LaRouche PAC Policy Committee Discussion, July 28, 2014, Transcript
July 29, 2014 • 10:32AM

Watch the video presentation here,& listen to the audio here.

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon, it's July 28th, 2014. My name is Matthew Ogden, and I would like to welcome everybody watching today to our weekly discussion with the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee, which regularly takes place on Monday afternoons. We're broadcasting today via Google Hangouts On Air, and we're joined live by video conference by Bill Roberts, who is joining us from Detroit, Michigan; by Dave Christie, who is joining us from the Seattle, Washington; by Michael Steger, who is joining us from San Francisco, California; and by Rachel Brown, who is joining us from Boston, Massachusetts. As you can see, here in the studio, I'm joined here in the studio by Diane Sare and by Kesha Rogers, who have both been in town for the past week, for a very dramatic week in Washington, D.C. and are scheduled to be in town for at least one more week.

Now, just to begin the entire broadcast here today, the Policy Committee is calling on all LaRouche PAC activists across the entire United States to join us in a maximum, nationwide mobilization. There will be a LaRouche PAC activists' call which is going to be taking place tomorrow afternoon/tomorrow evening, and you can into the National Center, the national headquarters of the LaRouche Political Action Committee, for more information on that. And we want maximum attendance and maximum participation in that activists' call.

Because, we have a very dramatic situation on our hands. As people now probably know, last Friday, Congress passed in an overwhelming majority vote HCR 105 in the House of Representatives, and despite Barack Obama's attempts at ignoring this, minimizing this, or covering it up in the media, this is a dramatic victory and a dramatic turning point. What this House Concurrent Resolution 105 stated, was that there will be no military action in Iraq, without specific statutory authorization by the United States Congress. This is a reassertion of the separation of powers; this is a reassertion of the Constitutional authority of the United States Congress. What Walter Jones, Representative from North Carolina, stated on the floor is that this represents a monumental step towards Congress reclaiming its Constitutional authority, and specifically in this case, the power to declare war, which was originally, fully and exclusively vested in the Legislature by the Founding Fathers.

Now, Mr. LaRouche immediately said, that this is dramatic and it opens up the situation for much, much more. Number 1, Congress can not be allowed to go into recess, until Barack Obama is impeached: Remember, this is the hundredth year anniversary of the Guns of August. And number 2, we must immediately, as Mr. LaRouche said in discussion last night, completely redefine our financial system, along the lines of the Four Cardinal Laws, the four new laws of Mr. LaRouche.

What he said is, we're going to have to cancel a lot of junk, a lot of completely and fictitious so-called "value," it's going to be a full sweep of the system, not some fixit, not some little band-aide operation one place or another. And then, the overall mission of the United States, and a concert of nations around the planet, is for the improvement of the productive powers of labor in every nation. And that means, very high-energy-flux-densities of power, defined by thermonuclear fusion as the leading edge. And this fusion driver becomes the new unit of measurement of economic value in our system. It's a unit of measurement, it's a unit of value which corresponds to the true requirements for mankind's progress.

So I think we can start with that as the basis for our discussion, and proceed from there.

KESHA ROGERS: Yes, I think that just to kind of continue to reiterate, from what you started with, is what Mr. LaRouche stressed in discussions last night with associates, is that what we're talking about right now is that the situation is not one to just simply "fix" problems, to fix small things. But he says, we have to move forward with a complete reorganization of the financial institutions, similar to what has been done along the lines of the BRICS summit, and move forward with LaRouche's Four Laws. And I think that the most important thing that be stressed to our listeners and to our activists, who are watching this, is that what has just been accomplished with the vote in the U.S. Congress, in the House of Representatives, around HCR 105, is an opening for not just the impeachment of Obama to take place immediately, but an unleashing of LaRouche's Four Laws in representing a new direction for the nation, a new direction for mankind, to crush the speculative fraud and looting of Wall Street and the British Empire. And this is the way that people should be thinking, that this was a blow, a defeat to Obama, this was a defeat to Wall Street, to the British Empire, and what it signifies is that all options are on the table now, all options to impeach Obama and to move forward with a total reorganization of this bankrupt financial system, and that's what people should be looking toward as you are fighting to make sure that this week Congress does its job, stays in session, cancels recess, and actually moves forward with the immediate removal of this President.

