Friday Webcast 29 May 2015


MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening; it’s May 29, 2015. My name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us here for our weekly broadcast from Tonight, I’m joined in the studio by Jeffrey Steinberg, from Executive Intelligence Review; and we both had the chance to meet earlier today with both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche just a few hours ago, really. And the two of them were emphatic that the next few days which lie ahead of us — Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and going through the end of this coming week — will be extremely decisive ones, which have the potential to determine the future of world history. If you take the official announcement by Martin O’Malley of his candidacy for President of the United States, which is scheduled to occur tomorrow in Baltimore, Maryland; which will be the official beginning of a campaign which he has already indicated in no uncertain terms will be dedicated to waging an all-out war on Wall Street by means of the re-instatement of Glass-Steagall and related measures. And then also, take the announcement by Rand Paul, which just came out yesterday — who himself is also a declared candidate for President of the United States — that he will be holding a press conference at 10 a.m. along with former Senator Bob Graham, Representatives Jones, Lynch, and Massie, Senator Wyden, and members of the 9/11 families to announce the introduction of a companion bill into the United States Senate to declassify the 28 pages of the Congressional report on 9/11. If you take just these two upcoming events combined, occurring virtually contemporaneously with one another, I think it couldn’t be more clear that we are now on the verge of an all-out political war against the enemies of the United States. And this is a political war which is being shaped literally from the top down by the leadership of LaRouche and the LaRouche political movement.

If you look at the role that LaRouche PAC has played over the recent several years, on both the fight to re-instate Glass-Steagall and shut down Wall Street and the fight to declassify the 28 pages on 9/11 and shut down the Bush/Saudi great London operation which was covered up in the wake of those 9/11 attacks. Not to mention the developments which are now occurring around the BRICS, the New Silk Road, the Eurasian Land-Bridge , and everything else; I think it’s clear that we would never have reached this decisive and dramatic moment in world history without the tireless efforts and the direct role that has been played by both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche, and their extended political movement — including many of you who are watching this broadcast right now.

And this was summed up very clearly in a few words that Mr. LaRouche had to say when we met with him this afternoon. What he said was the following: “The history of the United States is about to be suddenly and dramatically transformed. We have the responsibility to act to shape the Presidency of the United States. The time has come for men and women of true courage to come forward to rescue mankind from the dangers that now threaten it. The opportunities are there; we have to do our job. And this coming week could be the most decisive week in the history of the planet thus far.” And I think that was made extraordinarily clear in the historic dialogue which took place last night, Thursday night, between Mr. LaRouche and everyone who participated in the LaRouche PAC national activists’ call. This was the second week in a row that Mr. LaRouche personally engaged in this discussion with several hundreds of leading political activists from the East Coast, the West Coast, and everywhere in between. And it clearly exemplifies the power that this movement represents as a national and an international force at the present time; and the decisive role that Mr. LaRouche will personally play in shaping the incoming Presidency of the United States.

And of course, as those of you who participated in this call last night will know, we are exactly one week away from the June 6 conference which the LaRouche movement will be hosting next Saturday up in New York City. This conference, which will be taking place on the anniversary of D-Day, is one which could turn out to be as decisive as those events 71 years ago, if not more. Occurring just one day after the deadline which has been set for June 5 for Greece to announce whether or not it will be able to pay the IMF, which has the potential to precipitate the total disintegration of the entire trans-Atlantic financial system and everything that entails.

Now this will be the subject of our institutional question, which we will take up later in this broadcast. But before we get to that, I want to ask Jeff to come to the podium to lay out in a little more detail the implications of the intersection between this announcement of Martin O’Malley tomorrow of his official campaign for the US Presidency, and the events which occur this coming Tuesday by Senator Rand Paul and others on the 28 pages. So Jeff, why don’t I give you the podium?

JEFFREY STEINBERG: Thanks, Matt. I think that there’s a very fundamental question of political courage that is on the table. What we’ve seen in the case of former Governor, former Mayor O’Malley is that he’s dared to break the taboo. And as a pre-Presidential candidate — tomorrow of course, he’ll be officially declaring his campaign — he said, quite accurately, that Glass-Steagall is the defining issue for 2016; in fact, it’s the defining issue for 2015, because we’re in a countdown right now that is measurable in hours and days, and not weeks and months, to a complete blow-out of the European financial system. You’ve got a similar situation now with Senator Rand Paul. Mr. LaRouche said in answer to a question last night, “I don’t know every policy position that Senator Paul has taken on every issue, and I’m frankly not clear that I’d agree with many of them. But the fact of the matter is, that he’s come out and courageously taken a stand on an issue that is of paramount importance; the issue of the 28 pages is the issue of the entire Anglo/Saudi terrorism, which is not just a past history of 9/11 — both the September 11, 2001 attacks and the September 11, 2012 attacks in Benghazi. But as a matter of immediate strategic concern because of what is going on in the Middle East and North Africa right now; namely, provocations of a population war that could very easily spread into a matter of general war.”

