You Can Change History: Act Now to Force a Vote on Glass-Steagall (with transcript)

 

 

Tune in for our weekly Friday webcast hosted by Matthew Ogden and Jeffrey Steinberg. As the world is now being realigned toward a new economic architecture, it is incumbent on the American people to mobilize themselves to force a vote to reinstate Glass-Steagall during the month of September. In an historic press conference in Washington this week on the eve of the 15th anniversary of 9/11, Senator Bob Graham made it clear that it was the activism of citizens across this county which was responsible for securing a spectacular victory in forcing the declassification of the 28 pages on 9/11. It is that same level of activation now which can induce Congress to act to shut down Wall Street through the restoration of Glass-Steagall, the indispensable first step towards unleashing a surge of productivity never before seen in this country with the full participation of the United States in the emerging new paradigm sweeping the planet. On the eve of this weekend’s G20 summit, LaRouchePAC has just released a timely feature video titled “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge”. Watch this video to gain a full understanding of that new paradigm, and take the actions necessary to bring the United States into it boldly and decisively.

TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening; it’s September 2, 2016. My name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re joining us for our weekly webcast here on Friday evening with larouchepac.com. I’m joined in the studio tonight by Jeffrey Steinberg from Executive Intelligence Review, and via video by two members of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee. We have Dave Christie joining us from Seattle, Washington; welcome, Dave. And we have Diane Sare joining us from the greater New York City area.

I’ll just say to start off, we did have a discussion with Lyndon and Helga LaRouche just a few hours ago. It’s very clear that we are at the intersection point of the culmination of three very crucial initiatives that the LaRouche Movement has been right in the center of leading for several years. Number one, we’re on the eve of the G20 summit; we have the Vladivostok summit which is occurring; and in two weeks following that, we have the United Nations General Assembly. It’s very apparent that the initiatives are being taken to create a new financial architecture for the planet, around the development of the New Silk Road. I’ll just say very quickly here, if you haven’t seen it yet, there’s an excellent new 20-minute video feature on the larouchepac.com website which is about “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge”. It elaborates a lot of the Executive Intelligence Review publication by that same title. I would say to definitely watch that if you haven’t yet.

On the domestic front, we have a very intense campaign which is now being escalated to reinstate Glass-Steagall; and marshalling the forces to force that to a vote before the Presidential elections take place. Then we have the push to reopen a full investigation into the attacks on 9/11; with the declassification of the 28 pages that happened, you have to further that with the pursuit of the tens of thousands of more pages which continue to be withheld. On that front, we are one week away from the 15th anniversary of those horrific attacks on 9/11; and we will be seeing a series of concerts which will take place in New York City — Diane can tell us a lot more about that — of Mozart’s Requiem that will be performed in the cathedral in Brooklyn, a major church in Manhattan and elsewhere to commemorate the victims of those attacks and to bring justice. This is happening in conjunction with a strategic seminar which is being sponsored in New York City on the same subject. And at the same time, there’s a powerful push to force a vote in the House of Representatives — hopefully next week, before the anniversary happens — on the JASTA bill (Justice against State Sponsors of Terrorism Act). Congress is returning next week.

As part of that push, former Senator Bob Graham was in Washington DC the day before yesterday, at a major press conference which he held at the National Press Club. Both Jeff and I had the opportunity to attend that conference, and we will be featuring some excerpts from that press conference as part of our broadcast tonight.

But before I get to that, I do want to start with the discussion that we had with Mr. LaRouche just a few hours ago; particularly on the necessity of launching an immediate mobilization around the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. So, in order to introduce that subject, I’m going to read the institutional question which we received today, which was presented to Mr. LaRouche. I’m going to ask Jeff to elaborate a bit on what Mr. LaRouche’s comments were in response to this question. It reads: “Mr. LaRouche, you have warned that unless the United States Congress acts — and now in September — to reinstate Glass-Steagall as the first step in a much larger overhaul in economic and monetary policy, then the entire trans-Atlantic system is headed for blow-out. Would you please elaborate on the importance of the passage of Glass-Steagall in the next session of Congress immediately after Labor Day?”