DIANE SARE: I'll just add that what happened Friday, people may be saying, "well where is this? I haven't seen it in the news media? It wasn't in the Washington Post": That's how you know what a big deal it was! If you think about what is in the news media, and I think we are in the most spectacular disinformation campaign, probably in the history of the United States right now: The Nazis that have taken over Kiev are called "democratic freedom lovers"; you have Netanyahu, we've now had 1,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza, but this is somehow helping Israel's security. We're in an economic recovery, but average median income has gone from $87,000 down to $56,000. Every single thing in these media is not only a lie, it's the exactly opposite.

So you have a break like this, where you have 370 Congressmen, 180 Democrats, 190 Republicans, voting that the Congress has a reason for existence as it states in the Constitution, Article I, section 8, which implies many things beyond the declaration of war, and that Obama can not run roughshod over the Congress — and, not a peep is heard in the media.

So first, I just want to say that those of you who have been fighting with us, who have been making these calls, who have been on the delegations, this was a stunning success. Secondly, the point that LaRouche made, we don't know what happened to Obama! I mean, he lost his spine? He couldn't fight? He couldn't stop it? Has he lost his marbles? In other words, there's some kind of fracturing in his ability to ram things through, such that they could not even fight. So, all he can do now is to try and cover up and act like this didn't occur. And what Mrs. LaRouche warned about as a possible false-flag event, to get us into World War III, to get us into thermonuclear war. But they really are in a terrible position right now.

So I think first of all, people should be very clear, because sources that we've been in touch with have indicated that this is not the end, this is the beginning of a potential for many policies now, that Obama has been opposed to, including emphatically, Glass-Steagall, to be put on the table.

ROGERS: Just to stress and reiterate, what you just said is, sources that we have been in touch with have made it clear that this vote was a signification of the fact that Obama has lost ground, he's lost the trust of members of Congress, as well as the population, in his national and international policy, that his national policy has been a complete and utter failure. And that what this vote actually represents is a total revolt of that policy.

OGDEN: Yeah, and what you're saying about Glass-Steagall, this is the immediate issue. This entire financial system is about to blow out. Mr. LaRouche has been leading the fight for Glass-Steagall as the first necessary step in the Four Cardinal Laws and now this is catching on throughout the world. Half of humanity, which is posing a resistance to the British Empire right now, is now beginning to focus in on the necessity Glass-Steagall principle.

Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, the President of Argentina and the leading voice of the resistance to the Wall Street empire, made a speech at the end of last week, celebrating the opening of an iron smelting plant, and in this speech, she made an unmistakable allusion to Glass-Steagall: She said, there was once a law in the United States which prohibited the type of speculation which is being used to try to bankrupt and destroy Argentina today. Obviously, Glass-Steagall. Now, this is an echo, remember, from a few weeks ago, of Robeson Benn, the foreign minister of Guyana, who explicitly called on Congress to reinstate Glass-Steagall, as the way shut down these parasitical vultures. And then, the other thing that Cristina did in this speech, was that she compared the usurious so-called "profit" of these vulture funds, 1,608% profit, to the real productive profit that you would get from investing in an iron-smelting plant, for example.

So we're looking at the consolidation of this kind of idea, of two asymmetric systems of value that Mr. LaRouche has been bringing up, and Cristina said: Argentina is a global test case. And she said: We said feel a very strong sense of historic responsibility to win, at this moment. And I think that's a sense of historic responsibility that we all share on this broadcast, and we're trying to impart to the American people right now.

MICHAEL STEGER: I think we know where Obama and his staffers were on Friday — I think they were obsessed over the crisis of impeachment, because twice over the course of Friday, both in the morning and in the afternoon press discussions, they raised the threat of impeachment that's building in Washington. And again, this is something the American people really don't see, this is not covered in the mainstream media — CNN, MSNBS are not covering the heightened pitch of impeachment in Washington, D.C. But there's something interesting about it: It's not just that impeachment's being raised, and people should have a sense of this, that are getting on these activists' calls, that should get on the activists' calls, and should participate in this mobilization. Over the course of the last three weeks, everything has changed in the political process of the United States, because of what the BRICS development has brought about, but also what's happening here. You have to think, Congress is very comfortable, sitting back, drinking a beer, having a three-day work-week and watching the ball game, and that's literally what most members of Congress think that their responsibilities are. But the fact is, right now, that's not the case. That the situation is heightened in a very significant way. Why? Because the entire world is in a chaos situation. Libya, the Tripoli embassy just evacuated, Libya is in Civil War; the whole Middle East crisis; Israel-Gaza, Ukraine-Russia, the whole drug issue. I mean, the three Presidents of Hondura, Guatemala, and El Salvador, told Obama: Your drug demand, your drug demand, it's your drug policy!