So, there are some very cold, hard realities that have to be faced. I know that in a few moments, Matt will be presenting the institutional question, but I think I’ve got to basically preempt a bit, and say that the countdown that we are in right now, between now and the beginning of next week. You’ve got the O’Malley announcement tomorrow. You’ve got a Sunday evening deadline for the expiration of the Patriot Act, which would be something that should be welcomed by every American patriot. And here again, Senator Rand Paul is taking a definitive stand that the bulk collection provisions of section 215 of the Patriot Act must be eliminated; so there’s a showdown there. And then Tuesday, there will be a Capitol Hill press conference in which he, along with Walter Jones, Stephen Lynch, Thomas Massie, former Senator Bob Graham, representatives of the 9/11 families, will all be there to announce that there will now be a partner Senate bill demanding the declassification of those 28 pages.

Now, these next several days, also marks — as Matt briefly noted — a boundary condition moment, centered around the Greek debt. Greece has four payments that are due to the IMF during the month of June. They cannot meet those payments; and therefore, the question is whether or not the IMF, the European Union, the European Central Bank are going to take a hardline position. In which case, Greece — in all likelihood — will announce that they are in default. That mere announcement is more than likely to set off a chain reaction collapse that will spread rapidly throughout the entire European financial system, and simultaneously will hit the big six Wall Street banks; they’re all intertwined, and they are all sitting on quadrillions of dollars of illegitimate debt, of which a portion of that is the debt that was imposed on Greece by the Troika. Anyone doing a competent forensic analysis, a forensic accounting of that Greek debt, will realize that they don’t owe a penny. And therefore, the question that’s on the table is whether the European powers will blink and make some kinds of concessions; or, if they come in with a hardline, Greece will default. And that will mean a catastrophic event; a collapse of the entire financial system that will sweep across the entire trans-Atlantic region and will make the September 2008 collapse of the system back then seem like child’s play in comparison.

Now, we have a further and even deeper danger; because there are people in the City of London, in the British monarchy, on Wall Street, who know that their system is doomed. And the Greek default could very well be the trigger for that process to unfold very quickly. For those people, at least insane elements within that network, there’s a very real prospect that they will go for a short-term war provocation. And the target of that provocation will be Russia, perhaps secondarily China. But the mere idea, under these current conditions, of considering provoking Russia into a confrontation is the height of madness. Russia will not sit back; Russia will not blink. Putin has made very, very clear that he has a strategic grasp of the current situation. He knows what’s going on with that whole collapse of the trans-Atlantic financial system; he knows that the guns are out for Russia. For the last several years, Russia has been building up its strategic arsenal. And while any kind of provocation of war against Russia will not be contained, will not be limited, and will probably mean the destruction of Russia; Russia will retaliate with everything it’s got. And that means the obliteration of the United States, of Europe, literally of life on this planet.

Now, there are many people who have come to the same conclusion as Mr. LaRouche, and have been warning with repeated tones of desperation in the last several weeks, that we are on the threshold of a war. There was an article that was published in one of Rupert Murdoch’s publications in Australia, quoting a US military strategist who received a brief message from an unnamed but important NATO official from Europe; who simply wrote “It looks like there will be war this summer. If we are lucky, it won’t be nuclear.” So, there are many people who realize that the provocations that are taking place right now, primarily against Russia, secondarily against China — particularly these recent incidents around the South China Sea — these represent very dangerous provocations that could lead to an out-of-control outbreak of war. Kiev could be the Sarajevo of World War III; yet in an era of thermonuclear weapons, particularly the massive arsenals of nuclear weapons that the United States and Russia — and to a certain degree, China — now possess, anyone contemplating general war is completely mad, and is actually contemplating taking measures which can lead to the annihilation of mankind. The only reason that this threat remains in place; the only reason that the British — who don’t have very much by way of military power left to speak of — are a serious threat to trigger this is because we still have President Obama in office. He’s not been impeached, despite the fact that there is massive justification for his removal from office. So long as he remains in office, the danger of nuclear war is staring us squarely in the face.

