Executive Intelligence Review
This article appears in the June 12, 2015 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

We Have Within Us, the Power of Victory

[PDF version of this article]

This discussion took place between Lyndon LaRouche and hundreds of political activists from across the United States, in a LaRouche PAC activists' conference call on June 4, 2015. John Ascher was the host.

John Ascher: Good evening, everyone. This is John Ascher in Leesburg, Virginia welcoming everyone to the third "Fireside Chat" with Lyndon LaRouche, who is on with us live this evening. I'd like to welcome all of the assembled members and supporters of the LaRouche movement. If you are on for the first time, I'd like to give you a special welcome.

Lyn, do you want to make any preliminary remarks here this evening?

Lyndon LaRouche: Just one, which is a matter of settling unfinished business. We had a report presented from a member, an associate, of ours, and it was fairly important because it deals with the distinction between the idea of using trains on tracks, which has a certain validity, of course, naturally. But there's a higher level of importance, which I think we may come to discuss in the course of events.

The fact is that the principles of science, physical science, are not based on simple, ordinary kinds of algebra—and algebra doesn't do it. Because the actual nature of mankind is presented by people such as Nicholas of Cusa, such as great scientists, the founder of the understanding of what the Solar System is [Johannes Kepler], and also, more significantly, more recently, the galactic principle—the fact that human life is located within the domain of the galactic sphere. That's science. Very few people are aware of it, but that's the fact, and in due course, we can encounter that issue again.

The British Empire vs. the American System

Q: This is R— from Brooklyn. I'd like to say good evening to Mr. LaRouche, and I'd also like to say he talked last week about the fact that the British were responsible for our aggravation. I find that in talking to people, and telling people this, and communicating it, and discussing that, in my opinion, Winston Churchill was not a nice guy, and several other things, I constantly find myself having to do education in terms of the history of this. People don't seem to quite grasp it, and a lot of this, I take it, is because our educational system has been skewed to present anything but! In other words, the British were our good buddies, we fought a war with them, and blah, blah, blah. And that's about how the education system leaves it. As far as I'm concerned, Churchill—ugh! But the average person I talk to doesn't quite grasp it, and it's difficult sometimes to get this over. I wonder if you have any more comment on that.

Library of Congress
Sir Winston Churchill, with his son Randolph and grandson Winston, dressed for the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II.

LaRouche: Well, sure. The fact is that we are victims of a British Empire system. We used to be an American System, but over the course of time, a certain group from the British Empire circles became stronger and stronger. We had major fights to bring certain Presidents into a leading position, and a very few of our Presidents, who were elected as Presidents, were really competent in terms of representing what the principles of our Constitution are.

And this is the reality we have to face.

But the other side of the point is, if we do not understand what the American System represents, as in the case of great leaders, such as great creative people in our history, we fail. Because we get sidetracked. We are diverted from our mission, which was given to us. So, that's what our problem is.

Q: This is G— from Los Angeles, and I'm speaking to the nature of the British Empire, and our culture as an extension: that there is a theory—I'm paraphrasing—that we were originally complete beings which featured insight and feats of awareness, and at one point, a force from the Cosmos came in and pressed upon us their mind, their mind being covetousness, greed, cowardice, and above all, fear. That fear, and their fear of exposure, which they gave to us.

And in my lifetime, what I've experienced, is [a shift from] my grandparents and parents, influenced by FDR, with essentially pride and justice, to the culture we have now, which is really endless sources of conflict and fear. I'd just like a comment on that.

LaRouche: Sure. Well, in practice we have a very hot and very particular kind of situation, in terms of the electoral process ongoing at this time. We have [Martin] O'Malley, who is a leading candidate, actually, and we have others in that same category, who are important. Our struggle now is to clean up the issues of the ongoing election campaign; we're already in an ongoing election campaign process. The question is: what are we going to do? What's our policy? What should our policy be? And right now, my view, of course, is that I'm behind what I have been for a long time—in terms of the principles of policy, U.S. policy. I haven't changed much; I've been improved, I should say, more than anything else.

But the point is that I'm now backing, personally, what is represented by O'Malley, and by some other people who go into the same category. Because the other choices I see presented on us, are not something we want to have, if we look at the consequences of what these candidacies mean. So I'm actively involved in that, and I have, of course, a scientific view of how the economy works—I'm a follower of Alexander Hamilton, one of the greatest people, I think, in U.S. history.

These are the people whom I respect the most.

Q: This is C— from Boston. Good evening, Mr. LaRouche, sir. You know, since this week was the press conference to release the 28 pages of the 9/11 report, I was just wondering—you know, I've studied it, I've looked into it for a few years, finding the official story to be a fairy tale, to be honest, from the overwhelming evidence we've received. Would there ever be a time in the future where the people would be held responsible for that, like indictments?

LaRouche: I think we have to make it that way right now.

Now, you see this case of O'Malley. I cannot give you a final judgment on O'Malley's campaign. I can say that so far, it's the brightest one that I've seen on the horizon. And with good reason. His credentials are excellent. They're limited in some degree, but any Presidential candidate who's coming seriously into the candidacy, is generally an ingénue, relatively speaking.