So this whole situation, you've got the border, this whole thing is inflamed globally. And there is heightened tension, there are calls for Congress not to leave, on the question of the border crisis, which Obama's drug policy, as was raised again on Friday by Senator Nelson. Things are raised, the constant tension, what's supposed to be a weekend break is really a heightened process of the political crisis, not happening in the United States, happening globally. It is a global breakdown.

And what we've noticed, we've had some discussions here and I think nationally, but what we've noticed is that this question of impeachment, which might have been, for some peoples' mind the fact that Obama's criminal — and that's true, he's killing American citizens, he's bailing out Wall Street, he's he jeopardizing the lives of many people, but the reality is today that the discussion of impeachment now, the German spying scandal, the breakdown of foreign policy, the economic breakdown, is that impeachment now is, are we going to have a functioning government? Because, if Obama stays in, we face the threat of world war, and we see a breakdown of the ability of our government to function. And I think a lot of people, Republicans and Democrats now realize, if you want a functioning government, throw out this partisan bullshit. Get Obama out, and bring in a Presidency which can begin to bring sanity to a world about to go off a cliff.

And I think that's a complete shift, and it says that this week really does culminate in the threat and the potential to break Obama down, and people should take that incredibly seriously. This is not some hyperbole, this is a very real development over the course of the last three weeks.

DAVE CHRISTIE: You know and I think just the fraud of the partisan politics around impeachment, you have this brilliant statement by Steve Stockman, who has been wagging his stick on that impeachment for a long time, threatening Obama, now saying that this is all a ploy by the Obama administration to get the Republicans all whipped up on impeachment. So, we should ask Mr. Stockman if he's been up an Obama pawn all along, with his idle threats of impeachment? I think that would be a good question to ask him.

But, on that note, I think it's important to reflect back for the question of Nixon, the fact that it was his own party that moved against him, and what Lyn has called for all along is for certain leadership within the Democratic Party to move. And I think it's important to emphasize the point that Bill Clinton had made in a discussion on Glass-Steagall, where he raised that in an interview some time back, a few months ago. And what Lyn had done at that point, was to use that as an effective opening up of the discussion of what the interim government would look like, of the need to throw Obama out and forget all this discussion about 2016, but what are we going to do to save the nation and the planet right now? And it was from there, on that opening up of the dialogue of Glass-Steagall that LaRouche came up with these Four Cardinal Laws, of Glass-Steagall, the question about National Banking, to use Federal credit for high-tech employment, and then, of course, the real driver being fusion, as a science-driver program that informs and creates the conditions for the type of economic growth that is needed right now. And that's important, because the question of impeachment invariably comes back, OK, well, what does the interim government look like? In other words, those within the institution of the Presidency that would discuss something as dramatic as impeachment.

We were having some discussion, here, that, really impeachment is a kind of a coup. But it's a legal coup. You know, the Founding Fathers had sense enough to know, that you would want to have a kind of continuity of government, which is what the impeachment process represents, that that continue on, but at this moment, the kind of continuity of government has to be with what Lyn has laid out with the Four Cardinal Laws, and that that's what comes in on the impeachment.

And I think just as a point of inflection, particularly on this question of fusion and the implications that that would bring in for a whole range of capabilities to deal with the present crisis, particularly around the water crisis. The ability for large-scale desalination for southern California, for Texas, for frankly, the question of Israel and Gaza right now, you know, Lyn had proposed a while back, the "Oasis Plan," of desalination, of creating a new River Jordan.

But on the question of fusion, it's important to reflect on the impeachment, what Lyn has said around the science-driver program, remember, it was the cuts to NASA which finally have Lyn launch the impeachment drive on Obama. And you look now at all the various forms of fascism, the wars without Congressional authorization, the spying, the police-state apparatus, the assassination of American citizens without due process, and you now can look back and say, well, yeah, of course, this man has committed the most impeachable crimes, but remember what it was that Lyn had first launched the impeachment: It was on the destruction of NASA and the destruction of the future. And I think that's important to recognize that, what we're talking about with the continuity of government with these Four Laws, is the question of the future and the importance of a science-driver to initiate that. Without that, you don't have the capability to even reproduce society.