JEFFREY STEINBERG: Mr. LaRouche was very blunt; he said, “If you don’t implement Glass-Steagall as the starting point for such a total overhaul of the entire US financial and monetary system,” and extending that obviously into Europe as well; “then an enormous number of people are going to die. It comes down to that.” The major European banks, which are completely co-mingled with the big Wall Street banks, are carrying trillions — perhaps hundreds of trillions — of dollars in derivatives and non-performing debt of all other kinds as well. They’re hopelessly bankrupt, and unless you implement Glass-Steagall and separate out and just simply write off all of that derivatives and other gambling debt, you have no chance whatsoever for any kind of turnaround in the situation that we have in the US economy right now; and similarly in Europe. Namely, that there is a collapse of productivity; don’t believe the numbers about job creation, because the reality is that 93.5 million eligible, working age Americans have no work. Because they’ve given up trying to find a job, or they’ve never found a job; and therefore have never been counted in the working force to begin with. On top of that, a growing percentage of people are finding themselves relegated to working part-time; sometimes a few hours a day on several different jobs, because there are no full-time productive jobs available in the economy. You’ve got a lot of parasitic jobs; you’ve got a lot of other jobs that in a healthy, growing economy would be necessary and useful. But when you’ve got a collapse of production as we have in the United States and Europe, and you put on top of that a kind of massive banking crisis — financial bubble bigger than 2008; then you’ve got a perfect storm for something that will result in mass deaths.

Now, Glass-Steagall is the first step; it’s by no means the totality of what must be done. Mr. LaRouche has laid out the four cardinal laws, four major initiatives that must be taken to restore productivity; to create genuinely productive jobs. But the starting point has to be to break up and separate out the legitimate commercial banking functions from the speculative activities that have completely looted the depositor base of commercial banks since the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Both political parties, in their platforms, have endorsed reinstating Glass-Steagall; and this was not just simply a perfunctory thing. There was a fight at the Republican convention among the Platform Committee people; there was an aggressive push to force Glass-Steagall’s adoption. The same thing happened on the Democratic side. Hillary Clinton has not publicly called for reinstating Glass-Steagall. So, you’ve got both parties poised. You have bills in both houses of Congress and a vote can and must be taken; not after the elections, not during the lame duck session, but during this next 2-3 week period starting Tuesday, the 6th of September, when Congress returns that evening. Wednesday will be the first full day that Congress is in session. This must be one of the very first acts of this Congress during this interim session; and it’s not going to happen unless there is a full-blown mobilization of the American people. There are major institutions from the AFL-CIO to various civil rights groups that are with us on this question of Glass-Steagall. But what’s required, is an absolutely focussed and tough and laser-like intervention. And I think nothing sums that up more clearly than what Mr. LaRouche has said repeatedly over the last few days: Namely, if you don’t pass Glass-Steagall; if you don’t intervene to make sure that Congress does it, then you may die as a result of that.

OGDEN: Well, I want to use as an example of the kind of strategic leverage that is going to be required to force through this passage of Glass-Steagall, I want to use as an example what the LaRouche Movement was able to do by marshalling forces across the country to force the declassification of the 28 pages. Because it’s a very similar example of the kind of widespread upsurge in activism across the country led with this kind of laser focus, that’s going to be required right now in the coming weeks to force the Glass-Steagall vote. So, on that note, I’d like to introduce a short 7-minute video clip which is excerpts from the blockbuster press conference that former Senator Bob Graham held at the National Press Club this past Wednesday. We can invite you to watch the full press conference, which is available on the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel. For right now, I’d like to introduce that, and then use that to open up a broader discussion here.

FORMER SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Burr; and thank you for the opportunity to come back to the National Press Club.

As has been said, on July 15th, after some 14 years, the chapter of 28 pages from the final Report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11 was released. This was removing the cork from the bottle; but there is a significant amount of information which, like the 28 pages, has been withheld. It was necessary to get this first block of material to the public in order to build the support that will be necessary for the balance of the material to flowâ¦.

Now that the bottle is open, what is likely to pour forth?

I think there are three tasks in which the liquid will flow. One is, the 28 pages were written in the Fall of 2002, but were not — in a number of instances — completed. We were under a mandate to submit our final report before the end of that session of Congress; which meant by the end of December of 2002. There were some issues that have not been taken fully to ground. As an example, the role of Prince Bandar, the long Saudi ambassador to the United States. In the 28 pages, it is disclosed that in the book of Abu Zabadeh[ph], one of Osama bin Laden’s closest operatives, were the telephone numbers — which were otherwise unavailable — to Bandar’s mansion in Aspen, and to his bodyguard here in Washington. There was also information about the fact that both he and his wife had been involved in money transfers which appeared to go to the mentors and protectors of the three hijackers in San Diego. Was that where that money flow ended; or did it end up supporting the hijackers? That’s the kind of questions which were raised in the 28 pages; but I hope that we will now get information to close those loopsâ¦.