So, he represents that, and he represents the principles that represents. He has a very significant history, political history, in terms of this, and I think so far, he stands up very well.

Now, I know that's not the last answer on the whole thing. But right now, I would say he's the man on the case. Maybe he won't be that in the end, but right now, he is. His ostensible rivals at this time are not worth supporting.

On the Edge of World War III

Q: My name is R—, legally from New York. I'm a 9/11 survivor, and a first-responder before the first responders even got there. I want to say "thank you," Mr. LaRouche. I can't find words to express my gratitude for all of those, including Angela [Vullo], and the rest, being there Tuesday, with regards to the 28 pages.[1]

LPAC/Matthew Ogden
The June 2 press conference featuring Sen. Rand Paul's introduction of a Senate resolution calling for the release of the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 Inquiry Report. Former Senator Bob Graham is at the microphone.

I was a CFO, COO, transitional CEO, on Wall Street. As I said, I was in 9/11. I was blown back from... [audio loss] 10 times on my head. I was on the South side. I have over 200 pictures I've never released, and I released six of them last year in New York, at the release of a movie that came out then.

I've read your stuff. I've always followed you. We both are in total agreement—or, I'm in agreement with you. You're my senior and my mentor. I agree with all your financial stuff. I love the big picture, the world big picture, that benefits the American interests; and look at places such as Russia, who was our greatest ally in the Revolutionary War, and shamefully, American kids don't even know these things, because they're not taught these things, essentially because of the British monarch, who, I don't know how people forget that they're our greatest enemy, and never ceased to be our greatest enemy. Nor have all those affiliated with them, and there's no need for me to go into that just to show that I know it. Like I said, I yield to you.

Again, I want to thank you. Please know that I had dinner with [Sen.] Rand Paul and his wife about a month ago, and just know, that he's the real deal on this issue. That I can tell you.

And as you have written, the BAE report and what have you—the way you were able to line this all up, going back to 1985, with the London oil deal with the Saudis, with 600,000 barrels still being delivered to London to this very day, for the exchange of BAE Systems and defense—which is the British monarch—who actually had places and offices right down in the heart of America's secrecy and military in Pensacola—Eglin Air Force Base; I know you know of these things, because that's where I live now. I couldn't stay in New York, because it just became so hopeless. I've had my spine reconstructed many times—I'll let Angela fill you in on that.

I look very much forward. I just am recovering from another surgery, from injuries from then, but am so much trying to be at your events, and please know I'm there. I can't thank you enough. If there's anything I can do, anytime you want me to speak, whatever—I'm there for you. Again, I can't thank you—we do have to educate, not only our young, but those who were put through the ROTC system, and the JAGs, especially, in the military, in the '70s and '80s, because they can't grasp what Andrew Jackson made obvious. I mean, these people burned down our White House in 1812! Did the Russians do that? I don't recall them doing anything like that. But I'm just trying to point out some things, and I think you understand.

My question is this: They really are coming at us with everything they have right now. As I said, I lived in 9/11. After I got blown back, I was back in those Towers. My fiancée was in there—she never came out. She was where the plane went in, the second plane. And I know exactly what went down. There's no mistake. The official story is, as the last caller said, an absolute fairy tale, absolute fairy tale.

But what is more important, is what I heard earlier: We need to understand that not only did the U.S. Patriot Act come about because of it, but there was something much bigger, which you speak to, which has to do with the British monarch, which enabled them to push us into the financial repression beginning in 2009, with that crash, and with the derivatives of over $600 billion—all of this bringing everything into the three to five regions that they intend to do, to control manufacturing and production in the globe, using things like Agenda 21 and things of that nature.

They are moving now. There is no turning around, and I know you know this, because you say it. And I do see it. And I firmly, firmly believe that we are right around the corner from another 9/11 attack—which is going to be much worse. It won't just be anthrax this time—as you know, it was reported yesterday—sent to 17 different states and Washington, D.C. Now, why would that be happening?

LaRouche: We're on the edge of a world war. A world war like nothing we've experienced before. If this occurs, if the United States, under Obama, does what Obama indicates he's going to do, the chances of survival of the human species are pretty dim.

Barack Obama meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on May 26, 2015.

Now, obviously, the condition is to get Obama out of power over the United States government. But it's actually power run by the British interest, the British Empire. And our problem is, to stop this war, which would be an extermination war, if it actually happens—to prevent that war from occurring.

Now that doesn't mean we're going to go with humility—it means we're going to go with good discretion. And it has to be done.

At the same time, we see that over the course of the Twentieth Century, the United States has actually been in a long wave of decline in terms of the conditions of life, which we supplied to our own citizens; the conditions of life in general; the chances for the future. We see what happens to our children, or young people generally; of the degeneration of their ability to cope with reality.

So, we have a mission orientation. It's not only from the United States. We also have to deal with the fact that we have nations, in parts of Asia, in South America, and in Europe and elsewhere; that we have a responsibility, through the responsibilities of the United States itself, as a nation. We must achieve a guarantee that a thermonuclear war will not occur. Because if a thermonuclear war occurs, between the ostensible powers in conflict today, that could be—probably—an extermination of the human species.

That's where we are.

