TRANSCRIPT

Diane SARE: Good afternoon, and welcome to the LaRouche PAC weekly Policy Committee discussion.  Today is July 13th, and I'm Diane Sare filling in for Matt Ogden, and we're joined over Google Hangouts Live by Bill Roberts in Detroit, Michigan; Kesha Rogers in Houston, Texas;  in San Francisco, I think we have Rachel Brinkley visiting from Boston, Massachusetts and Michael Steger; and I think Dave Christie will be back with us shortly; he was having technical difficulties from Seattle, Washington. And here in the studio, we Jason Ross of the LaRouche PAC Science Team, and by Lyndon LaRouche.

Lyndon LAROUCHE:  I should probably be the one to announce that there was an intervention in the speech of Hillary Clinton, and our man who volunteered without telling us in advance, but nonetheless, what he said was correct; that she was ducking the issue of Glass-Steagall when we know at this time in the political realm that both leaders in the Senate, and many leaders in the Congress, themselves, are already urgently concerned about the Glass-Steagall issue.  And her attempt, or her claque's attempt to smother this discussion, will only actually have the effect, of causing her to lose, most of her chance to win a nomination for President.

SARE:  And I understand this Glass-Steagall question from this one intervention has been picked up apparently; it's out all over Twitter, it's buzzing in the airwaves.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, but I wouldn't  bother to make trouble on this thing, unless the press were building this up.  If it's just his voice was suppressed, that's one thing.  But if there's an attempt to make a big issue about it, the fact is, that she's committed as far as I'm concerned, a fraud against everything she's pretended to be politically during this period.  And therefore, there's no question about, that if she is not willing to defend Glass-Steagall, she is not fit to be a President of the United States.

SARE:  Right.  And I would say especially now, given what's happening internationally, you have the situation with Greece, which is not about Greece; it's about the bankruptcy of the trans-Atlantic system, and some people are so desperate, arrogant, foolish, to think that somehow they're going to save a system which is insoluble, and the response by some members of the U.S. Senate, who clearly, at least one of them grasped that this is the case and that the Glass-Steagall has to be brought back now, at this time.

LAROUCHE:  Well, that was brought by four representatives of the Senate.  And probably more are actually sympathetic to it. But in the Democratic Party, she's just wiped herself out of politics.  It may not come immediately but she's discredited herself.

When the main issue is Glass-Steagall, — Glass-Steagall is the leading  issue not only in the United States, it's also internationally.  So I don't know how anyone could be so stupid as to try to, kind of conceal the existence of the Glass-Steagall legislation.  It's absolutely impossible.

So, I think she's lost control of herself, intellectually. That's unfortunately.  It's regrettable; she used to be a very nice person; she had her own independent approach.  I didn't agree with her running for President.  I thought that she should stay in the Senate where she was based, because she did not have the qualities for President, but she did have the qualities for a Senator or for running for Senate.  That would have been good; she was doing that in a sense, but she should have stuck to the Senate ambition.

SARE:  Right.  Well, working for Obama was a terrible mistake.

LAROUCHE:  Well, and she got herself into that, because knowing Obama, Obama is not a nice person; is not an honest person, nor a nice person.  And her attaching herself to him,  — she may have been able to plead ignorance about how bad he was, but after history has run down a few years, you know that this guy is a very evil man and he's a British agent and an evil man, but no honesty.  And therefore any honest person in the United States who's not a fanatic of some kind, will not support the attack that Obama did, in his role; and certainly would not join in the camp of Obama, once Obama's characteristics began to be shown.

And they were shown immediately in the first argument I had against him.

SARE:  Yes, in April 2009.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  And so at that point, no one should — and she could have walked out any time she wanted to, at that point. That was good reason for her to walk out then, but that was the only game.  Within the branch of the first year of his incumbency in office, she should have walked out.

SARE: Yeah.  Yeah.

LAROUCHE:  Well, that's that, and that's a factor in the continuing process of our national, and international, affairs. And she can't get out of that.  It's not her issue.  She is the issue, that's the problem! She's the one that made the mistake, the terrible mistake, and she shouldn't have done that.

But her wild ambition, which is running loose, and she's been doing that again and again and again, you know, making herself an instrument of Obama, which she did a number of times, repeatedly, it's all a big mistake.