And we’re not now talking about a nuclear war danger in principle or in abstract; we’re talking about the immediate days ahead. We’re talking about the showdown over Greece. The Secretary of the Treasury, Jack Lew, was in Europe two days ago, on his way to the meeting which took place today in Dresden of the G-7 finance ministers. And in London, at the London School of Economics, he spoke and said, very bluntly, nobody should risk a showdown with Greece. A showdown with Greece will immediately spread; the contagion is going to be there. And he was delivering a desperate message of warning to the Europeans, not to run the risk. But yet, going into this next several day period, we don’t know where things are headed; we don’t know what is going to happen.

We know that there is a new, fresh dynamic on this planet, centered around the BRICS countries; and that you’ve got the New Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank [aiib]. You’ve got major projects — serious infrastructure projects — for development corridors stretching from the Far East in China all the way through to the Atlantic coast of Western Europe.

There has been a phase-shift in the last several weeks of these New Silk Road developments. No longer is the European media either ignoring these developments all together, or presenting cynical geo-political arguments why it is that the New Silk Road policy, the BRICS policy cannot possibly succeed. It’s now clear that not only will it succeed, it already issucceeding. So, you’ve had a whole series of statements coming from some very unusual and prominent circles in Europe, saying it’s time to embrace this because this is the best opportunity that Europe’s been presented with in a very long time. So, you had the research director of — of all things — Royal United Services Institute in London, coming out and saying that Europe should embrace China’s New Silk Road policy. You had the Financial Timesyesterday coming out, after months of pouring cynicism on the AIIB, now saying that it looks like this will be a world class development bank whose standards and performance will be better than that of the World Bank and the regional development banks.

So, you have this shift in developments going on at the same time that we’re intersecting a moment of absolute desperation on the part of the dying British Empire faction that knows that Greece can be the trigger for not only the contagious breakdown of the entire London/Wall Street financial system, but may very well back them into the corner where they run the risk of thermonuclear annihilation under the general idea that “if we can’t run things, then let it all go to Hell.”

So, this is something that we are looking at squarely over the next 24, 48, 72 hours. We don’t know for certain whether the Europeans will blink; whether the Greek default will be temporarily postponed and the can once again briefly kicked down the road. But we know that we’ve reached the break point; Greece cannot and will not pay. And that means that the moment of contagion, the moment of desperation is right there staring us in the face over the next few days. I can assure you that the future of the World Soccer Cup is not the most important development that’s taking place in the world right now; although to view any major news organization in the United States — with very few exceptions — you wouldn’t get that impression. So, we’re facing a contagion, a breakdown far beyond 2008, and we’re facing the imminent danger of a war that will very rapidly — if it’s directed as now intended by London against Russia and against China — then what we are facing is the prospect of annihilation.

OGDEN: Well, I think you already addressed in a certain way the institutional question that we got in, which read as follows: “Mr. LaRouche, in your view, is it appropriate for the Eurozone to consider expelling Greece from the euro without their consent?” And I’ll let you say more about that, if you wish, but one thing that I do want to do, just in light of what Jeff elaborated, with these events which will be occurring over the coming days — Martin O’Malley’s announcement of his Presidential candidacy, and the press conference by Rand Paul and others on Tuesday on the 28 pages.

I just want to read a short excerpt from what Mr. LaRouche had to say last night, on this National Activists’ Call, because more than anybody else, perhaps, Mr. LaRouche is the authority on what it takes to create a Presidency — not just a Presidential candidate as an isolated individual, but a Presidency, which stretches across the political spectrum and is comprised of sober, mature, and patriotic persons within the institutions, the long-standing institutions, who take on the responsibility of, as he said earlier, rising to the challenge and showing true courage to confront the dangers which face mankind at the present. This is what Mr. LaRouche said last night.

He said, “the creation of a Presidential system, which is in accord with the best practice of our system of Presidency, requires a broad team of people, gathered around a figure we call ‘the President.’ But there are many people who have to contribute to make up the combined effect, which represents the kind of President we need. We need a Chief Executive, yes; and the Chief Executive has to be a good choice. But the efficiency with which the good choice can be realized, depends upon bringing a team together, around that Presidential candidate. …

“What we need, however, we need to create a Presidential system, and a Presidential system is not a President; very rarely can a President be successful, even if they’re the best quality. You need a best President, a best option; but you also need a combination of people, whose combined talents, brought together in the proper way, gives you a real Presidency, something like Franklin Roosevelt did.”