Now what that means is, if you don't dump Obama out of the Presidency, and you allow him to run out the end of his term, he's getting very close to pushing the United States into a thermonuclear war, from which the United States itself would not recover. And he's a British agent anyway—it's well-known. But the problem is, we stuck him in there. It should never have happened. It wouldn't have happened if the Bush family hadn't been in there. It was the Bush family's intrusion into the election process, which caused the degeneration which led to all these effects, since the early part of the Twentieth Century.

But that's the situation. So, we do have to mobilize.

We do have also responsibility for developing an economic recovery, which assures a reasonable improvement in the life of people in general. Our job as human beings is not to be a success only in our own life. Our purpose in life is, we know we're going to die sooner or later, all of us—each of us is going to die sooner or later. But what we have to do, is consider what we leave behind us for future generations. And that intention, which is the intention for which any soldier of the United States risks his life, in trying to deal with this issue—they risk their lives for the sake of the future of our people, of our nation, and of the world.

And we need that kind of orientation, and we need it urgently now.

Move Obama Out of the Presidency

Q: A— in Orange County, California. I'm wondering if Mr. LaRouche can tell us what we can do to make the people here, the voters, conducive to the candidacy of Martin O'Malley?

LaRouche: There's a lot we can do. That is, each of us can, those of us who know how to deal with these kinds of problems, in particular, we know exactly what we have to do. We may not define details, but we know in principle. We know, for example, that we must remove Obama from the Presidency—because Obama's on a course of policymaking, which is aiming directly at World War III. That's what's happening.

Look at what Obama's doing with China. Look at what he's doing otherwise. Look what he's done in Northern Africa. Look at what he's done in many cases. Look at what he's done to the American people. Look at what he's done to the health care for the American citizens, and so forth and so on.

This guy should never have been President. He's a disaster. And we've got to have him ushered out of office.

Now, that doesn't mean we just want anybody to replace him. Or our best option may be almost anyone, to get him out of there. But the point is, we need to compose a Presidential campaign, for a Presidential body, which is not just a President, but which is a number of people who have the combined skills, and the abilities otherwise, to make, create a Presidency which will meet the standard which we have not had often, since the Kennedys were killed.

So, this is our situation. We have to pull our citizens to come to understand, that we must move Obama out of the Presidency before he gets that extra margin, which enables him to launch World War III. And I mean, World War III. And with World War III, as launched by Obama, as the trend shows today, there are very few survivors, if any, from the kind of war that Obama is pulling the United States into.

Q: This is F— from Louisiana. Lyn, will you dialogue these effects of regulating the value of money, and of foreign coin, and fixing the standard of weights and measures in the physical economy, which is Article 1 in our Constitution? Will you reflect on that?

The Constitution calls for regulating the value of money, and of foreign coin, and fixing the standard of weights and measures—Article 1 of the Constitution. Lyn, can you discuss that and brief us on how you get the physical economy in balance?

LaRouche: That idea, that concept, that conception is a valid one, but underneath it, there's a more important one. I mean, that's a good example—that's a good starting point for the discussion of that issue. But you have to go to something deeper.

State of the U.S. economy: The scene of the May 12 Amtrak train derailment.

For example, the key thing here is how can we in the United States take this mess we have now—and it is a mess; it's a terrible situation—the situation of the Americans since the Bush Presidency, and now the Obama Presidency, which is much worse. It's destroying the United States, and destroying the rights and so forth of the people. So, we have to get that cleaned up. The first question is: Throw Obama out of office. Because if you don't, you're not going to get anywhere. He's on the road to launching, or provoking the launching, of thermonuclear war, globally, and that would be pretty much the extermination of the human species.

So, the other thing is, what are we going to do, presuming that we keep Obama from destroying the world—what are we going to do to deal with the problems we already have here? The problems of economy, the problems of social care, problems of morality, and so forth. So we have a two-fold problem. We have to deal with a threat, which threatens the extinction of our existence, and at the same time, we have to deal with the problems of ending the injustices which were imposed upon our people.

I know that the solutions for these kinds of problems exist. I know what they are. I've had a lot of history in this thing. I know what it is—we can do it. The question is: Can we muster among our people, among our citizens, can we succeed in mustering a sufficient part of our citizens right now, in order to bring about a forced action, primed by the desire of our citizens, to say "We are not going to war. We are getting tired of this starvation. We don't want to be cheated any more. We don't want the people who have been cheating us to have any more control over us."

That's about the short of it. And that's a good place—if you want to get a bigger discussion of the thing, that's a good place to start.

Q: This is B— with the New York group. I'm a World War II veteran, Mr. LaRouche, and I've got you by a little bit, because I'm 95 years of age. I went over in the third wave of invasion in Europe, and when things kind of quieted down a little bit, I had a one-on-one with General de Gaulle. But what's troubling me now as the tickler, is the people who are poisoning our food. Are you aware of this, and do you have any particular means at your disposal to offset the poisoning of our food?

I'm listening.

LaRouche: Okay. Of course I know about that. There are all kinds of aspects to it. The very fact that we are cheated in our food; the fact we're being deprived of access to nourishment that we need. That's all there. But what we're seeing now is a product of a process that's been going on for a great deal of time.