RACHEL BROWN: That's a really important point. I reminds me of the idea that Friedrich Schiller wrote in his Aesthetical Letters, that the highest art is the idea of creating a new society, that the plastic arts are there to develop the minds and souls of people, but that the highest art of all is true political freedom and the creating of it. And how do you do that? While the work of art is in motion, because you can't stop time, to produce the painting. The art of producing a new civilization is something that's in motion while lives are at stake. So that's very important to emphasize this point of LaRouche's four points and the question of value, which still is not properly understood — I can say that pretty confidently.

But, we are being exposed to this question of value by what's happening in Argentina, in China, in the BRICS. But there really isn't a force which can stop what Argentina is doing right now. Mr. LaRouche made the point this weekend, that there's no way to win the case against Argentina. You also have what China's doing, for example, in the rail building. They've built 10,000 km of rail in the last six-seven years, more efficiently than is possible in the United States, not that we're building any, but because they're actually reaching standardization, that they're building so much of it, that they're making the process standardized and more efficient. Which is the point with the science-driver project, that you mobilize your entire economy to produce something, and it's more efficient that doing it any other way.

So, just these questions of what are the principles by which we're going to reorder the recovery of the U.S. economy that are fundamental to put into motion now, that you really can't have an impeachment, without having this understanding in both parties, of what are the essential principles that we have to organize the future around?

SARE: I just want to put in, here, what we have on the agenda for this week, in terms of the blowout of the financial system, because, as we were discussing the vote on the H. Con. Resolution 105 opens the way for all kinds of things, and LaRouche said, "Yeah, a collapse of the whole system could occur on Tuesday," which is tomorrow; you have the European Union meeting to decide whether or not to go along with these absolutely insane sanctions on Russia. And the Brits, in the London Daily Telegraph say, since the City of London itself is the beneficiary of some EU7.5 billion in Russian bonds issued there, about half of the total in Europe — and this is a quote, "adverse effects could materialize in loss of revenue for operators, depressed value of existing securities, loss of market positions, and, as an unlikely worst-case scenario, risks of default." (Unquote.) Now, that is their "stiff upper lip" way of shrieking at the top of their lungs, that if these sanctions go ahead, as Glazyev had warned, earlier, you could have a blowout of the entire trans-Atlantic system, being precipitated as early as tomorrow.

And then, Wednesday, Thursday you have the deadline for Argentina, in this case of these vulture funds, where there are rumors that NML Capital may decide to back down, so as not to push this to a head, because there's no way they can win. There's absolutely, they have no leverage, they have no political leverage, no financial leverage, there is no way that they can force Argentina, to cave on this. And Argentina knows that, as you said: Cristina Fernández is very aware, that they don't need to respond to whatever threats on this, and they can't even threaten anything.

So, there are two major inflection points, in the immediate days ahead. And then you think of the Congress, the idea of leaving town, leaving this madman, we don't know, as I said before, what's gone wrong with Obama, but he's somehow crumpled up and couldn't fight on this. There is a great deal that can and must be done in the coming days.

ROGERS: Absolutely, and Mr. LaRouche's remarks and demands on this is very simple: He says, cancel the debt, we're not going to pay, that this is fraudulent debt, this is fraudulent, cancel all of this junk, because it's nothing but junk; and that once we do this, we can then move forward with exactly has to be done, which is reorganization of the entire global financial system, around an increase in productive powers of labor and productivity, and going forward what most nations know is the embodiment of the truly American System of political economy. As was expressed by the understanding and knowledge of the agreements that were made at the BRICS summit, that this system's finished.

And that was one of the things that Mr. LaRouche really recognized with this vote, not just as a vote in and of itself, but what it catalyzed is the complete destruction of this British Empire. The British Empire has lost it; this financial system is coming down; and now, their President, or their puppet in the White House has no power whatsoever. So, we know that Obama's Boehner has gone limp! And that's what was the cause of this vote in Congress — so I don't know, Obama's Boehner went limp and I don't know, Steve's Stock went limp, too. [laughter] Sorry!