So, my question for you Jeff is, actually, twofold. Number one, with what is the culmination of years of leadership and effort by LaRouche and the LaRouche PAC, with the announcement of the anti-Wall Street, pro-Glass-Steagall, Martin O’Malley candidacy tomorrow, and then the introduction of this 28 pages resolution into the United States Senate on Tuesday — these are two nodal points, between which we have the potential right now, to create a real Presidency around a Chief Executive who will be elected. But then the other facet of my question is, what do you do, when the Chief Executive who occupies the position of the President of the United States, is in all effects and to all extent and purposes a virtual traitor against the policy that the institution of the Presidency represents? And when you have a figure such as Mr. LaRouche, who has acted consistently inside of those institution, to give support and backup to the great Presidents, or the good Presidents, such as Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton, but also has fought tooth and nail, to oppose, and to contain, and to bring down those Presidents who are traitors to that system: the Bushes, most typically, and now you have the figure of Barack Obama. So, with those two, kind of aspects of what it means to create a Presidency, perhaps you can give us a little bit of insight into that.

STEINBERG: If you’re part of the Presidency, and have any understanding of what it means to be a patriot to this country and our Constitution and our history, and you’re faced with what we’ve all been faced with for the last fourteen and a half years, namely, two consecutive two-term Presidents who have been enemies of the United States. You had the Bush-Cheney Presidency, and now you’ve had six and a half, seven years of the Obama Presidency.

And what you’ve seen in those instances, I think, is exemplified by something we talked about last week — namely that you’ve had a number of things coming up just recently that have been damning indictments of President Obama. First you had the Seymour Hersh article, that basically tore the lid off of the fraud that has been perpetrated by President Obama and his loyalists, over what actually happened with the raid that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. Virtually everything that was said out of the mouth of the President and his top aides, afterwards, was a complete fabrication, and they got caught with their feet in their mouths, and they wound up telling more outrageous and more provably-false lies as time went on. Then, just this past week, you had the Defense Intelligence Agency releasing a series of documents, a total of about a hundred pages, in a Freedom of Information Act case, that made very clear, that the Administration — the White House, the President — was also lying explicitly about what happened on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi, when the U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others were killed in a terrorist attack mounted by al Qaeda networks. So both of those stories came out from within the larger institution of the Presidency. We know that, you know, Seymour Hersh, who is a well-known and well-respected journalist, received an enormous amount of inside information for those articles. It’s obvious from just reading them. And the material wasn’t fundamentally coming from Pakistan, from sources there. Most of it was coming from people inside the U.S. who you would recognize as being part of this larger institution of the Presidency. The Defense Intelligence Agency could have quite legally withheld the documents that they freely did release to Judicial Watch and therefore out to the general public. And it came at a very critical moment, because the Benghazi issue is not just an issue of recent past history, but is a very pressing issue in terms of the current presidential election.

So you have elements within the institution of the Presidency that very often have to become leading elements in the patriotic resistance to the person occupying the Oval Office. If they represent forces that are anti-fundamental-core-interests of the United States. Mr. LaRouche was first really tapped to be a part of this institution of the Presidency back in 1977. Why? Because he did a historic 30-minute national TV broadcast on the eve of the 1976 elections, and warned that Jimmy Carter was a puppet of the Trilateral Commission, and that people like Zbigniew Brzezinski and others would go for a military confrontation with the Soviet Union if Carter were to be elected President. And that’s exactly in fact the direction that the Administration did move in, and would have quite possibly created the conditions for a world war, if there wasn’t this patriotic resistance force from within the Presidency itself, that moved against Carter. And Mr. LaRouche was tapped to be part of that, because he demonstrated a certain quality of patriotic leadership back in November of 1976, and it went on from there. The current issue of EIR has some historical accounts of LaRouche’s role within the institution of the Presidency, and I’d urge all of you watching this broadcast, to read that material.

Now, you also have to be very frank and honest, that if we’re talking about political courage, and we’re talking about the qualities of leadership that are required to create a Presidency that is so urgently needed at this moment in our history, you’ve got to also face certain facts that the ostensible Democratic Party front-runner, Hillary Clinton, made a horrific mistake by going into the Obama Administration, and essentially putting herself in a position of becoming a victim and a captive of what Obama has done in the last seven years. Benghazi is one issue that is of particular great embarrassment to Hillary, because her only honest recourse at this point, will be to step forward and tell the truth, tell the truth about the mistakes that she made in deciding not to basically put the spotlight on Obama — to use a modern term, to throw Obama under the bus — back as those events were originally playing out. Hillary Clinton effectively has destroyed herself, by her association with Obama and I think that issue is going to play out very quickly over the coming days and weeks and months.