I, as you did, belonged to the period of World War II. You were obviously serving in World War II, as part of it. We were also serving in the intermediate periods, we were trying to fight against those people who were destroying the rights of our citizens, even then. And in the face of the fact that we had Presidents who got assassinated, and not much was done about that, in curing that problem. We've come to the point that we must be determined, as a group of people, we must be determined to ensure—at your age, of course, it's more important than ever—to be assured that we have secured the kind of situation, the kind of society, which we require for the future of coming generations of our citizens.

Because we're all going to die. The point is, the meaning of life is not dying. The meaning of life is what you can accomplish for the future while you're still alive. And that's my principle. You're a little older than I am, by a significant stretch. But that's where it is.

Water and the Galaxy

Q: This is K— from Silicon Valley in California. Mr. LaRouche, again, thank you for being on the call tonight. It is a real honor to get to speak to you.

I'm asked to help out with donations periodically for the LaRouchePAC and that takes money. My concern is that it seems like money, unfortunately, drives our system entirely. And it discourages me to see our mass media join in with so many who want to demonize China and Russia, and as you said, lead us toward war. What's an effective way to battle that monetarism that just runs the world?

USDA/David Kosling
A dried-up riverbed along Highway 99 near Bakersfield, California--in February 2014.

LaRouche: Well, the problem is—take the case of California. Now some time ago, we had a governor in California [Edmund G. "Pat" Brown, 1959-67] who was a very good governor. But that was some time back, before other people got in there, including the current governor [Jerry Brown]. What they're doing now, is they're proposing that we have to draw down the access to water, which is the water of life, really. And they're saying we have to withdraw that water from the citizens not only of California, but of the states that are in the overall area. So, we're in a struggle right now, a struggle to prevent a systematic mass killing of the citizens of the United States, in particular. That's what's behind what the present governor of California has done publicly. That's why he's opposed publicly.

So therefore, these are the kinds of things that make many people think that maybe there's something wrong in the political process now, inside the United States, not just in California.

Well, there is no reason, no scientific reason, why we have to dry up the resources of water in California. Because there are difficulties, which have to be overcome to deal with the water problem in California. They are serious ones. But there are scientific principles which we could put to work, and develop to put to work, which can address this issue.

The control of water—just to get to the fact of the matter—the control is not based on water on Earth. Yes, water on Earth is a very significant part, of the water available to mankind. But the source of the security of water by humanity, is not located on Earth; it's located in the galaxy. That is, the galactic process is a source. All the problems that we have dealing with the water problem such as in California—how do we use our technology, our skills and technology, to manage some of that water, which is circling around us, and is involved in that area? How do we get into moving it into areas where the water that we need on Earth is actually prompted to come down?

If we address that problem, which is a problem which does lend itself to solutions—if we do that, it requires a higher level of technology—but we can do it. The galactic system is also reflected by the system of Earth anyway. So, that's where we are.

We are threatened from our own government, inside the United States, at present, which is depriving our citizens of the means of having sufficient water to maintain the existing population of our nation. And we should take that exemplary case, and let that be the root of our motivation, to fix some of the things that need to be fixed.

Shut Down Wall Street

Q: This is E— in Los Angeles. Mr. LaRouche, it is an honor and a privilege to be talking with you this evening. Two weeks ago, a lady called in and asked you about ISIS and how to defeat it militarily, and you referenced her to the Congress, which, of course, there's no doubt there; they're all ready to send weapons to these terrorists. But isn't ISIS actually, in fact, a front for the Western oligarchy, as we've seen in Libya, and are, as a matter of fact, currently seeing in Syria? So, ultimately, even a creation of British-America and British-Arabia, and even the 51st state of Israel, to squelch resistance in the Middle East, and put them under the boot of the Empire?

creative commons
The New York Stock Exchange on Wall Street, New York City.

LaRouche: I would say that Israel is not the major problem. You've got some bad choices of leaders in Israel, but if you understand the history of Israel, in its modern game, you understand some of these things, and you find that most of the Israeli population is not evil, though some people in that orbit may be evil in terms of the consequences of what they do.

But that's not the issue. The issue is simply: The British Empire, the British Royal Empire, which is the Mother of the Saudi Kingdom, and related things. These terrible things, including the role of the British royal family—which is an evil force—these are the things we have to free mankind from. And if we get rid of the various crooks in our own nest, and deal with the problem of the British Empire and deal with some other things of that nature, we find that the world at large, in terms of the general population of the planet, is trying to move in a direction which is nobler than anything we've experienced for a long period of time.

You look at what's happened in China. You look at what's happening in India right now. You look at what's happening in certain other parts of the world. And you see that the nations are struggling to bring themselves into a state of betterment, of self-government and government in general, which is good. It may not be perfect, but it's good, and it's going in the right direction.

Actually, the greatest part of the population of the planet, is actually pushing for a good situation of relations among states and peoples. So that's there.

Our problem is: We, in the United States, as well as what we have to do with the nations of Europe and so forth—what we have to do is we have to get rid of Wall Street. That's the first thing we have to do. Don't you know that? Look, Wall Street is bankrupt, totally bankrupt. But nobody will let it get shut down, because it's protected by the Wall Street interests.