BILL ROBERTS: I think it is quite notable that this vote represents something of the floodgates opening, and it is quite peculiar that the press has blacked this out to the degree they have. Because I was just watching the floor speeches of the different members of Congress on why this was so important. A number of members made the point, look, this isn't a vote over the deployment of troops as such, but the fact that Obama hasn't come to them about that, tells you in a certain sense that there would be a lot of opposition, obviously, to having another war, that the American population doesn't want that.

But a lot of the members of Congress speaking, correctly identified that this is actually a question of principle. One of the members of Congress who argued against the resolution, on the grounds that we have to maintain a presence in Iraq or something like that, McGovern pointed out, if you oppose this return of the authority to go into war to the Congress, if you oppose that, then the proper thing for you to do is introduce a declaration of war. This is a different question, this is question of Congress not having done its job on its responsibility to make sure that the Congress lives up to its Constitutional role. And so the question expressly of the Constitution, and the Constitutional power of the Congress, was made the issue.

And you know, you think about, over the recent years, how much it is, how much it is that everyone talks about gridlock, gridlock, gridlock, nothing's getting done because of partisan gridlock. And they never talk about the fact that a lot of that gridlock occurs because Obama simply says, "I have the authority to do this, to create law," and then he gets attacked in the Congress, and then people take sides over it and fight over it, but nothing actually gets done, nothing gets addressed, because there's an implicit issue that hasn't been addressed, which is dictatorship! And the dictatorship is a function of a collapsing financial system.

So I just wanted to underscore, that this was an extremely important vote, and if you hadn't had the chance to listen to the floor speeches on this, it would be important to take a look at, because this is absolutely an outcome of the work that we have been doing to make the issue the question of principle over party. And I think it should be clear to everyone that that sets forward a new potential to organize the basis for new laws and a new mode of creating the future.

CHRISTIE: [crosstalk] ... standpoint, the two core issues of war and the purse strings, which was accorded to the Congress because of the obvious reality that what makes a king or a dictatorship is the fundamental issues of the future, which is what the purse strings should represent — unfortunately at this point, it's debt slavery under the way the banking system is run; and life and death, the issues of war, that that should be the decision, ultimately, of Congress, which is the most immediate body connected to the American people, and the nature of the votes and so forth, that that get them into office in the timeframe that the votes are actually held. So those two core issues.

And I think for our activists and for this week, here, we want Congress to stay in session on the impeachment, and we want them to stay in session on Glass-Steagall. So I think we should have an idea that Congress has taken back one aspect of the question of the war aspect, but on the question of the purse strings, that is the point of Glass-Steagall. And to mobilize this week, with the sense that they need to stay in, on those two crucial issues of the impeachment and now the passage of Glass-Steagall, as the first step to the Four Laws.

OGDEN: I think it's necessary to always step back, and make sure we're remembering that this is a fight against a Zeusian system. This is a fight against what the Queen of England represents, the attempt to reduce the world population, from 7 billion to less than 1, and to cause mankind to bestialize itself. And the place where we see that fight taking place the most, is in the fight for nuclear power, which is happening now, being led by Russia, China, India; we had a map which defined two systems, last Friday night, where you see, there's an explosion of the construction of nuclear power plants in one part of the world, and the other part of the world, as typified by Germany, is actually destroying its own power to survive: Germany is mandated by the year 2020, under this idiot Angela Merkel, to completely eliminate nuclear power as a share of its electrical — you know, anything!

Now, I got to read an article which was just written, it's in the final stages of production, by Liona Fan-Chiang, and it's part of a package of three articles that's coming out of the Basement Team this week. This is called "Fusion, Basic Economics." And Liona does a very good job of just defining what the basic issue is: The ability of mankind to survive as a species depends on us always increasing the energy-flux density of power of our system. And this is a reflection of a universal principle: All life forms have reflected this, or they perish. They've either increased, they've evolved to a higher level of energy-flux density, or they've gone extinct. And we as a species are very, very vulnerable, sitting on a planet which is subject to all kinds of cosmic catastrophes, calamities that can be coming at us at any minute, and we don't even know it, we don't even have the observational capacity to know when these asteroids are coming, and as of now, we're dependent on a Sun which is going through extreme cyclical changes, causing extreme weather, causing droughts beyond precedent in the places in United States and elsewhere, and at a certain point in the future, we've got to acknowledge, this Sun will burn itself out.