So the fact of the matter is that we have some combinations emerging, of people who are willing to break with Wall Street, to break with Obama, to certainly in the case of Rand Paul break with the Republican Party leadership, — for all intents and purposes, what Rand Paul has just done, on the 28 pages, what he will do on that on Tuesday [June 2], what he’s done around the Patriot Act, has been to basically stomp all over Jeb Bush, and virtually all of the other so-called Republican candidates for President.

So you’ve got two examples here, of people who are putting issues forward that represent the vital interests of the country. There are many, many people, — I know many of them personally — who are amply qualified, to fill out the institution of the Presidency under a viable President, under a Chief Executive, who is committed to actually upholding the Constitution and defending the interests of the United States. that’s not a one-man job, or a one-woman job, that’s going to require an extensive team; but there are people, who have taken a courageous stand against the Bush-Cheney tyranny, against the Obama tyranny and have thus qualified themselves to be part of the kind of governing structure that Matt was describing, and that must be put together around a new Presidency.

The current leadership of the Republican Party is thoroughly bankrupt; the Democrats, by capitulating to Obama, have left themselves similarly discredited in the eyes of a vast majority of the American people, but there are individuals, and you’ve got several people right now engaged in the Presidential campaign process, who are breaking with that. So we’ve got something to work with. And I think that’s the best thing we can say right now.

And so, the next several days are going to be crucial: Both O’Malley and Rand Paul are going to be in a spotlight on different issues, but they will be out there, and they are going to be coming under enormous pressure.

When we spoke to Mr. LaRouche earlier today, we were reflecting back on the entire scope of the 20th century, which was a century of absolute disaster. And it’s important to remember, that that century began, it was a prelude to the beginning of the 20th century was the dumping of Bismarck in Germany, which was the single-most significant event that effectively started what became World War I. Bismarck was committed to the idea of war avoidance and had the diplomatic skills and connections in Europe, to avoid the kind of conflicts that ultimately erupted and led to World War I.

The second event was the assassination of President William McKinley, which opened up the floodgates for the British to move in, and take over, and dominate the directionality of the U.S. Presidency, increasingly, with very few exceptions, throughout the 20th century.

The other thing that Mr. LaRouche noted is that, the real, key measure of the horrible 20th century, is the fact that in very real terms, there was really only one, true scientist in all of the 20th century and that was Albert Einstein, and he was up against a machinery, that was committed to his destruction, precisely because he exposed the lies of the entire Bertrand Russell/Hilbert mafia that destroyed science in the 20th century.

Yes, there were engineering breakthroughs, there were technological breakthroughs, but no fundamental scientific discovery, has taken place for more than 100 years, and that also means that our education system has been gutted. We have a millennium generation that has no skills whatsoever; so we have a tremendous crisis in developing the productive powers of labor among a generation that has received no effective education, has no technical skill sets.

So again, these are among the major issues that the new Presidency is going to have to take up. And let’s not forget the fact that Mr. LaRouche has emphasized, that so long as Barack Obama remains in the White House, remains free to move about and provoke on behalf of London that the world stands on the edge of the gravest danger in human history, a danger of annihilation that’s never really before existed, before the advent of thermonuclear weapons. And we’re closer now to the danger of a war of annihilation that we have ever been, perhaps even more so than at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, because then you had leaders like President John Kennedy who understood the grave responsibilities of a President and did everything possible to work with Khrushchov to basically make sure that the Cuban Missile Crisis did not lead to a thermonuclear war.

No one in their right mind should have confidence, that President Obama possesses any of the leadership qualities that a John Kennedy possessed. So that danger remains there. So we have a problem of the current Presidency, and we’re finding that there are more and more people stepping in, to expose the fraud of the Obama Presidency. But until enough people step forward and begin to openly discuss impeachment, or even invoking the 25th Amendment, which set forward procedures for removing a President who’s either physically or mentally unfit to continue to serve. Anyone even toying with the idea, of provoking Russia into a thermonuclear war of annihilation meets my criterion for not being psychologically viable to continue to serve as President!

Now, yes. I did answer, I think, the institutional question on the issue of the Greek debt. It’s not a matter of will Europe kick Greece out — in fact, under the Lisbon Treaty it’s not even permitted. It’s a question of will the European financial oligarchy blink, or will they go for confrontation, in which case we may be very well hours away, or days away at the most, from a total blowout of the trans-Atlantic system.