Now, if we would shut down Wall Street, because it is a fraud, because it is worthless, we would find—and if we turned our policies back to what they were, say, 50 years ago, we would very rapidly move in a positive direction, for life in general, and for conditions of life.

So, I think that's the way you have to look at it. On the one hand we know that the evil is there, the problem is there. But we also know the majority of the planet, in terms of national forces, is actually aiming for common good things to happen. They may not always agree with each other, but they are trying to move in that direction. And what we want to do is get the United States free of Obama, and free of what he represents—the Bushes, for example. Get rid of that. And by that means, we can turn the United States population into an effective force to free us from the problems that curse us from within at this time.

We Don't Have a Jewish Problem

Q: My name is D—. I'm in Indianapolis. What I wanted to ask you about is Israel. As I see it, you give Israel a break that you do not give to the Saudis. You've been asking for the 28 pages, and I'm behind you on that. But I think you had the dancing Israelis, you had the dual citizenship Israeli-Americans in Congress, and the Administration. I think that you've given Israel a break, and not attributed their responsibility to what's happening in the world today.

LaRouche: There's a fact here, and I know the fact very well, because, you know, I've been around all over the world, back and forth, a few times around. And I also know what goes on in our country.

I also understand the whole anti-Semitic stuff in the United States. I've lived since a youth with that issue. And people would say I was Jewish. Well, I'm not Jewish, but they thought I was, because I wasn't on this other side.

But you know, we don't have a Jewish problem, not really. That doesn't exist. You may have isolated cases, people who are gangster-inclined, and so forth, but that's not the general thing. The Jewish population is actually very close to what's called the Christian population. There's not that much difference. There's difference in terms of bad face, bad things, bad behavior, but in general, in the history of Jewry in the United States, and in parts of Europe, plus the Hitler nonsense, and also some French nonsense, and some Italian nonsense—the French nonsense, in particular.

But there was no problem like that, no systemic problem. There are special conditions which are induced by pressures of various kinds, and they produce hateful attitudes of those who feel they're victimized and those who feel they want to victimize somebody else. So, it's not really that kind of a problem.

If we have a United States which is functioning as it should, without Wall Street—eliminate Wall Street! That's the key to a lot or problems. And again, you talk about normal people, normal people with Jewish religious backgrounds and so forth—you don't really have much of a problem. No more problem than with any next-door neighbor you have.

So, the very idea that we have to have an anti-Semitic, or a counter-anti-Semitic thing, is not really a legitimate issue. Because the issue is something which reflects a part of what should not have occurred, which did occur. And that's the way to look at it. But there's no reason to say there's any systemic, justified conflict between Jews and Christians, for example.

Ascher: I say "Mazel tov" to that, Lyn. So, here's the next person up.

The Common Interests of Nations

Q: This is B— from Washington. Where do I start? Well, I signed the BRICS petition, and if everybody did that, that might change Wall Street, right? Yeah, and I'm going to go get some cattle prods and hand them out down there in Washington, D.C., and get the Congress people to get off their ass, and stand up and impeach Obama. That's all I've got to say.

LaRouche: Let me say one thing in response to that. We have two cases now of people who, along with O'Malley, are ready to move, to create an election process for the United States, to create a new composition of our center of government, and if we do that, and get away without thermonuclear war in the meantime, I think that we have entered a new period.

For example, let's look at South America, or most of South America. What I know is going on in South America is a very beautiful change for the better. Similarly, we see what's happening in China. What's happening in China is essentially, from the standpoint of statecraft, beautiful. What's happening in Russia is actually quite beautiful. And Russia has a legacy of capability, in engineering, science, and so forth, which is very important. You have also, in other parts of Europe, where they have bad conditions now, those conditions can be cured.

Remember: Spain, Portugal, France also, and especially Italy, have been abused. They've been suppressed. They've been reduced to poverty, to a great degree, and a very serious degree of repression. And therefore, all we have to do is change our attitude sometimes, and recognize that what's going on is, bad conditions globally, and not those conditions which are desired by the populations more generally. And we have to operate from that standpoint.

Russian Ministry of Defense/Antov Blinov
One of the many Russian surprise combat exercises held recently. This one was in the Kaliningrad region March 20, 2015.

We've got to a point now, where we cannot fight general warfare any more. General warfare in its present stage of technology would be the extermination of the human species. What we're confronted with at this time, is that if Obama is not removed from the Presidency, if he's not kicked out of office, the danger is that he is moving rapidly for causing a global thermonuclear war, a war which could lead, probably, to the extermination of the human species.

So our objective is not to say, how can we win wars? Any competent general officer in the United States, and in similar nations, knows that. So why are we toying with this junk? Why are we playing this game? Because of a few Nazis, like those in Ukraine? They're really not most of the Ukrainian people, but most of the Ukrainian people are under the control of a Nazi party inside Ukraine.

So, if we deal with these problems, and threats of warfare, and get nations to recognize what the greatest injustices are that are going on right now, we have a reason to bring nations to recognize that they have a common interest. They may have different ways of functioning, somewhat different objectives. But we know that the interest of those nations, those peoples—their interest is to benefit from the kinds of options which should be made available to them right now. And that's us too. So, it's in our common interest, to share our common interest with some other people in other nations.