But the issue now is still locked up with the current issue. We've got this situation in Germany, and the German situation is very interesting. Because you have two officials, Schäuble and Merkel, and what they do, they've gone on their own; there are some weak fools who will also take that position and they are already doing that.  But the rest of the Europe is very much disturbed about what Schäuble and Merkel have done.

SARE:  Yes.  Well, there was intense media coverage and pressure, making the point that you have made, saying there should be a debt conference, as the 1953 conference, where 50% of Germany's debt was written off and their payment of debt was tied to the surplus in their economy; so there was an actual advantage to Germany getting back on its feet and recovering.  So many people have been saying, "You, Germany, were forgiven and you turn around and plunder Greece, and say, not one millimeter, nothing, we will give nothing."

LAROUCHE:  Well, the point is the claims against Greece, were fraudulent, inherently fraudulent.  What happened is that the foreign agency issued fake loan charges, and charged that Greece owed this money.  Well, Greece did not owe that money; that was an outside operation.  It was not a decision of the Greek people to accept that kind of debt.  So the whole thing is fraudulent.

And of course, Merkel and Schäuble both know what happened.  And therefore, what they're doing is they're presenting and arguing for a lie:  The Greeks were not guilty of what they're charged with.  They're not responsible for what they're charged with.  They didn't make the decision.  It was chiefly the British Empire that made the decision, and institutions which are associated with the British Empire.

So what they did is, the Greeks were terrified, the earlier Greek government was terrified, and therefore they submitted to the conditions dictated chiefly from the British Empire.  And that's where this thing came, and that's what the Greeks were objecting against, essentially.  But they were playing a soft game, hoping that some of the Europeans would come to their senses.  I think that you will find, soon, that other nations in Europe, do not agree with the German position taken by her and by Schäuble.

Schäuble's a wild-eyed fanatic!  He's a  —

SARE:  [laughs] He certainly sounds it!

LAROUCHE:  Well, he is.  He is, and the extreme right wing in the German system is also pretty close to some — I don't want to name the name — OK! [laughter]

SARE:  Right!

JASON ROSS:  You also recently had the visit of the Queen in Germany.

You know, if you look at what they're pushing, the Merkel/Schäuble policy, it's clearly not to actually get repaid on their loans.  I know that's supposedly what people are saying, "well, you know, Greece borrowed this money, they ought to pay it back," whatever; it's obvious looking at it, they can't possibly pay it back anyway.  Like that arguments that they're making on that basis aren't because they actually think that; there's another purpose, there's another aspect of what kind of financial system you're trying to maintain as a whole.

LAROUCHE:  It's like trying to demand, a vast payment of money to a child!  [laughter]  I mean, it's — an idiot!  The Greeks were fairly in a reduced condition of impotence, by what had happened through various processes!  They didn't have any means to pay money for a debt!  They weren't even getting enough to eat!  And when you do that to a nation, and say, "well, you're not getting enough to eat? Okay, we'll take more away from you!"  This is  — I mean these guys are really Nazis.  I mean, in that sense, that's really that kind of thing; they don't give any regard for humanity.

But basically, it's Schäuble, you have to be fair:  Most of the German leading circles, ones who are really respectable, you have in the right wing in Germany, in the economic right wing, you have some terrible people, that's true.  And they are behind this, and Schäuble is the sector of that; and Merkel is also the same quality.  She doesn't do it the same way, but she and Schäuble are both, really, very destructive forces against the interests of the German people.

And so this is a much more complicated thing than is reported in the press so far internationally, because what's happened is, she was supposed to be dumped out.

SARE:  Right.  Well, you had two former Chancellors of the SPD, who made known their opposition to her policy vis-à-vis Russia, when Russia was excluded from attending the G7 meeting.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, and other things of the same nature.  So and you find many official circles in Germany, in various parts of the party system, also do not like this.  But the point is, it has to be cancelled, this operation has to be cancelled.  But Schäuble should have been thrown out, because the point is, the whole fund that he's claiming is his department!  It was his department  in the German system, which actually demanded that these debts be solidly accepted; "we want that money back!"

Well, they never earned it!  It was stolen from them.