??: Senator Graham, thanks and congratulations for what you’re doing in insisting that the facts on 9/11 come out. As you pointed out, and as the media pointed out, the 28 pages and credible media reporting that there were meetings, there were facts here; not just myths and wonderings, but facts. In San Diego, the meetings by the Saudi Director of Religious Affairs with at least three of the hijackers; and 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. There was money paid from Prince Bandar’s account. Those are the facts; but it just seems that the American policy is to hide and to obfuscate. Why? Is it a matter of Democrats and Republicans alike just want to pander to Saudi Arabia? What I don’t understand is the reason why we don’t just take the facts and move from there; because these are the facts.

GRAHAM: No, this is not a partisan issue. In fact, in the House, the effort to pass this JASTA legislation that will modify the sovereign immunity defense, and prior to that, a resolution urging the President to release the 28 pages, was led by a Republican, Walter Jones from North Carolina, and a Democrat, Stephen Lynch from Massachusetts. This has had strong bipartisan support. If anything, it’s more of an Executive Branch versus the people of America; it’s been the Executive Branch through not only Justice and State, but Treasury and the intelligence agencies, that have largely been the barrier to allowing this information to be known by the American people. And let the American people then form a judgment. What do they think we ought to be doing in this relationship with Saudi Arabia?

STEINBERG: Jeff Steinberg; Executive Intelligence Review. Senator, former Navy Secretary John Lehman, who was a commissioner on the 9/11 Commission, told “60 Minutes” back in April that there really never was a complete investigation by the 9/11 Commission; and you’ve already said that the Joint Inquiry was limited by time and resources. Now, 15 years later, we have the 28 pages. As you just indicated, there’s lots of facts in there. There was a 47-page report written at the beginning of the 9/11 Commission by the two people on your staff who were following up on the Saudi leads. They listed 22 Saudi officials who had direct contacts with just the San Diego hijackers. What do you envision as the next step? Can there be a new investigation without the time restrictions and other problems? Do you support that? How would you envision moving forward from here in addition to the lawsuit which we do hope will be reinstated against the Saudis for discovery?

GRAHAM: In addition to the request to the National Archives, who are the custodians of the 9/11 papers, to release those sections of its report which have been withheld which relate to following up to the leads which are in the 28 pages. So, we could ask, in those pages, is there a chapter about Prince Bandar that pursues the leads that were outlined in the 28 pages? Second, will have to be more Freedom of Information Act with the FBI and the CIA. Another thing would be the President; I can understand why George Bush acted the way he did. I cannot understand why Barack Obama is acting the way he has. This information is going to be known; whether it’s in 2016, or 2026, or ’36, or ’46, it will — like the Pentagon Papers and all these other old scandals — eventually it’s going to come out. I think the legacy of Barack Obama is going to be stained when the people recognize how much information was under his control, that he made the executive decision to continue to restrict from the American people. So, those are, I think, the principal levers; they all eventually come to the American people. The American people care about knowing what their government did in this particularly egregious action; and if so, will they put enough political pressure? The most immediate thing is to contact your member of Congress and urge he or she to vote for JASTA. That bill has had a roller coaster existence over the last four or five years; it seems to be closer to reaching its destination today than at any time during that long period. The key is going to be, will the House take it up? That’s where the pressure needs to be until that important task is accomplishedâ¦.

What I think are the most likely three directions after the 28 pages are: One, following up on the leads that were in the 28 pages; such as the role of the then-Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar. Second, there’s been information developed since the 28 pages were written in the Fall of 2002; such as the existence of this relationship between a prominent Saudi family, Mohammed Atta and two of his compatriots in Sarasota, Florida. Then third, the litigation that is being frustrated by the sovereign immunity defense; which the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been raising. Those are, I think, the three major channels in which we will get additional information on the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the 19 hijackers. The report, I think, made a case that an investigator reading what Prince Bandar had done, would say, “I want to pursue this further.” The question is, were those leads pursued? And if so, to what end? I hope what we’ll find is that yes, they were pursued; and here are investigative reports that carry this case to its conclusion.