OGDEN: Thanks. Now, those of you who have been watching this broadcast know that over the past several weeks, actually several months, Ben Deniston has been elaborating in very detailed terms, the solution to the so-called water crisis that’s now being experienced in California and other states in the Western states. And Mr. LaRouche has identified very clearly, as Ben elaborated last week on this webcast, that this is in fact a genocidal policy. When you prevent and deny the Promethean powers of mankind to develop itself, you are in effect, killing the human species, and this will have that consequence, a Zeusian consequence, as Ben elaborated it last week.

This is something which is near and dear to the evil souls of the British Monarchy, every single member of the British royal family has, in one way or another, identified themselves with this intention to reduce the world’s population, by billions of people: And now we’re seeing that playing out, under the policies of Jerry Brown in California.

Now, I think also, and you brought this, in a very real way this so-called water crisis, can be attributed to the destructive effect that Hilbert and Bertrand Russell had on science at the outset of the 20th century. Again, a Zeusian effect which has suppressed the creative powers of the people of this country, and really, the people of the planet. And I think Jason Ross elaborated that very well in this forum two weeks ago.

But what I want to cite in that regard are some more remarks that Mr. LaRouche had to make last night on this Activists’ Call, which go directly to this point. What he said, in answer to a question about this water crisis, so-called, out in the Western states. He said, the problem comes up when the human species ceases to be human. The human species must realize itself as being human, and only through the creative powers of the human mind can the human being be what he is. He said, “Let’s take for example, right now: We allegedly have a great water crisis in, say, the United States, and the West Coast of course is the leading subject on this matter currently. … Now the fact of the matter is, we are not running out of water! …

“The basic system, for the water system of the United States, is that is merely a part of a much more powerful system, called the “galactic system.” The point of fact, the existence of humanity depends upon factors of the galactic system, of which water supply is the most obvious. And the struggle now is to get people to understand, how to get the ‘juice’ shall we say, out of the galactic area, which is there waiting for us, how do we tap into that, and bring it into play to solve our problems. And the future of mankind depends entirely, on the promotion of that revolution.

“It is a perfectly feasible revolution,” he said. “It has a precisely scientific set of characteristics. It’s this thing with a follower of the work of Kepler, the great Kepler who was the first person to understand how the galactic system was created. He didn’t have a complete view of the galactic system, but now that system is known. The galactic principle is known; and it’s also known that the water on Earth depends upon the management programs prescribed for the galaxy, not the local water system.”

So this is the kind of science-driver which Mr. LaRouche indicated earlier this week, has to be at the heart of the program which has to be adopted, the kind of mission-orientation which has to shape this incoming U.S. Presidency. The other aspect which he specified in discussions with the Policy Committee, on Monday, and followup discussions after that on Tuesday, was, what he’s calling for, in terms of a national, high-speed railroad project for the United States. And Jeff you indicated this a little bit in your first answer tonight, but I just wanted to ask you to elaborate a little bit on it.

This came up in the wake of the trip by the Prime Minister of China to Peru and Brazil, where a Memorandum of Understanding was signed among China, Peru and Brazil, to conduct a feasibility study for the construction of a transcontinental, high-speed system, from the Atlantic Coast of Brazil to the Pacific Coast of Peru. And what Mr. LaRouche said in light that, is, it’s time to create an assembly of capabilities for building a national high-speed rail system for the United States. We need a single national institution for such a vital project as, as this is the only efficient means for getting the job done. We know what the Chinese are doing, and remember what the United States was historically capable of doing.

Now, Jeff I know that you’re going to have an item in the upcoming EIR which is a sort of historical review of what Abraham Lincoln did with the transcontinental railroad system that he built in the 1860s. And it’s very clear that the most direct means that the United States has to join in with the BRICS, and to become a member of this new international economic order, which is emerging around especially a collaboration, of China, India, and Russia, is connect ourselves into the extended Silk Road, by means of a tunnel or a bridge across the Bering Strait, and to become part of this new international system of relations among nations, as Mr. LaRouche has been elaborating this idea.

So Jeff, maybe as a final item here, you can give us a little bit of an idea of what are implications of this BRICS revolution for the United States right now? And what are the lessons of the Lincoln period, and Lincoln’s efforts especially on the transcontinental railroad of his day, for defeating the slave power then, and what we can do with this now, to defeat the slave power of Wall Street, today?