SARE:  And the Greek people never got it.  I mean, that was the thing the Parliament said, they formed a committee and said "this debt is completely illegitimate; no more than 10% maximum, if that, even ended up in Greece. And now you're telling us to repay the whole thing, by looting a population that's already been looted."

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, and that's exactly it.  So what Schäuble did and what she, Merkel, supported, so far, was a fraud!  It still is a fraud.  And the fact that he yells, and makes screams and noises and so forth, like some strange animal, does not speak any support for what they're doing, what Merkel and Schäuble have done.  There's no justification for it.

Kesha ROGERS:  Well, I think as we cancel Schäuble and Merkel, we also have to realize that this is the cancellation of Obama, because the only way that we're actually going to make the intervention which is necessary in terms of Glass-Steagall, and what it really represents is, we have to go back to what we've been saying all along in terms of what the policy must be.  This is not just about some half-cocked legislation.  But what is the significance of  this legislation in terms of our emphasis on returning the nation back to a unified status of what is the Hamiltonian principles, why you actually put forth the Four Laws that have to go hand-in-hand with the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.  Because it now has come to the point, as you see the situation starting to explode in terms of the war drive, what Obama represents, then people are starting to realize, and particularly the senators, starting with Elizabeth Warren, that Glass-Steagall is probably even more important now than they even realized before.

And I think the emphasis that the whole system is coming down and it's not just a "Greece problem," and it's not about a single nation, but it's about the fact that the European Union, the European system is bankrupt and we don't know exactly what's going to happen; this thing could blow up at any time now.

So the point is, is that who is going to be there to lead the country?

And what we're seeing all over the place, is that people are coming to us, and recognizing that we weren't just going out there for Glass-Steagall, which has to be absolutely important to be reinstated, but we're saying this whole system has to be overhauled and a new system has to come into play.  And we're giving the directions as to what that must be.

LAROUCHE: Well, it's not a matter of precedence, really. Because you have the original Constitution of the United States and you have the reading of that by the first President of the United States.  And what we had that opposed that policy that came from the United States, the opposition came, from a section of Virginia, and Virginia was actually against all the lawfulness of the United States.  The slavery system, for example, was actually established inside the United States by that President, the third in the succession of the Presidency of the United States:  Jefferson.

And this has happened.  And we're now in the state of Virginia, and the state of Virginia has been the flag institution, against the United States, ever since birth of the nation.

So this is not simply some law that's been passed.  It's a principle; it's the Abraham Lincoln, for example; it's the Franklin Roosevelt principle.  It's what was really the principle of the President I served, the same thing.  These were laws.

It was the Bush family, the followers of Prescott Bush, who was practically a Nazi himself, in every possible way; he was a shameful creature, to even mention, when he was operating from Britain.  And these are facts!  This is corruption!  Wall Street is evil.  I mean.  I mean Wall Street must be repealed.  Now Wall Street happens to be right now bankrupt! Hopelessly bankrupt! Nothing can save it.

Look at what the issue is now:  How stupid Hillary was on her standpoint of not responding to Glass-Steagall. Glass-Steagall is the institution on which the continuation of the United States' survival depends.  So anyone who's against Glass-Steagall is a lunatic, politically; they should not be politics.  Maybe knitting or something like that may be more appropriate for them. I don't know that she knows how to knit, but anyway! [laughter]

The problem we face is really going back to our United States' tradition, our lawful tradition and all these things like the Glass-Steagall was actually an expression of the Constitutional principle, so you can't just repeal that and dump that.  But who did the dumping?  It was a bunch of members of the Congress, who destroyed the people of the United States.

That act, what was done, that act, destroyed the rights of the people of the United States in general. Because by removing Glass-Steagall, you turn the whole nation of over to the predators, outright predators!  Wall Street, an absolute predator.

Wall Street happens to be absolutely bankrupt now!  There's no way you can sustain Wall Street.  It's totally, hopelessly bankrupt, and the first thing we should do with Wall Street is shut it down!  Because it's bankrupt!

The problem of government, the responsibility of government is, when the nation's welfare is being jeopardized, by an unfitness of outstanding debts claimed, you shut it down, and you put it through a process of reexamination and reconditioning. And Wall Street should have been shut down!  Instead of allowing the law which didn't work.  And these are the issues.  There is no historically, no literally, no detail of this thing which should survive.

