we have to defeat it. But the way to defeat it is not by fusting, and killing and so forth. The way to defeat it is simply by introducing mankind to understanding of what mankind is, and finding what the true pleasure is. The true pleasure is the achievement of the human species, as opposed to the animals which Wall Street are. We should give them collars, and doggie leashes, and things like that...

OGDEN: They might already do that! [laughter]

LAROUCHE: I wouldn't be surprised. But maybe that should be their culture. And like all animals, they don't have a right to vote. They can pee, they can do other things, but they can't vote.

OGDEN: What were you going to say, Kesha?

ROGERS: I was just going to say that the expression of that freeing of mankind is really going to be presented next Sunday at this conference, that many of us will be attending. And if you think about how the optimistic vision for mankind, from the standpoint of the ending of the war drive, the four-point policy that you're putting forth, and also the Eurasian perspective which has been rapidly taking off, all of these things coming together to define a new direction and principle for mankind, in getting people out of this bestial sense, it couldn't come at a more appropriate time. So I think we can be very optimistic about what we're about to unleash.

LAROUCHE: And we have to be resolute, and not allow our intention to be thwarted, from inside our own organization. That is a summary issue. Because there's no continued worthwhile existence any more, of being in an organization, which would allow that kind of behavior! Maybe the existence of the organization depends upon dealing appropriately with that problem: To set a lesson, and say, this does not happen! Because if we allow it to happen, then you will corrupt other people, because they say: Well they have a right, too.

And I say, you don't have any right at all! Go someplace else. There's a slum there waiting for you.

That's a good message, you know.

OGDEN: Okay. Well, with that message delivered, I think we'll bring a conclusion to our discussion today. So, thank you guys for joining us, and thank you everybody for watching.