OGDEN: So, as you could see, yours truly Jeff Steinberg was on hand to ask Senator Graham a question; and Senator Graham’s emphasis, which he repeatedly came back to, was to open up the file on Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador. So Jeff, maybe you want to elaborate a little bit more on where this investigation needs to go.

STEINBERG: Well, I think Senator Graham was very clear that there are 80,000 pages of documents that the FBI has acknowledged belatedly and begrudgingly exist in Sarasota, Florida. I’m sure that that was a small fraction of the documents down there, as Senator Graham said, 13 of the 19 hijackers, at one point or another, were based in Florida before the attack. Paterson, New Jersey was another center where the hijackers were living and training for a period of time. Falls Church, Virginia was both a place where a number of them were present for a while, but it was a convergence point; a kind of a staging area. There was a confirmed report that a high-ranking Saudi minister was at the same hotel in Falls Church, Virginia as a group of the hijackers the night before the hijacking. So, there are many leads. Undoubtedly, between the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, there’s an alphabet soup of 16 intelligence agencies that undoubtedly have millions and millions of pages of undisclosed material.

I think one of the most crucial things — and again, Senator Graham was very clear on this — the most aggressive and effective form of forcing out new information on what really happened is by having the Saudi monarchy reinstated in the lawsuit. Meaning that the JASTA bill has to pass the House; it has to pass by a veto-proof majority. Once again, we’re back to the same question: Are you, the American people, going to stand up and fight for something that’s urgently needed? Or, are you going to treat democracy as a spectator sport? If you choose the latter, then the consequences are going to be more of the same and worse. I think that the fact that Senator Graham focussed on further disclosure — as he said, the bottle is uncorked; but the contents have been barely trickled out. There’s an enormous amount more that has to be done; and of course, next weekend is the 15th anniversary of the initial 9/11 attacks. Let’s not forget, it’s the fourth anniversary of the second 9/11 attack in Benghazi in 2012. That’s not only a very relevant issue in terms of the consequences of the original cover-up of the Saudi involvement, but it’s a very immediate and intensive issue related to the Presidential elections in the US. We’ve got to be fairly blunt about that. The cover-up of Benghazi is part of the continuation of the cover-up of the Saudi role in the original 9/11 attack.

OGDEN: Well, Diane, you’re right in the middle obviously of putting together the commemorative anniversary celebrations and the seminar, and just leading the activism there in New York City. So, maybe you can just pick up from here.

DIANE SARE: Well, I’d like to actually take a step back; because one of the things that Senator Graham brought up about why this was so important. He said there were three reasons: One is the question of justice for the family members of the people who were killed; Two, a somewhat obvious question, which is the question of security. If we don’t root out these networks, they’re there to be used repeatedly. And three, which I think is really important and cannot be overstated, which is the question of whether people trust their government. Because once the population of the United States no longer trusts the government, which is almost where we are right now, then you lose the republic. Our republic, going back to the conception of Nicholas of Cusa and Concordantia Catholica, depends on this question of the consent of the governed. If you don’t trust your government, you will not consent to have it representing you. What Mr. LaRouche said in the last days, is what we’ve seen between the breakthrough that was driven by our work, and then Congressmen Jones and Lynch virtually threatening — not exactly in those words — but saying we know that we are immune if we read this into the record; and what’s moving on Glass-Steagall in terms of the party platforms, is that these Congressmen are beginning to be forced to represent their populations.

I would put this in an international context, because what you have coming up with the Vladivostok meetings going on right now, and the G20; the trans-Atlantic system is completely bankrupt. There is nothing Obama and the current configuration, the European Central Bank, what are they offering to the world? Negative interest rates? Keep your money with us, and we’ll make you pay! In other words, there is nothing that they can do; but what you have with Russia and China. China’s work — which people who are following our website will have seen the show on Wednesday; the New Paradigm show on the question of the far side of the Moon, or the talk Thursday night. There is an entire universe — we’ll start with the Solar System — which is opening up, which this collaboration in Asia has to offer. What the Chinese have done is, they’re hosting the G20 meeting, and they’re making President Putin the guest of honor. Then they’re having President al-Sisi as another honored figure at this meeting. What is Obama’s response? He thinks he’s going to go there and somehow push the Trans-Pacific Partnership; which is bound to be a complete flop, a non-starter. The Russians made very clear in an interview in Xinhua going into this meeting, that Moscow and Beijing need Washington as a partner. I found that somewhat — it made me happy as an American, because I think the US should be a partner in this. Also, paradoxical. Then the person who was interviewed, said Washington can be a complex and unpredictable partner.