Wall Street should be shut down right now.  It is hopelessly bankrupt.  Why do you think the four Senators, following Elizabeth Warren, why do you think they did that? Because at the same time, the fact was established, that the bankruptcy of the speculation by Wall Street was hopeless. Therefore, in order to prevent a crisis in the United States, a deadly crisis, shut down Wall Street.  Just put it out of business, as a bankrupt entity, because it is now fully bankrupt.  It's run out all possibility of survival.

And that's what Schäuble's representing as an echo of that. Schäuble's an echo of this policy, of the desperation, the absolute desperation of the Wall Street in the United States, and of the German equivalent, and so forth in Europe.  So that's what the issue is. And the problem is, if you don't raise the issue properly, and when Hillary essentially stood out for avoiding the Glass-Steagall issue, that was an action by her, which actually morally threw her out of the Presidency.  I mean, that's a criminal thing under these circumstances, whether she knows it or not!  It's desperate.  It's unprincipled.

SARE:  Well, I think the point that you made in your discussion with associates on Saturday, which is what people have to really get, Wall Street is done, it's dead, but the nation can be saved.  And people get a little confused about that.  We saw that at the meeting on Saturday:  This one woman got up and said, "can we really survive without Wall Street?" As if Wall Street has something to do with the survival of the United States.

LAROUCHE:  No, well, see they believe in money per se. People have become foolish because they're taught to believe in money per se.  That money per se,  is the thing that they live on!  [laughter]  And when money isn't worth anything, they ought to see what the history of bankruptcies, total bankruptcies of the history of nations is.  Once you get in that kind position, you shut down the banking system until you reconstruct it, without missing this crap.  And that's where we're at.

Rachel BRINKLEY:  And that is what Greece represented last week.  They called out, they undermined the authority of the Wall Street system; they did it.  That can't be taken back.  Now, what was represented by that referendum last week, you also had the BRICS summit last week, where they announced, we understand that we are overcoming the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, they said.  What must be restored is the sovereignty of nations because of the collapse of the Bretton Woods system.  This was the BRICS summit in Russia.

The point is, if you are attempting to cling to the dead Wall Street system, you are part of something which has already been demonstrated to be completely fraudulent, and anyone who is moving with the new system, is relevant, as we had these comments from German leaders recently:  That going with the sanctions on Russia is impotent and obsolete; that the G7 countries will should include many more; I mean, anyone that's trying to cling to this system is part of the past.

LAROUCHE:  A legacy of Oliver Twist. [laughter]  If there's a new Twist on the horizon.

SARE:  You could also say the Tale of Two Systems:  because just this very week, while you have this unbelievably brutal response to Greece, you had the meeting in Ufa, Russia of the BRICS nations, and what they are announcing in terms of the agreements that [indian] Prime Minister Modi is planning to travel to Pakistan; that India and Pakistan will become members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization [sco]; they have a ten-year perspective on all kinds of development and cooperation. This, again, it could not be more different from what we're seeing from Schäuble and Merkel.

LAROUCHE:  Well, we have to do something more profound than this.  These things are very important in the short run, as of now, as the more recent threat to civilization in general, because that's what it is.  We're talking about actually the British Empire's aim which is done by, now, the new Pope, is to destroy the population, reduce it from 7 billion people to less than 1 at a rapid rate. This is what the policy is, for example, of this Governor of California, and people in California can rejoice about that great achievement that's occurred there, accordingly — but I say, "accordingly."

So also, we have a more general problem.  We say we have an immediate problem.  Well, the United States and Europe do have an immediate problem.  It's the problem of the 20th century:  It actually is a problem which arose in the last decade of the 19th century; because during that period, at the time that great leaders were moved out of office.  Like, what happened?  You had a period of wars, a decade of war, breaking out;  assassinations; things of that sort, which occurred in the last decade of the 19th century.  This was the onset, of warfare in general, the kind of warfare we  know from histories since that time.

And what we're looking at now, is we're looking at the same thing, on more or less a global scale, especially the trans-Atlantic region.  Now you have in Russia, you have resistance against this, which is a systemic resistance.  You have a systemic resistance from China.  You have systemic resistance from other parts of the planet.  But this part of the planet, which is actually dominated by the British Empire, including the United States which is dominated by the British Empire, this is what the problem is.  But the problem is located not just in the effect of what happened then, but in what the continuation was of that effect, during the 20th century and now during this present century, part of it now.