Q: I want to ask Mr. LaRouche a question: How can we do this? You need the political party to listen to the voters. They seem to have a mind of their own, and we understand that they actually have a different agenda. How can we get Mr. Obama out of office, or do we have to wait until his term ends?

LaRouche: No, you don't! The way his term ends—because his end will be your end, and you don't want that!

No, we've got to get this guy out of there, and it can be done. The O'Malley campaign for President, right now, which is coming into focus, with some other things which are related to that, there is a movement of resistance against what Obama represents, and what some of the worst Republicans represent; also at the same time, the opportunists, that sort of thing. So we have the reason to wish and to act to free ourselves of these diseases: We must do it! We can do it! We simply have to put our minds to it, and we'll find we can do it. I know we can do it: I get a good smell, for this kind of thing.

The Right To Be Free of Tyranny

Q: This is B— in L.A. My question for LaRouche—and how are you, sir?

LaRouche: I'm old and happy.

Q: My question would be that the situation seems to be generating in people a quality of retreat, and you stated lately about this—how do we snap people out of this? Obviously, the conditions by which we are getting people out of this, would be to take on the beauty inside people's souls in order for them to see what has to be done, in order to get rid of this evil. So my question to you is, under these conditions, what would be the conditions by which humanity will actually save themselves away from this existential threat?

LaRouche: What do you think, for example, that the typical person, often deprived, especially broadly, nationally here—deprived, intimidated, beaten, so forth, demoralized, what do you think that that all-so-typical citizen throughout our United States—don't you think those citizens would like to be free? Would like to escape from the kind of tyranny which Wall Street, for example, represents? Why do you think so many people in the United States are poor? Because Wall Street does it! Wall Street has gained the power to come in and rob you, and rob the nation generally, of everything.

If you look at what happened over the course of the Twentieth Century, into the present period now, here, you see the people of the United States have actually been deprived, increasingly, as a whole, over the entire period since the Twentieth Century began. Don't you think that those Americans, if they're not tortured into some kind of obscenity, would like to have a decent life? Don't you think that parents would wish they could have decent children, who can live and be successful? Don't you think that people with hunger, who are being robbed and suppressed, would not like to be freed of that?

The problem is, we who have the spark and experience, must encourage our fellow citizens to join together with us, to bring about the action, the political action which throws the tyrants out of their pews!

Q: This is K— in Moline, Illinois. President Obama's mother and maternal grandparents worked for the CIA, and that's been covered up because they don't want the people to know that he has any connection like that to the CIA.

LaRouche: We're aware that there's a certain truth to that. When you look at it on the facts of the case, as presented normally, that's a very simple way of look at what the abuse is that people are suffering, actually suffering.

The problem is, we have to look at the other side. We have to concentrate on what the measures are which are available to our hand, to change that. It's when people submit to oppression, that oppression takes over a nation, and if you don't have a certain kind of insolence, about people being pushed around, then you give in, you give in to tyranny. And I've been a stubborn cuss, and I can say, fairly without any exaggeration, that I've always been on that side, the side that the people in general have a right to be independent of tyranny.

But I would say also, that the tyranny applied to our people, in terms of bad education, bad job opportunities, everything you want to talk about, every kind of deterioration and fraud that's been happening to our people, we let it happen. And I think the time has come—I've been at this a long time—I've been fighting this fight for a long time, but we're on the edge of an option of winning. And the time to win, to muster ourselves, and to go out into the election campaign theater, and get a new President in place, now, I think we can do it! Because Wall Street is bankrupt. Wall Street is bankrupt: It has no value.

Take the case of what's going on in Europe. Throughout Europe, generally: Europe is bankrupt! The British Empire is bankrupt! That is, all the swindlers are implicitly, thus bankrupt.

The starting point of the middle route of China's South-North Water Diversion Project, one of the beautiful projects transforming that nation.

But, on the other hand, there are technologies which exist, which are available—you've seen what's happening in China, what's happening in India, despite the problems they have now with the weather system; but we're seeing in South America, we're seeing elsewhere. We see that in the world, there is a virtual majority of the population of the planet, they're ready! They're oriented in that direction! All we have to do, is join with them, around the same issue. We must create a better world for the human beings who inhabit it. That's the simple version of what we must do. The time has come to do it.

Now, I think on the case of O'Malley and what is associated with him,—I think there's a potential coming out, right now, at us, in which we have reached the point, which O'Malley expresses, and he expresses it adequately, because he has a history which fits this story: That if we move, now, on the basis of saying we're going to get a better system of government, that is a new institution of government, which is better than this crap we've been subjected to for the past eight years; and if we do that, we are on the road to a new, and better world, than we have known in a very long time.

The True Purpose of Human Life

Q: Hello this is W— in Virginia. You know, all these people still wondering what ISIS is, and this is just short comment before my question. But you might have them understand who ISIS is, if they understood what the dynamics behind the Confederacy were.

My question is around the continuing development—the genesis of the effort to get the release of the 28 pages, which actually goes back to when Mr. LaRouche was on a talk radio show the day that the 9/11 attacks occurred, when he exposed the cause of what was really behind the attacks. And I was just wondering if he could comment on the relevancy of the most recent press conference to release the 28 pages—if that really reflects a more developed understanding as to what's really behind this, and how it can actually accomplish getting Obama out of office?