So, with fusion energy, with the power of thermonuclear fusion, we have the ability within our fingertips, to create the power of the Sun, in a controlled way here on Earth! And everything that comes out of that, plasma technologies, a new physics, a completely new level of chemistry, and I would just recommend that, as these articles are published, everybody who's watching this broadcast take very, very seriously, studying and really internalizing what's coming out of the Basement Team right now on this thermonuclear fusion, the fourth step, the Fourth Law, of LaRouche's Cardinal Laws.

CHRISTIE: Well, I'd just add something quickly: This was an article I found fairly fascinating because you know, Lyn makes this specific point of the role of Vernadsky, and as you just have gone through this question of progress, that you see this in the biosphere. But there was an article that was just put out — I just saw something of a summary, but just as an idea, I think it's fairly accessible; but, basically, the article goes through the evolution of birds through the course of history of birds, and that the aerodynamics by which the actual design of the birds as they go, is almost matched up with what you see in the evolution of aircraft.

And I think that's fairly fascinating. Because if you think about it, what are the issues of the evolution of aircraft, if you think of it from the standpoint of economics, you have an ability to do work, and you have all the factors — lift, to drag, to how big is the fuel tank — but in the end, what makes something necessary, as an evolutionary upshift is its ability to do work and therefore, you could see that, in a sense, the principle of least action as a concept in expressed in airplane design, that that quality of mind is also expressed in the evolution of the species of the bird.

So I think that's an interesting thing, because this comes down to a scientific question on economics, because people will often say, "well, isn't it just your preference that you want fusion? I mean, maybe my preference is solar panels and windmills!" And what that question shows, is that people don't understand the process of mind that should guide an economy. And you can choose that, but you can also choose then, the necessary extinction. You wouldn't see Boeing, all of a sudden saying, "You know, we really feel like the bi-plane should be brought back as a cargo plane," or something. They're not going to make that decision, because Boeing would go extinct if they did that. Similarly for birds, they're not going to go back to an earlier, less efficient design.

So I think that goes right to this question of fusion, that this is not some optional or some preferential idea. It's a necessary idea, and one that challenges the very nature of the universe as defined by a creative, evolutionary upshift.

OGDEN: Remember, birds can't fly to the Moon. Human beings can.

STEGER: I went through again Lyn's Operation Juárez, this past week, and it's remarkable the foresight Lyn has, and how it's been a roadmap for these BRICS and emerging nations. In there, Lyn says that by 2030, the question of nuclear fusion will be an existential question for the species, that the ability for mankind to develop upon the technology of nuclear fission will reach a certain boundary point, which Lyn approximated at around 30 years into the current century, which is about 16 years from today. So you see the actual necessity of it.

But what's amazing, is that you see when the BRICS idea was first developed, it was put forward by a Goldman Sachs banker, because they intended to loot these countries as the top priority. That these countries were the emerging nations, they were based on primitive accumulation, cheap labor in manufacturing, cheap agricultural goods, cheap natural resources, and the idea that these nations responded to break now, and instead of in 1999 and 2000, they responded to the 9/11 crisis, you saw the Shanghai Cooperation Organization formed in 2001 as a security organization to deal with terrorism and the drug trade. And what they began to orient towards was a new system, exactly as Lyn had prescribed, create a common market, which you now see with the nations of Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. They developed a Eurasian Development Bank within those three same countries; they're going to develop a Eurasian Economic Union.

But the critical factor among these nations was to move away from primitive accumulation, cheap resources, which really was just intended as a policy to be looted, to loot their populations, to kill their populations for cheap resources, cheap food, cheap labor. And instead, the fundamental decision, and we saw this, not so much in the BRICS agreements in Fortaleza two weeks ago, but amongst the bilateral agreements of all the nations to move towards nuclear power: That really does define value in the new system that's being created. And that really does determine what value is, this money, the derivatives, the speculation is crap! It can just be wiped out. And the question of what these nations responded to, as an orientation, has now been consolidated, and the question of fusion, China already has a commitment towards a fusion program; so does south Korea; India's moving in this direction, the thorium cycle's far more advanced than the uranium cycle. These kinds of questions are already being committed to.