What has happened in the United States, in particular, the typical American is being destroyed.  How's he being destroyed? Well, the conditions of life for the typical American, working people, specialists and so forth, the same, the productivity of the individual human being in the United States, and in Europe, is one of consistent decline, into degeneration.

Now what happens is, is you've got the tail-end of the thing; you've got more and more people fall into the swamp, into death in the swamp! And so therefore, what's happened is there's been, since 1890, to the present time, there has been a continuous general trend of degeneration throughout most of the population of the planet.  Exceptions have occurred in case of China; an exception has developed in Russia; India is on the march to go ahead; Egypt has advanced.  Much of the rest of the world, especially the trans-Atlantic phase, has been degenerate. We are part of the degeneracy!

What does that mean?  That means our governmental system is a process of degeneracy.  In other words, the Constitution and all that it has meant, is now being ripped up!  And some people, like four Senators and some members of the Congress have reacted to that in a useful way, a purposeful, appropriate way.  Not adequate, but appropriate.

And therefore, instead of trying to say, how're we going to fix this little thing, this little thing; you know, how to replace a lightbulb, or something like that — that is not going to settle anything.  The problem is the people of the United States, the people of Europe, have undergone a process of degeneration, political and moral degeneration; scientific degeneration, and that has been the history since the beginning of the last decade of the 19th century.  That's the trans-Atlantic experience.

And so therefore, now you can't say, we're going to fix something by "changing a thing."  You're going to have to change the principle on which we operate, and return to the principle which was the original principle of our Constitution. And these guys do not want to talk about the Constitution, they want to talk at it, not about it.  They don't want to get to the subject, they want to express an opinion against it.

And this is where our real problem is right now:  That unless you can arouse the people of the United States to acquire the confidence to fight against this stuff — look, they won't protect themselves against what's being done to them!  Health care!  They won't defend themselves against this thing, that is, they won't mobilize and insist there's a body of the population, the authority of the population, the authority of the members of the United States, they don't use that weapon! And rather, they become chopped off, one at a time, this here, that there. They're victims.  They're not citizens, they're victims.

And so this is the real issue that faces us.  It's not these little details.  The details are simply symptoms of what's happening to us, of what we're letting ourselves be subjected to. And that's what the real issue is.  We don't have a Constitution any more.  We say we have, but we don't.  The Constitution is violated practically every way you can think.

Look at the people:  They're becoming increasingly stupid, really stupid.  That is, by the most simple standard of performance, the ability to perform, the ability to think about something.  The ability to progress at something, to create instruments, to create progress.  And now the family's being destroyed.  We have a national campaign, to eliminate the family. Who produces the children?  [laughs]  If you're not going to have children, you're not going to have any more people!

I mean, it's happened:  Everything is being destroyed, arbitrary authority.  Arbitrary action, arbitrary this, arbitrary that.

SARE:  Well, they certainly have no understanding of Alexander Hamilton.

LAROUCHE:  No, but the point is, in all these things, the people, each member of society, and the collective assembly of society, share a common right to achieve their own destiny.  You come down and you make arbitrary laws — "this is the law, the universal law; this is the law, this is the law, this is law, new laws, new freak laws."  Forget 'em!  We don't need those laws!

What we need is a compassion toward people, and on the basis of an understanding of compassion, you can adapt to all kinds of dissent, but the fact that there's dissent in a government, under the people of the government is not a fatal issue; but it's the kinds of dissent which are arbitrary, which some dictatorship or some dictatorial decision makes.  Then the human being is as an individual comes into play; and the development of that individual and their ability to perform functions which are useful to for them and for society at the same time, that's what's important.  And we've lost it.  We've lost it much.  We don't have freedom any more. We are slaves of a bureaucracy.

And if we don't change that, there isn't going to be a United States.  As a matter of fact, even during these weeks right now, the summer weeks, we are now faced, as long as Obama remains a President of the United States, he's going to keep lurching, in the direction of launching world war throughout the planet. And such a war will mean, very few human beings, if any will survive that war.  And the death, the mass death, of that war, will be essentially within the first week of actual warfare; and it will be throughout the planet.  That's what we face now.