LaRouche: I can use a military example. From my observation of warfare, and what its effects are—that there are two things that you can do when you're going to war: One is to run away, and the other is to charge ahead! But don't charge foolishly, but rather deploy yourself with such a force that you actually have a chance at victory!

But victory lies in the attitude largely of the soldier, and those around them; the courage to realize what the thing is that should be done, that must be done, and that it can be done. And that's where we are now. We're at that point: Can we as citizens of the United States, in this United States, these citizens here, can they capture a memory of the courage of the United States in fighting deadly wars, such as World War I and World War II? Can we cope with that? Can we cope with that effort? Can we act accordingly? Can we lay down our lives at risk in order to ensure that the future of mankind, of our people, will be secured, and better, because we took the chance to win that battle? That's the question.

To me, it's a rather obvious one, because I have an attitude about life and death. I'm not a person who wants to die. I'm just willing to think much about it. I had a few occasions to think something about that; but it was never really a big thing for me. My concern was the shame of not doing the thing that you knew you had to do. That's still my policy. I will not give in, to betray, what I know my responsibility is. And, if we get more people doing that, and who can be encouraged to do that—we have within us, the power of victory.

Q: First of all, it's an honor to be speaking with you gentlemen. My name is J—, and I'm a U.S. soldier, and resident of California. My question is, how can I support and educate others in my job field, about the goals of the LaRouchePAC, without opposing my boss, the President? And, how can I show people that are rather ignorant, that this is actually for America, not against America? And that things like the BRICS nations can be an absolute economic blessing to us, if we let it be?

LaRouche: Now, look, we are individuals. We have, particularly in the United States, those of us who have some decent kind of education, especially some knowledge of some history of our nation, and therefore, we're not fools who have to sit there and be "impressed" by a tyranny or tyrannical attitudes. We don't have to! Sometimes, you get yourself nearly killed, or even actually killed, because you're resisting evil.

Ken Thomas
The Tomb of the Unknown Revolutionary Soldier in Washington Square, Philadelphia, featuring a replica of Jean-Antoine Houdon's famous sculpture of President Washington.

But what's the point? The point is: The purpose of human life, the true purpose of a human life, is, don't waste your existence. Which means, if you're putting your life in danger, because you think you have to, for the sake of mankind, you will try to minimize the danger, but you won't back off. You may go sideways, and try to outflank the guy who's out to kill you, but you don't give in like a coward. You don't cringe and collapse!

Because human life is not a permanent thing. Everyone, who, so far as we know—we've heard about Methuselah, but I haven't got the score there; I don't know if those dates are actually true! But the point is, mankind dies; dies within their generation. And yet, they have done great things, in effect, for the next generations; many of them have! So, what's wrong with death, if it comes honorably?

Don't take your own life. Suicide is not an option! There may be a case, where it's an option, but generally suicide is not an option. Cowardice is not an option. Mankind must do the best they can, each, to realize the meaning of the future of humanity. We live, for the future of our human species. We live, in order to hope that we've achieved a better future for our successors, than we had for ourselves. And, that's our mission in life. There's no room for cowardice in human life, but to live in such a way that whatever happens to you, or people like you, that thing must come out, as a plus for the next generation.

A Better Future for Those Who Follow

Q: This is K—from Massachusetts. You just asked a question, Mr. LaRouche: "Can we make a better future for the next generations?" It's not a case of "can we?" It's a case of "we have to." We must do it. We must fight to make the future better for the next generations.

LaRouche: Absolutely! Absolutely! The question is, how do we do that? That's the issue: How do we do it?

Well, first of all, look at what we've got. I like to pick on this thing, because I know about it, and we've been doing it, in my group of people, who are working on this thing. We have focused on the fact that the source of water, the supply of water, for the needs of mankind, is not located primarily on Earth. It's located in the galaxy. Now, the challenge, in that respect, is that, how do we manage and control the galaxy? Or, induce the galaxy to help us, in supplying what we need, for example, as water. And, there are techniques which can be applied to induce that effect. Those techniques are known in some degree, but they're not fully enriched. That is, they're not fully understood. But we know it's true.

The greatest source of water for man's requirements, is located in the galaxy, not on Earth. There's a large amount of water on Earth, but that amount of water, is not necessarily adequate, to meet the requirements of mankind's residence on Earth. However, we have access to scientific understandings, which will enable us to understand how we can improve our access to the use of water, for man's purposes.

Q: I believe in your mission, to make a better future, for those who follow us. But I believe that to do this, we need to know, love, and serve, our Creator, who is God. Then He will help us in our goals to be achieved that you have been discussing.

Currently, America has turned against God, as exemplified by legalized abortion, where we have killed more than a 100 million unborn children, and now, it's gotten to where we may have legalized same-sex marriage. And I think you all know what happened to those, in the Old Testament, in Sodom and Gomorrah. It was totally destroyed.

Okay, so, we now have Obama. It's a possibility that he is being used by God, as a punishment to us.