STEINBERG: Back in 2003, there was a critical intervention that Mr. LaRouche made at the point that the auto industry was facing bankruptcy. You had the financial bubble that had been created around the auto sector, but you still had an enormous productive capability there, largely centered around the advanced machine-tool capacity, that was part of the auto sector. And if you look at other key elements of the U.S. economy, you’ve got auto, you’ve got aerospace and you’ve got other elements of the defense sector, that used to be all kind of an extended and integrated part of the economy.

In 2003, when the auto sector was going through a major collapsed, bankruptcies of the two of the big three auto companies, bailouts instead of alternative policies. Mr. LaRouche introduced the Economic Recovery Act of 2003 which basically proposed, number 1, to establish a Hamiltonian bank, to emit credit to retool those auto plants. There were millions and millions of square feet of viable floor space for any kind of industrial production. We had a machine-tool capacity that had not yet been significantly gutted. And back then, before we’d seen the immediate explosion of the California water crisis, Mr. LaRouche at that time, was, take that capability, that broad machine-tool capability and retool it: We don’t need all of these cars.

So, begin to use that capacity to build up a high-speed rail system, to build up a water management system, that was desperately needed in virtually every part of the country, and to drive that by a massive expansion of production of nuclear power.

And so, that core idea, back in 2003, was very much viable, and very much what the nation urgently needed. Yet, the cowards in Congress barely paid lip service to that idea, and instead, became drawn into the commitment to bail-out which became a disease that wiped out what little was left of the U.S. economy after the Lehman Brothers and related blowout of 2007-2008.

So, we’ve got a very serious problem right now. Much of that capability, that was still available and around, as recently as 2003, was literally sent off to pasture. Many of those factories were basically shut down, blown up, collapsed altogether; the skilled workers who were still on the job in 2003, 2004, many of them were basically retired, and left in a state of absolutely demoralization.

And so, we’re faced with a situation right now, where we have lost an entire generation, of potential skilled labor. And the issue of labor power has always been the fundamental question: Scientific advances, a small cadre of highly skilled scientists can change the world, but then you need a general population with a certain skill set to operate within a modern and expanding and constantly changing and improving economy.

Now, we’re in a situation where, the absolute indispensable first step, is the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, and I’m happy to say, there is a fight going on in Congress around that. And I think as of tomorrow, you’re going to see a dramatic leap in the fight for Glass-Steagall, and for the shutdown of Wall Street, and all of the other rotten gambling dens, that have looted the U.S. and world economy over the recent years.

So we’re in a situation right now, where we need urgently to reinstate Glass-Steagall. We’ve got to basically establish a Hamiltonian credit system, and we’ve got to launch what’s going to be a very challenging and very difficult process, of reeducating a labor force, that, from among the generation of 30 years and younger is virtually nonexistent. The skills virtually don’t exist. So this is going to be a difficult challenge. We’re going to have to create certain projects; we need a national system of high-speed rail; we need a national system of water management; we’ve got to go forward with a massive expansion of new generation nuclear power. We’ve got to do the work to make the breakthrough in this decade, on fusion, and to move into a fusion economy, and then beyond. We will not make any breakthroughs in space, without fusion.

So all of these things have to be done. But bearing in mind that we have some retired or advanced in their career workers who have certain skill sets, but there’s going to be an enormous challenge. It’s going to be a slow and difficult slog for a period of time, before we actually, gradually develop a cadre of young workers who are actually skilled to function in the kind of economy we urgently need.

Now, President Lincoln really is another one of the exemplars, of what Mr. LaRouche is talking about, when you talk about “the Presidency” and having a Commander in Chief of the kind of unique qualities that we’ve only had, maybe a half-dozen times in the entire 200-plus years of our history.

Lincoln, prior to being elected President, already had a thoroughly-composed vision in his mind, for the transcontinental railroad as a critical project, to bind the country together for the first time, to establish a continental republic, stretching from the East Coast to the West. In 1859, before he was even a Presidential candidate, during a visit to Iowa, Lincoln met with Grenville Dodge who was one of the great engineers of the middle part of the 19th century. Dodge had just travelled out to the West Coast and had come back with a map of the best potential routes for the transcontinental railroad. And so, when Lincoln sat down with Dodge, and asked him to explain what would be required, Dodge, in his head, had a very clear map of exactly how to do it.

Well, Lincoln went into the Presidency, committed to the idea of the transcontinental railroad, knowing, virtually from the day he entered office, that we were going into a British-sponsored war of secession by the Confederacy, and that he was going to be consumed with being a war President. You had the greenbacks policy, which was a revival of a Hamiltonian system of credit, which was pivotal to the victory in the war.