So all these issues, issues as issues, as debating issues, is a simple way of avoiding the issue, the real issue: The issue of the destiny of mankind.

BILL ROBERTS:  I was just going to say that, I think from that standpoint, it's very important what we're doing with this — to make sure the population is educated on what the BRICS is, and what the United States role is going to be in that.  Because, you know, the Chinese and these other nations have gone through these kinds of cultural struggles with their version, you know, of cultural collapse, of various backwards and manipulated cultural baggage that they've had that's dragged down the conception of what a human being is, oftentimes promoted by the British in particular as we've outlined recently, as we've been outlining in EIR for a long time.

But the fact is, it's very transparent what is guiding this BRICS process, what is motivating Xi Jinping: This is Confucianism.  This is the conscious notion that mankind is the jewel of creation, that mankind, human beings are rational creatures, that we are driven by reason.  We are not, as Thomas Malthus, says, governed by a survival of the fittest type of bestial hell.

And so, I think the Glass-Steagall question, the Glass-Steagall fight as not just an issue, but here is where the United States actually has to drive a stake through the heart of this British Imperial enemy and reclaim our actual Constitutional tradition of declaring what humanity actually is in the universe, and that that's where the United States becomes part of this process on the planet of defining mankind's future.

LAROUCHE:  But the point is, that is only a moot proposition.  It's a dead proposition, as such.  Because you're right on the edge of a thermonuclear conflict.  Which is being led now, by the agency of the President of the United States. We're on the edge, on the one hand; Russia is a key factor on one side of the conflict, and on the other side we have the British Empire, and the stooges of the British Empire which include, prominently, currently, Obama.  As long as Obama is the President, no one of this United States has any efficient confidence manifest, as an instrument available to them, to prevent the extinction of the human species. Or something approaching that.

You have to realize what truth is:  If you look at what the counter-position is; just go to the core of the different. Russia on the one side, with what it has as forces lined up with it; but we're talking about thermonuclear weapons!  There's no longer warfare.  Warfare's gone on for a long time; it's been stretched out and caricatured and everything else to it. but right now, you have, through the agency of the British Empire, you have an immediate threat, against all humanity, including the threat of an immediate extinction by a form of warfare based on the British control over the President of the United States.  As long as that President of the United States remains President of the United States, you don't have a prayer!  You can't do anything!

Now, what's happened is, you have four member of the Senate, led by one, who is then launching the effort and three others joined.  We have also a number of members of the Congress otherwise, who have also reacted on Glass-Steagall.  Why have they reacted on Glass-Steagall?  Because they know that the fall of Wall Street, which is already occurring!  Wall Street is doomed!  Wall Street has no basis for existence, and it was the fact that Wall Street [was collapsing, fatally collapsing, which forced the issue which attracted the attention of the Senate and members of the Congress.  This nation is about to go bankrupt, totally!  In an absolute bankruptcy.  Not a bankruptcy of degree, but a bankruptcy of overall fact.  This is where we are!  We can't  play monkey business with this thing any more!

The only thing that would make things immediately better, is dumping the President.  We can put him out of office; the institutions of the United States have the authority, the means of authority, to put this President out of office!  If this President were thrown out of office, suddenly, by the appropriate method for doing that, we would avoid this problem.

But we would now have an opening for discussion rather than killing!  But if the war occurs, and what Obama and the British are determined to do, the British Empire, look at what the policy is, look at what governor of California is, the same thing: Genocide! Reduce the population of the planet, from 7 billion people to less than 1! That's the policy of the governor of California!  That's the policy of much of the entirety of all Wall Street, essentially, in principle; that's what it amounts to.  That's what's going on with the Saudis.  The Saudis are that kind of evil force,  but the Saudis are nothing but British agents.

These are the forces:  And we've come to the point that we've on the edge.  Germany is not really much significance right now, because they don't have the ability to, themselves, to shape things, particularly as long as they have this kind of Schäuble and Merkel.  It's a non-existent force.  Maybe if we got some other leaders in Germany, it would be a different one.