So, I would say that our job as Americans — in a sense — we’ve been given a mission that other very important leaders are saying that the United States is wanted as a valued partner in this New Paradigm. It is for us to deliver that by straightening out this criminal regime that we have. Part of what we saw with 9/11 is that the cover-up has gone on through two administrations; that Obama has been not only complicit in this, but with his policies in the region, has contributed to the growth of ISIS, the growth of al-Qaeda, their ability to recruit. We’ve lost over these last years, almost 4500 soldiers in Iraq, which is now known to be a complete lie and a fraud; that’s what came out of the Chilcot Inquiry. The question of 9/11, therefore, becomes will we get justice? And justice doesn’t mean revenge or retribution; it means will we restore our nation to something which someone would want to give their consent to be governed by this government?

I think when you look at the question of Mozart, which is the Requiem which will be performed, which our chorus is participating in and working on; Mozart’s commitment was that. He was a supporter of the American Revolution; he was a supporter of the ideas of creating a republic, and he was murdered. His work was eliminated; his contribution, what he could have done had he lived longer. The piece has lived on because it has a quality which is immortal; which actually embodies the question of human creativity. What we’re seeing here in response is that the people who are engaged in this are developing a certain kind of passion which probably was always in them. But because they have a chance to participate in something which is going to be so profound and so beautiful, and it has a mission in the real world, they are becoming passionate again; which is I think is something that’s been very lacking. Everyone can think of conversations that you’ve had with your friends and neighbors about the upcoming election or almost anything; and the population has become passionless, which is why people don’t act when they should or when they can.

So, I have a sense that we really are on the brink of a major breakthrough that the United States will be a part of; even if many people in the United States don’t fully appreciate why it is here and how they came to be involved in it.

OGDEN: Absolutely! I would just echo exactly what you just said, Diane. In his speech at the Press Club, Senator Graham quoted the often-quoted anecdote from Ben Franklin at the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention; when the woman asked, “What have you given us?” And he said, “A republic, if you can keep it.” The passion that Senator Graham has exhibited around this, sustaining his role and his fight for 15 years for the declassification of these documents; where does this passion come from? Even though the FBI tried to intimidate him personally, and told him to back down; basically “Get a life!” they said. Senator Graham has refused to back down, because he sees this — as well it should be seen — as an existential question for the survival of the American republic. Not only from justice and the standpoint of national security, but the very survival of our nation as a republican form of government. I would assert that we’re looking at exactly the same kind of existential question when it comes to the restoration of Glass-Steagall. The magnitude of the implosion of the trans-Atlantic system that we are about to see — if this thing came down without the necessary leadership in place around the restoration of Glass-Steagall and otherwise, to protect the American people from the fall-out from that kind of financial crisis — this republic would not survive.

The opportunity is there at our fingertips to join the new financial architecture and to create the kinds of productive surges in growth that this nation has never before seen; that would surpass even what we achieved during FDR’s New Deal, if we were to join the New Silk Road which is being led right now by China and others. So, it’s that same kind of passion which needs to be applied to that question as well.

DAVE CHRISTIE: Just to add, because I think the other side of this is what Mr. LaRouche has identified that we’re at a point now where the old concept of sovereignty from the standpoint of geopolitics; that the moves that are being made in the world by the leadership of Russia, China, and India, are obviously the echo of what Mr. LaRouche and his wife Helga have put on the table for over a 40-year period. The discussion of the new financial architecture really began when Mr. LaRouche proposed the International Development Bank; his proposals for a New Bretton Woods conference, starting in the ’90s. That was picked up by Nestor Kirchner of Argentina. Putin was actually discussing this concept as well, of the new financial architecture, in the early 2000s. So clearly, the role of the LaRouches is at the forefront of this New Paradigm and the potential for that to come into existence. What Mr. LaRouche has stressed is that we’re going to move beyond the old nation-state system. That doesn’t mean we’re going to cease to have nations; but rather, the first and foremost thought will be of mankind viewing itself from the common aims of mankind. That humanity will be thought of first. I think that’s what we’re seeing with the implications of the New Silk Road policy and the new financial architecture; it is just simply to facilitate the expansion of this concept.