People have to get a sense, this is now a real economic system, and the guidelines, the mapping was laid out between 1971 and 1982: Mr. LaRouche laid this out with his associates as a perspective. And the one thing he makes a point of, which these nations now identified, is, isolated they remain too weak to oppose an Empire system. But together, weak nations who then consolidate themselves under a common agreement for development, represent a major economic power, and that's exactly what these BRICS nations have become: a major political and economic force, that has empowered people like Cristina Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina, to really define what the new value of a new system would be, against this dying Empire.

So incredibly significant: And people have to go back to this report and get a sense of Lyn's roadmap.

SARE: Along those lines, I was reading yesterday, in the press about another one of these horrific suicide-murder situations of a whole family. And the American population has been really ground down since the assassination of Kennedy, and I think it's the pessimism that makes people stupid. It's not the stupidity that makes them pessimistic, but because they decided to succumb to despair and they do not know how to fight, and they're being bombarded by all this garbage in the press, then they also stopped thinking. I was just reflecting on what Rachel was saying on this question of the creation of political freedom. And you can imagine, in what Mr. LaRouche was saying, that if it were to be announced, Obama is being impeached, we're reestablishing the American System of political economy, starting with Glass-Steagall, a credit system, and we're going to commit mankind to what mankind is worthy of, which is breakthroughs in the laws of the universe, starting with fusion, but mastering, the at least near-Earth space, let alone the galaxy and beyond that, the kind of transformation of the population which would occur, as if in an instant, where people would suddenly be shaken by what they haven't been thinking of, and a whole new potential would be open before them.

Because this can be ended, this system of money is arbitrary. Money has no intrinsic value, it's arbitrary, and you see it with what's about to happen with the showdown between NML and Argentina: It's completely arbitrary! There's no — you know, law! It's just like the banks and what they charge you interest on the credit card: A lot of times you can call the bank, and say, well, I want my interest rate reduced, and they say, OK. It's just completely arbitrary!

So the idea that there's "contracts," and you have to be crushed by this, and you must pay, it's all — like the little man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz, it doesn't exist. And there's a new potential, which we are really, probably this close to achieving.

And I do want to reiterate, just to make sure, that people know the Thursday night activists' call will be on Tuesday, that is, tomorrow night, because we want to keep the Congress in session, which means we have to get to them before the end of the week. So we're moving everything up to Tuesday for the East and West Coast calls with the activists.

OGDEN: It's fascinating what you're saying about law: because arbitrary law is completely, as you said, arbitrary. There's a moral law, there's a natural law, which was the foundation for our Constitution. That's what Hamilton elaborated in his four Reports to Congress, you know, the Report On Manufacturing, Report on Public Credit, Report on National Banking, and On the Constitutionality of a National Bank, and the argument that natural law is the basis for any human system of government, is what the American System is based on. And what we're doing now, with the endeavor that Mr. LaRouche has now initiated is to completely redefine and update the idea of what is a principled standard of value? And real law, is the law of ever-increasing energy-flux density: That's the only thing, that should have value attached to it. Anything that's separate from that, or most of all, anything that's contrary to that, can not be given a standard of economic value. And that's why Wall Street has got to be shut down, and it would be a revolution in the minds of the entire American population, when we say, "Wall Street is over."

ROGERS: Mm-hmm. I think President Xi Jinping of China understood it clearly when he said, history tells us that the law of the jungle is not the way of human coexistence. It's absolutely true: Don't live like beasts and animals. Live like human beings — emphasis added! [laughter]

STEGER: I would even suggest the Four Laws are really the next four Amendments to the Constitution. They really are, intrinsically, what Alexander Hamilton would have suggested be in place. And really, between Hamilton, now and the current time, these Four Laws are the way the United States and any country has ever developed. And that's really what Mr. LaRouche has brought to the table: This is really a consolidation of what the true American Constitutional system is, and really hasn't been brought into the doctrine of the Constitution formally, and really the Four Laws present that necessity, and really, the foundation for a real scientific advancement in what we view as human government, human society.

OGDEN: I'm going to invite anybody to add anything if you find it appropriate. Let me reiterate what's been said: We are calling for a maximum national mobilization. Please call in, as soon as you can to the 800 number for our national headquarters, which is available on the larouchepac website, and we are looking to maximize the participation in this activists' call, which is happening tomorrow night, Tuesday night, and we will be bringing delegations into Washington, D.C. Both Diane and Kesha are here in town, and we've got a big job on our hands.

So, I think with that, I'm going to bring a conclusion to today's broadcast. Thank you very much for joining us, and please stay tuned to