But, Russia is not going to launch a war, a thermonuclear war that is.  From the standpoint of the British, and the standpoint of Obama, the only warfare they want is, instant thermonuclear war, on a global basis.

Now, the question is, how do we remove the agencies which are for this total destruction of civilization?  When a war between Russia and Obama would be a thermonuclear war, which would practically pretty much eliminate most of the human race, suddenly, all in one blow; or maybe permanently.  So that's why you can't  say, "what's the issue we're going to gradually improve something?  Gradually improve something, gradually improve something?"  That's over!  It should have been done a long time ago!

But now time has run out, and there are only capital measures, will do any good.  In other words, you're not going to get gradual improvements.  They don't exist!  The gradual movement of the United States population has been down for one full century or more.  Now you want to talk about gradual improvements?  Progress towards success?  You had the chance for progress towards success, for about one and a half centuries, about that. What have you done with that?

I don't see any results.  I see results by some of us, who recognize this problem.  But people who want to be practical, that is to say, "well, let's be practical.  Let's not try to be decisive.  Let's not try to make a sudden galactic change."

But that's what's necessary.

And therefore, of course, if Obama were thrown out of office, under proper terms, and those terms exist and are available, well, then that would make a different story.  That would improve a lot of things, and all the work that he's done, during his two terms in office, would be  — "get this guy outta here.  Get this crap outta here."

And then worry about how we're going to rebuild the economy, how we're going to take people who've become more stupid, day by day, practically now, get more desperate, more stupid, more futile; and we cannot say partial things, "let's go forward to improvements..." You're not going to get improvements! Unless you do some things which is to break capital power, and the capital power, when the British Empire, through its agent Obama, is operating, while Russia holds its temper back from warfare; the minute that the organization of the United States military capabilities, begins to launch, an attack on Russia and other places, within that same minute, an irreversible horror descends upon the whole planet! And there's nothing you can do about it at that time!

That's the problem right now!

Therefore, the political issue, you've got to take away, the tools of Satan, such as Obama.  If Obama were thrown out of office, you would have a revolt in the institutions of government, because they see two things, and you see the reflections of that in the recent development in the Senate. She, Warren, acted; invited three others to form a group to install Glass-Steagall. Others echoed that.

In the meantime, the fact is known behind the scenes, that the Wall Street system, the system that Hillary defends, is going to collapse, total collapse!  Now, we can take, accept a collapse of the Wall Street system; in fact we can welcome it, if we have any brains at all. [laughter]

We can construct capital policies, which will restore the United States, according to its Constitution and according to the conditions which the United States as an institution faces. That we can do.  To do that practically right now, means that you have to remove  Obama.  If you remove Obama, by the appropriate method, you will create an opening, which will open up the gates, to deal directly with the Wall Street problem.  And it will also be an inspiration to a lot of people, because once people realize that the condition that they sense, is leading towards war; like the fear, of here's Russia, Russia is a fully capable military force; it's a strategic military force; it's a thermonuclear force.  On the other side you have the British, as an actual smaller force, but the real force, behind what the United States has in terms of these kinds of weapons.  And when that moves, it will move from the United States, only from the United States, but within the first second, the span of the first second of that motion, you have the extinction of the human species descending upon you, if not completely, nearly so.

And that is the issue that you have to face.  Taking up other issues, other issues, is nonsense.  We wasted all these — we had opportunities to do things; we had options to defeat and turn this thing around!  We didn't do it!  Our government failed us!  We didn't do it.

Now, we're on the edge, where the only thing that can really give us any immediate prospect of survival of humanity, is get Obama out of there.  Once Obama's kicked out of there, then the reaction, against what's happening to Wall Street; Wall Street is absolutely, totally bankrupt!  It's absolutely bankrupt, there's no way to build it back.  You just dump it in the garbage pail and burn it, or something like that.  It's not worth anything.

But we in the United States can create a credit system, by methods we've already devised as a nation.  We can do that.  We can solve the problem.  But we're prevented from solving the problem by, to a large degree, the ignorance of most of our people. They haven't learned anything about this.  you know the educational system is stupid.  We don't have an educational system any more; we have a de-educational system, which is what the effect, people become more stupid, day by day, almost hour by hour, on a global scale.