In that light, I think it’s important that The Hindu just had an interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche; and in the coverage of that article, they cite the question of the Bering Strait, which is the tunnel underneath the Bering Strait to link Eurasia with North America. I think that’s relevant to the ongoing discussion in Vladivostok; because clearly the ability for Japan, for Korea, for China and Russia to come together in this part of the world, represents an amazing potential. Just think of the scientific and technological potentials of those nations: China’s space program; Russia’s space capabilities; the high-tech capabilities of Japan and Korea. It really represents a very profound potential; and when you begin discussing the development of the Siberia region, the Far East region, you’re building up that economic potential right up to the doorstep of the Bering Strait. So, I think that’s obviously reflected in this Hindu article which interviews Helga Zepp-LaRouche and her call to make the New Silk Road become the World Land-Bridge; which is actually the title of that article.

So, I think the importance of what Diane referenced — this idea of the consent of the governed — in a sense, these discussions that are going on this weekend with the Vladivostok conference, the G20 conference, that is what is actually being discussed. As the Europeans are complaining about Obama, they’re trying to ram the TTIP and the TPP down the throats of the Europeans; where prominent leadership of Germany and France are saying, “Wait a second. Aren’t we going to be involved in any kind of discussion about this? Is this a democratic process?” But of course, for Obama and the imperial interests that control him, there’s no discussion; no democratic process. I think that’s actually what is on the table. Just to come back to it, there’s no other place than space, which is perhaps the greatest reflection of the end of the idea of the old system of nation-state. There are no nation-states in space.

We were discussing earlier the fact that this SpaceX rocket just blew up; the great privatized space program that we’re now going to have after Obama dismantled NASA. It turns out that its payload was a satellite launched by Facebook to run broad band in Africa. This is the level of technology that we have in the United States, or that we’re concerned about. Whereas, if you look at what China’s doing with the far side of the Moon, look at this collaborative effort; that can be the way to bring Asians on this planet together to actually realize the common aims of mankind.

OGDEN: If you go back to the inaugural speech that John F Kennedy made in 1961, when he was elected President; that was obviously the focus of a previous generation of this country. He said, we must move beyond the age of war; because all-out war is not conceivable anymore in the age of nuclear weapons. This would lead to the extermination of not just one country or another, but the entirety of the human race. Instead, what we must do, is move beyond the age of war to an age where nations are collaborating to achieve the common aims of mankind. He said, our mission must be to explore the stars, to conquer the deserts, to cure poverty and disease, and to bring an end to the age of war itself.

When you look back one year at the speeches that Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping made at the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York, that was exactly what the subject matter was. It was the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, and the framework that was put together by Franklin Roosevelt after that war before he died, was intended to be a framework of international relations based on bringing the New Deal, bringing the awesome achievements that the United States had accomplished under the American System to the rest of the world. And, bringing an end to imperialism and colonialism once and for all. So, they harkened back to that framework in which the United Nations was originally conceived, and said this must be the foundation of the paradigm going forward. Immediately after those speeches at the United Nations General Assembly, Helga LaRouche issued a call for a new security architecture for the planet. If you look at how much has changed just over the past one year, in terms of what now exists in actuality in those terms; that new security architecture, the new economic architecture, this new international order has now begun to coalesce.

As Diane was saying, it’s incumbent on the American people to impress upon yourself how rapidly the situation in this country could change, if the necessary steps are taken in order to bring the United States into that new framework. If you bring yourself outwards by a couple of months or one year from the present date, and look at how much has changed since that previous United Nations General Assembly meeting; you can see how rapidly things could change for the better. I know that’s been Helga’s assertion over and over again. The future is so close; it’s at your fingertips. It would be so easy to achieve. But there are bold actions that must be taken in the United States; and absolutely that starts in the month of September with the convening of an immediate vote on Glass-Steagall, and ramming that through the United States Congress.

STEINBERG: I think that Mr. LaRouche has emphasized repeatedly that winning this fight in the United States, basically restoring the United States to its historical tradition — which was an anti-colonial, anti-imperial, specifically anti-British Empire nation that came into existence through a struggle against all those principles of empire that have been gradually more and more adopted by the last two administrations; by the Bush 43 administration and equally so if not even more so by Obama. The fact of the matter is, that we can at this point — as the 28 pages fight indicated, as the momentum for Glass-Steagall indicates — we can win this fight in the United States; but it’s got to be done now, and it’s got to be done in a timely fashion where people realize that there are critical flanking battles that must be fought. Many other things are merely irrelevant or distractions; and should just be ignored. We win the fight on Glass-Steagall; we win the fight on the full exposure of the Saudi 9/11, because that is really a British-Saudi story that goes deep into our own national security structures. So, these are the things that are going to be measured in the next immediate days and weeks ahead. It has virtually nothing to do with the election show that’s going to be more and more of a dominant factor.

We’ve got to win this fight for Glass-Steagall; we’ve got to win the JASTA fight. Those things can be won in the Congress in the immediate several weeks ahead of us. That’s going to take an enormous mobilization, a focussed mobilization of the American people. It means a lot of institutions that can be dragged in many different directions, have to have the same kind of laser focus that Mr. LaRouche is calling for and demanding of our own forces. AFL-CIO actively involved in Glass-Steagall. Now is the moment to pull out all of the stops and force the issue; because Glass-Steagall is merely the starting point. It begs the issue of a national system of credit; of national banking; of establishing priority projects. Including, first and foremost, reviving NASA; reviving our government-backed space program. Because these are the things that are the only way that you’re going to revive real productivity in the US economy, given how far down it’s sunk already.

OGDEN: I would just say one thing. Those two subjects — the forcing of the reopening of the 9/11 investigation and the immediate mobilization around Glass-Steagall — these are featured in this week’s edition of The Hamiltonian; which is hitting the streets today. That is a direct focus in terms of activism that everybody needs to be involved in, is the saturation of New York City, specifically with this weekly publication that is now coming out — The Hamiltonian. So, maybe before we conclude this broadcast, Diane, you can give us a quick update on how that’s changing the situation on the ground in New York; and what people have to do between now and next weekend in order to maximize the effect of the events that are coming up in a week.

SARE: I would say that people should certainly contact the Manhattan Project office about coming to our meeting tomorrow in Manhattan; where people can pick up copies of The Hamiltonian and can join us on the distributions. We’ve been getting them out all over the city and in the neighboring boroughs, and getting a very favorable response. It’s amazing; this one we’re printing now is only the fourth issue, but we already clearly have a following of people saying, “Do you have the next one?” I think it’s also shaping the perception of what people are willing to say. It may have been a coincidence, I don’t know, that we ran our first issue on Hillary Clinton as a stooge for Obama’s wars and Wall Street; and that week, Maureen Dowd came out with her column on Hillary Clinton as the pro-war perfect replacement for Dick Cheney was the idea. As we’ve seen in the past, there are certain things that we take the point on, and we change what people are allowed to discuss. Like when Mr. LaRouche, years ago during Cheney and Bush, talked about Leo Strauss; and we produced a series of reports — ultimately a book — on this policy of lying and ramming it down people’s throats as a way of terrorizing the population to go along with fascism. The next things you knew, the New York Times was running this big article about Leo Strauss, who I’m sure most people had never heard of until we did this.

If you go back to what happened with the 28 pages, Obama had absolutely no intention to ever release those pages. We created a situation where he could not not release them; he had to do it. Therefore, people should take heart in a certain way, that what you used to consider as the powers that be, or the things that are unmovable, or what can’t be changed; that is no longer the case. Now is really the moment to pick up — Jeff said it clearly — the American Constitution, Alexander Hamilton; what our nation is actually supposed to represent in the world. Now is the moment for Americans to find their guts and stand up on their hind legs and demand that nothing lower than that standard is going to be tolerated by us at this point.

OGDEN: Absolutely. So, I would encourage everybody to please contact the New York office if you’re in the area, or if you can travel there. There’s going to be a series of events that you can participate in over the next week; and it’s very significant. If you have not yet, please subscribe to our YouTube channel, but also, watch the two latest features that have been posted on the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel and the LaRouche PAC website. As I mentioned, the full press conference that Bob Graham delivered at the National Press Club is available; the short address of that is lpac.co/graham-press-club. We’ll put that in the description of this video here today. Also, the 20-minute video called “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge: a Tour”; which is very well-composed overview of exactly what the New Paradigm and the new economic architecture looks like. Again, we’ll put the URL of that video in the description as well.

So, thank you very much for joining us here today. I think this was a very important discussion. Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com. Thank you very much; good night.

This entry was posted in Glass Steagall, LPAC and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to You Can Change History: Act Now to Force a Vote on Glass-Steagall (with transcript)

  1. Pingback: You Can Change History: Act Now to Force a Vote on Glass-Steagall (with transcript) — LaRouche Irish Brigade | Disrobing The Emperor

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s