LaRouche: I don't think God does that. That's not the way it works. What works is the fact that mankind becomes an agent of Satan; that's a better way of putting it, and we don't want people to become Satanic. Because, when you're talking about these kinds of things, you're really talking about things that border on the Satanic: I mean, abuse of people, unjust imprisonment, all these kinds of things. These are wrongs. They're wrongs against humanity. And when humanity does those wrongs, then humanity is guilty of a crime. And that's the way to look at it.

The best way we always try to deal with things, should be that we try to induce our fellow human beings, to abandon things that are inherently destructive. And that's as far as we really want to go. If we find the person who is a criminal, who can't be controlled, who's going to kill people, or do other serious damages, well, it's perfectly lawful to put them under restraint. Not to abuse them, but to put them under restraint. Try to induce them to change their ways. That's real.

“But, above all, we concentrate on the children. We have to care for our children.”--Lyndon LaRouche. Here, a performance by the Boston Children's Chorus at a local library.

And the best thing is, you know, if you're clever enough, you often can induce people, who would otherwise tend to become criminals, by simply discouraging them from criminality, because you provide them an idea, an image, of what they're doing as being evil. And the fact that they recognize that as being evil, or something equivalent to evil, can be an inducement to people, to get rid of their dirty habits. And we try and do that as much as possible.

But, above all, we concentrate on the children. We have to care for our children. We have to ensure that they're guided safely, before they reach the age of judgment. And that's the important thing. We have to force that through, in the sense of encouraging it. We have to educate students, children. We have to educate them. If they're educated to understand what the world is made of, they won't be stupid. But if we don't educate them, they're likely to become stupid. If they become stupid, they may become criminal.

So, it's in that nature. We, as society, are responsible, to do everything we can, to ensure that our people do not become criminals. That our people, not only do not become criminals, but they realize something good in themselves, which can be brought out in them, with some help.

A New Presidency

Q: This is F— calling from East Orange, New Jersey. How are you, Mr. LaRouche? I met you a couple of years ago.

What I'm wondering—you may have partially answered my question, regarding education of youth, because I'm sure you've seen, down in Newark, the children in the high school have walked out, because they feel as if—because the state of New Jersey is monitoring the educational system. And in Newark and a good many urban areas here in New Jersey, the children are dissatisfied with the type of education that they're getting.

And, my question is, how do we get a handle on that, where we can see that the educational system throughout the country is improved? Where children feel that they are not being neglected? And then also, to stem this gang warfare that we see going on with children. And to prevent another Ferguson, and another Baltimore? Thank you.

LaRouche: All right. Well, let's say that we have O'Malley becoming President, or in the process of becoming President. Now, what would that mean? That would mean that the school system, which has become a travesty, an abomination—this has been going on for a very significant time, two generations, and actually more. It was going bad even during the time I was a student in school. It was bad then. But that was "sweet times" compared to what we've been getting in the past couple of generations; or as we call them, de-generations.

And therefore, what's happened to students; what's happened to the school system; what's happened to "culture in the street," is a destruction of the very souls of the human individuals, the young ones. And that means degeneration of the older ones, as a result.

Therefore, if we're going to have a new President—a new Presidency—under a competent President, as opposed to the—you know what I mean, the kind of people I mean: the Bush people. If we're going to do that, then we're going to reverse the trend toward degeneration in the members of our children and adolescents, and so forth. We are going to change the way in which people are employed, something more fitting for human beings.

And I think that, you know, O'Malley, by virtue of, as much as I know about him, would be the kind of President you might want to have, for those reasons.

Ascher: Well, Lyn, I think we're getting right up to the point we had discussed; we've covered tremendous amount of ground here, this evening. You want to give a summary, or shall we take another call?

LaRouche: Well, take another call, and see what happens.

Q: Hi, this is B—. I'm from Houston currently, but I met Lyndon back in 1975-1976. And I like to hear Lyndon on these calls; it's great! Direct from the horse's mouth!

I just wanted to say, I got an e-mail today from [Rep.] Beto O'Rourke, in response to a query that I sent to him about H.Res.14, and he said he read the 28 pages, and he's going to co-sponsor H.Res.14. So, he's the Congressman from El Paso.

LaRouche: That's great. Good effort.

Ascher: Lyn, we're at an hour and a half, I think would an appropriate time to get a summary from you, so people can get some more sense of where we should go between here and our next call.

LaRouche: Well, I think the O'Malley case—I'm not going to say conclusively that O'Malley is the solution. What I say is that what I'm looking at, in him, is a very credible case for a good choice, as President. I don't know the last answer. But I know that right now, that among all the options I see out there, in the election process, that he is probably the man we want.

Martin O'Malley at his May 30 announcement of his candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination for President.

But I would also say, as I've said before on earlier occasions, the important thing here, is not just a President. The important thing here is to assemble a group of leaders in the Presidency, as the Presidency system. And we have to get a composition of members of that team, which by its very nature is the kind of agency which should be responsible for the agency of our government at this time. That's what's important.

And I think O'Malley, so far, you can say faithfully, that compared with the, shall we say, not so good people, who are also running for President, that he stands out as being a favorable choice. But to meet that requirement, we're going to have to see in him, a justified assessment of a man qualified to move into the actual procedure of becoming President.

[1] See "Bill To Declassify 28 Pages Now in the U.S. Senate."

Subscribe to EIW