But in 1862, Lincoln pushed through Congress the legislation to establish the funding for the transcontinental railroad, knowing that the project could not get off the ground until after the war had been won. In fact, Grenville Dodge became a leading figure in the Corps of Engineers, under Generals Grand and Sherman, and was one of the instrumental figures in the defeat of the Confederacy.

As soon as the war ended, even with Lincoln assassinated, Dodge became the pivotal figure in helping to organize the establishment the project, to build the transcontinental railroad. And that project was the largest infrastructure project in American history up until that time; one of the largest projects in history, period. And it not only was a vital project for tying the nation together, but it was a project that involved Union and Confederate war veterans, soldiers who survived that meatgrinder of a war, who were bound together by a common purpose, a common national mission.

And I think it’s important to bear in mind, that if you were in New York City and you wanted to travel to San Francisco prior to the completion of the transcontinental railroad, it was not only a very costly and very hazardous attempt, but it would take a minimum six months. You could go by rail partway across the country, and then it was stage-coach and other very primitive transportation out to the West Coast; you could take a boat to Panama, and walk across to the Pacific side of Panama, and wait for a boat to arrive to take you on the rest of the journey; and the chances were about 50% that you would die of some tropical disease. Or, you could take a ship all the way down the Southern tip of South America and all the way around. It was a six month prospect.

When the transcontinental railroad was completed, the journey from East Coast to West, was two weeks. Furthermore, the construction of the rail line was simultaneously the construction of a national telegraph system, so for the first time, from the standpoint of conveying of policy and news and things like that, the country was bound together coast to coast!

This was a visionary idea that Lincoln brought into the Presidency with him. And in fact, it became an inspiration in Europe; it became an inspiration in Russia; American engineers who were veterans of the Army Corps of Engineers and other projects related to the building of the transcontinental railroad, were in Russia in the 1870s and ’80s and ’90s, working on the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railroad. This is why Tsar Nicholas II, at the point that the Trans-Siberian Railroad was completed, was the first person to say, now we need either a bridge or a tunnel across the Bering Straits, to link North America, Central and South America, with Eurasia.

These were great projects, and these were visionary ideas: They were the land-bridge of the 19th century, and these were the ideas that flowed from President Lincoln, that survived and spread long after he had been murdered.

So that’s the kind of Presidency we’re talking about. That’s the kind of Presidency we need. And I think we have a great advantage at this moment, because the leadership in China, in Russia, in India, in the other BRICS countries, have clearly come around to the idea that this Hamiltonian American System approach, is exactly what the world needs.

So the question that is on our plate to resolve, is, whether or not we can show the courage and foresight, to be able to win this fight to bring the United States back into alliance with the very projects that were the hallmark of some of the greatest Presidencies that we’ve had.

OGDEN: Thank you, very, very much, Jeff.

Let me just provide a few more words from Mr. LaRouche, to conclude our broadcast tonight which I think served to put the discussion that we’ve had thus far, into perspective.

So, what Mr. LaRouche said on the Activists’ Call last night was the following; he said: “The problem is, we have to have, always, we have to have two things: guts, and the teamwork to create a leadership, a political leadership, a practical leadership, inside the United States. And we have to pull people together and get them to decide they’re going to stick together for that mission….

“The majority of the planet wants progress. And we can pull the team together, of those who already want progress. We have the means, potentially, to create a better way of living, very soon. And it’s going to take a lot of work to make that thing happen. …

“I’m confident that what man is capable of doing, in terms of science, in terms of understanding of mankind himself, in terms of coming to understand what the Solar System is all about—mankind has those powers. Mankind has developed those powers. We can develop them. …

“But what we must do, if we’re human, really human, we must be devoted to doing the things that would bring that kind of progress into being. That’s what I’ve been doing most of my life. And I can tell you, from my experience, it works. We just don’t have enough people doing it right now.”

So, I think with that said, we have very clear marching orders over the coming days, and we have an extraordinarily dramatic week ahead of us. The O’Malley candidacy will be announced tomorrow; the Rand Paul press conference will occur on Tuesday, and then we have the June 6th D-Day conference in New York City a week from tomorrow.

So, I encourage everybody to get your hands on the transcript of the Activists’ Call from last night, which featured the dialogue with Mr. LaRouche; it’s currently in preparation right now and will be available very soon. Study it in depth, and circulate it as widely as you can.

So, with that, I’d like to bring a conclusion to our broadcast here tonight. Thank you all for joining us tonight, and please stay tuned to

This entry was posted in Friday Webcast and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.