So we can reverse that, but we have to have the opportunity, the precondition for doing that.  China's willing to work with us; India's willing to work with us; nations in South America are willing to work on this; Egypt's willing to work with us.  And so forth and so on.  So the option is there.  The problem is, you've got a force, which is the combination of the British Empire, the Queen, and her stooge, Obama.  That's the threat.  And unless you can answer that threat, and remove it, you don't have an answer. And that's what people are afraid of:  They don't want to talk about it.  They want to hear "good news," that things are not quite as bad as they thought they were. Or they're not as bad as we thought they might become.

SARE:  It's a little bit like someone whose head is already in the guillotine, and the thing is being dropped, and they say, "Can we have time for something else?"

LAROUCHE:  A sharp way of getting ahead.  [laughter]

ROSS:  Yeah, and stupidity, that's a basis for practicality. If you don't have any basis for coming up with thoughts of your own, or standing for things that seem like they could be impossible but are necessary.

LAROUCHE:  Well, I would say, one of the things is, that when we meet at a table like this, that those are the things which ought to be the primary driver, of considerations. You can't gradually improve the present condition of mankind.  First of all, you have to eliminate the cause of mankind's self-destruction.  And the stupidity of trying to duck the issue, that Obama and what he represents, is a threat of the death of humanity,  — or at least virtual death; if anyone is a survivor, that will be a remarkable, but minimal, exception.  But that's where we are, dangerous.

And we have all the means at us, I mean, we're having this meeting now, but we have all kinds of things, once we accept the fact that that is the situation.  Not evading that fact.  And the problem is, our tendency to evade that fact.  If you start from that fact, then if there is an option, you can win it!  But if you duck the issue and try to ignore the issue, the reality, you can't win.  And that's what happened to many nations, peoples, in the past.

SARE:  I think partly, the significance of what you've begun to do on this series of the Thursday night discussions with the American people, because that has demonstrated there is more to our association than we previously were aware of, some of us.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  Just take the following facts;  in short, easy, quick, following facts.  Presume that we're not going to have a thermonuclear war.  What are the problems we have to face, we have to face, ourselves?  And other people, similarly? Well, we have to understand, that we're going to develop and increase, a steady increase, of the creative powers of the individual human beings.  And that we're going to organize on the basis of that.  And that we're going to make the progress of the prowess of the productivity of the individual human being, as once again being the basis of our national outlook, and that of other nations who are reasonable. We want legroom, to get rid of this crap which is the instant death recipe, and we want to start that by getting the people who have been misled.

Look, during the period since the period of the near-end of the 19th century to the present time, there has been a consistent degeneration, with some little bumps in between, in the life of the United States, in the quality of its leadership, in the competence of its economy, and everything else of that nature. And the similar case goes much around the planet, in terms of what is the global prospect for mankind.  Maybe some parts like China, are progressing, other parts are progressing.

But all of that can be wiped out, with one big thermonuclear war, which takes only less than a minute to occur, before it's final, and most people on the planet are already dead.  So, that's the problem! And therefore, we have to intervene now, between the interval between that being the immediate prospect, and the inauguration of a program which will eliminate that problem, and give mankind a chance, to make it back.

And that's what we have to do.  And that's why you cannot say, maybe we can make reforms.  I think the time for reform school is out.  I think more serious penal methods are required! Reform schools do not do enough, to eliminate crime, more efficiently! [laughter]

That's where we are.  It's obvious!  I'm not being exceptional in a sense, it's just simply, I'm facing facts that I know.

SARE:  Well, I think that's the hard thing for a lot of people to face, even after Obama did what he did on the Trans-Pacific Partnership with the Republicans, and you had the vast majority of the Democratic Party vote against him and turn against him, but they're not ready for impeachment — yet.

LAROUCHE:  Everything, but the fuzz is missing;  the fuzz on the peaches is missing. [laughter]

SARE:  Well, I think we'll see what we can do on that.  Is there anything else from our friends.

Michael STEGER:  I don't Lyn could have been more clear. And I think the former, late President of Mexico had it right when he said, the world "should listen to the  wise words of Lyndon LaRouche."  [laughter]

SARE:  I think that's a wise place to conclude our discussion.  So we'll leave everybody with that.  And hopefully we'll succeed in this mission so we can see you again next week.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah.