|
|
Manhattan Town Hall event with Lyndon LaRouche
16 August 2016
TRANSCRIPT DENNIS SPEED: My name is Dennis Speed and on behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee I’d like to welcome everybody here today, for our Aug. 13th dialogue with Lyndon LaRouche. I think most of you here have received a copy of broadsheet The Hamiltonian, and we’re fully in business now as a very active force in Manhattan. I had a chance to talk with Lyn a little bit beforehand, and he was very emphatic that we seem to be on our way here in Manhattan to doing what he’s wanted us to do. So, Lyn, I’d like for you to give us some opening remarks, and then we’ll go right into questions and answers. LYNDON LAROUCHE: Well, we’re in a situation now where everything that’s wrong in the United States has to be corrected. It’s that simple. But now we find that there are certain numbers among the members of this organization, that they are working on trying to solve these problems. What I can do is not to solve these problems as such, but perhaps to guide some of our members here and elsewhere to get a better grip on what they can do to change the situation in the United States and beyond. SPEED: Good! So, we’ll go right into questions and answers. You’re going to get several reports today from various of us who have been doing some things. Q: [Elliot Greenspan] Dennis just referenced a phone discussion; Dennis, Diane, nd I were on with Lyn and Helga about an hour ago. And we received a report from Jeff Steinberg on a new book that has just come out by Jack Matlock. Matlock was the U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union during the Reagan period. Matlock is presently a leading figure in this new American Committee for East/West Accord; which has been increasing working to prevent the new Cold War, as they put it, from becoming nuclear war. Matlock’s [2004] book is called Reagan and Gorbachev: How the Cold War Ended. In very brief summary, what he emphasizes is that the Cold War could have been ended much sooner had Gorbachev not been paranoid and accepted the offer from Reagan of the Strategic Defense Initiative. That Reagan all along had intended that this be a joint program of the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Gorbachev — according to Matlock, who was an eyewitness — did not believe that the U.S. was willing to share the technology; and therefore, Gorbachev rejected it. Now for people in the audience who do not know, Lyndon LaRouche was the author of that Strategic Defense Initiative — SDI. I think this is just a fascinating area of history, but I really wanted, Lyn, you to elaborate on what happened back then, on your role and on your role presently as it’s shaping a certain potential for Matlock and others to intervene to stop this war. LAROUCHE: Well, my career here, comes especially out of what I did of my job in an organization of the Reagan administration. So therefore, I had a number of jobs. I organized a lot of the military protection which was threatening us. But what happened in the course of this was that we had a force in the United States which is working for British interests inside the United States, to prevent what was intended to be the package for getting peace for the President of the United States. He struggled hard to realize that, and his efforts were impeded. And I was also put in jail, in order to try to get me to do something on this, and I refused. But that’s the way it worked; it was that kind of simple. You had the FBI, you had the wrong sides of the political screen, who were all on our wrong side and that’s what happened. And we are still on the wrong side, with Obama; that’s about as Obama as you can get. Q: [Bill Roberts] Hi, Lyn. I’ve been asked to try to describe a process which is underway now, as the Manhattan choral process expands into the outer boroughs with the process of organizing for the series of concerts that are taking place, the Living Memorial for 9/11. This is intersecting — you could call it an ecumenical process is taking place; I think it’s a reflection of the way in which the Westphalian principle throughout the world is finding its way into New York, really, and intersecting this process of the Manhattan choral principle expanding outward. I can just give a few examples. We were in an Irish neighborhood in the Bronx, telling people that we had been the ones who had organized this concert commemorating the 50th anniversary of the family’s concert held in honor of John F Kennedy; where the Irish President sent a message; and it’s with that same spirit that we are organizing this concert in the Bronx. We were in the Italian neighborhood, and a shoe salesman — shop owners whose children have been trained in Classical music — wants us to start a community chorus; and want us to use the church in the neighborhood in the Bronx. I think the Bronx feels a little bit under-appreciated as a borough, and likes what we’re doing there. We also had a meeting with the board of a certain mosque; and this was interesting because it was in the aftermath of this priest being killed in France. There was a deliberate decision that was made by the Pope that the service that was going to be held to honor this priest, was going to include a large number of Muslims. And about a third of the audience there, of the 15,000 people, were very visibly Muslims. There was very explicitly this Abraham Lincoln sort of idea of "with malice towards none". These are people who immediately respond to the idea of what we are doing with the Living Memorial of 9/11 in honor of all the victims of those attacks and their aftermath, and the process of wars and terrorism that have come as a process of the cover-up of how that was organized. So, they would like to help us. A number of the churches, a number of the mosques would very much like to help us organize this event as an intervention. Of course, several weeks ago, just as another example of this, for the first time at a Puerto Rican cultural center, instead of the usual sort of music that they put on, we had a Classical musical concert in this Latino center. So, maybe you just want to comment, because there’s a sort of process now underway which is a little bit hard to describe; but it is intersecting these different communities, who see the intervention that we’re making as very important for their communities and for their young people. LAROUCHE: Well, I don’t want to distract from those concerns; but if you want to get at the core of the United States and its effective leadership, you have to go back to Alexander Hamilton. Now, there are a lot of people who would follow Alexander Hamilton in certain suggestions; but they do not understand the effect and importance of Alexander Hamilton’s expression. Without Alexander Hamilton’s tradition, you could not have a solution for any of these problems; that’s the thing you’ve got to look at. And you’ve got to look at what it’s going to take, to bring forth in the United States from them and their souls as such, to understand what Alexander Hamilton represents for the history of the United States and of the world. Q: Hello, Mr. LaRouche. My question is towards 9/11 and the victims from the attack and the aftermath. I had an uncle who was not there that day, but he worked for the building and he was part of the clean-up; and he just passed recently. I’m reading more and more about people that are still dying; I just lost an uncle, and I’m reading more and more victims are still dying to this day. Even though the reports from the 28 pages are just starting to surface, we’re not getting justice; we’re not coming to the light of what really happened. We’re trying to strive for the truth of it, we’re trying to bring justice; but the criminals who did that terrible act that day and put into action What can we do more to bring justice...? LAROUCHE: Yes; the first thing you’ve got to do is go back; and you’ve got to go back to Alexander Hamilton. Again, the Hamilton tradition of the United States is the key to the survival of the United States; without that, you don’t get a survival. Now, what’s the issue here? The issue is that essentially Obama is an enemy of what was represented by Alexander Hamilton, and in spades. Therefore, you’ve got to look for solutions and not for symbols. In other words, a symbolic gesture is not a success intrinsically. So you’ve got to look at where’s the generation of this. Now, I’ve observed actively in a photographic process of what went on in 9/11. I went through every page of 9/11 as it was being presented as the people who were being thrown out of the buildings from which they were burned. So therefore, the question is, how do you solve that problem? And what’s the answer? The answer is, again, Alexander Hamilton. The answer inclusively is the members of the Congress who have allowed the alleged legitimacy of the practices of the members of the Congress and of other people who shared those opinions. Without getting at the combination of Alexander Hamilton’s role and his personal sacrifice, to create and develop this nation, you would not have had a U.S. nation; it wouldn’t have happened. And everything that has hit us — and I’ve also gone through this — I watched what was happening with the towers; it was photographic, but it was active. I was photographing it by that point; I saw what happened, step by step. From Boston to Washington, and to the present premises. So, you’ve got to go to attack the problem by the name of the cause of the problem, and how you can bring a solution to that problem, by identifying precisely what has to be stopped; I’m saying, should have been stopped. Q: Hello, Mr. LaRouche; it’s Howard from New York. We’ve been able to do some campaigning this week, we’ve been getting these out — The Hamiltonian newspaper — in Manhattan on the role of Hillary Clinton as a stooge of Obama and the war drive. We’re still dealing in the back of our head that we are having an election for President; somebody of some sort has to become the President of the United States in January 2017. What are we supposed to think when we hear the rather poor campaign, the rather defective campaign of Donald Trump say that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama founded ISIS, the terrorist organization? Is there something real here, with him saying this, or is this just whatever? LAROUCHE: This is the problem of the citizens of the United States, who have not agreed to do what they should have done. That’s the problem. The cowardice of the citizens of the United States is the problem. Now, what is the cause of the problem? How does the problem work? The problem works that popular opinion, or a certain section of popular opinion, is now saying you have to respect, you have to give them a chance, you have to give them an option, you have to give them an explanation. All this has been done; and it did no damned good at all. It’s still not being enough good. The Hamilton principle is the recipe; and get that Hamilton principle in mind. Look at Hamilton’s mind from inside his mind; look at it from the beginning of his rise to power and influence in Philadelphia, and what he did in the whole process of developing the United States. This man, Alexander Hamilton, is the hard core of the continued existence of the United States. If you don’t get at that issue, you’re going to fail because you haven’t got a weapon which is effective enough to do the job you want to do. Q: [follow-up] Just one follow-up. I know that the Russians have been very vocal about this, but do you have anything to add on to what we can do about the phenomenon ongoing of ISIS and international terrorism? LAROUCHE: I can tell you what’s going. It’s largely Putin; Putin has built up a very respectable organization which now occupies much of our entire planet! He has pulled together groups of nations which are the most respected, in general, and the most efficient, and the ones which are most likely to cure the problem. That’s what the problem is. It’s when people say, "Well, yes, but; yes, but; yes, but." "You can’t talk about our President right now," because what is our President? Our President is a substitute for Satan. What do you want? You got him! Some of these people are trying to get him in there again; and you find that most of the people in the Congress are corrupt — terribly corrupt. The leading candidates are terribly corrupt; so you’re going to worry about which candidate you’re going to elect? When you know that all the candidates, chiefly, that you’re talking about are specimens of evil! That in one way or the other, they reject their responsibilities as human beings for this process. So, we’ve got to get at the source of the problem; not trying to find a solution for the problem. Find the source of the problem, and bring about a removal of the source of the problem. Q: Lyn, I know you’re right in the middle; or almost. But this week we had this major turnaround between Putin and Erdogan of Turkey, where they met; and I’m thinking about Hamilton in terms of the reflection that we see in Putin’s personality and his action. Because we very nearly had a World War III last year, on the basis of the Turkish action on behalf of Obama, to shoot down the Russian airplane. And yet, here we are, less than a year later actually, and in resolving this crisis, Putin has made agreements on the Turkish Stream Pipeline that Turkey is going to pay half of it and I believe Russia is going to pay the other half; new nuclear power plants being planned in Turkey. And even the cooperation in Syria is on the agenda in a very serious way. It reminds me of the Hamiltonian idea of the Erie Canal; that you have to actually change the strategic situation period, the context of strategy, if you’re going to win a victory over empire. That was a method that we saw demonstrated this week by Putin, which was exciting, inspiring, surprising. So, I wonder if you can comment on that? LAROUCHE: I was not at all surprised about what happened the past week; I knew it was coming. I affirmed the fact that I knew it was coming. What did he do? What did he incorporate? Putin’s influence is not only Russia, it’s other parts of the whole Asiatic area is loaded with it. Putin is already the working President of a new universe. He hasn’t gotten any other people to do the job for him, but he’s the one figure who is doing the best job right now. What you have is, you have a bunch of people in the United States who ruined themselves and ruined the nation by condoning things that they shouldn’t condone; that they are actually promoting as destruction. What we need to do is get Obama thrown out of existence, out of his office; get similar types of creeps out. Push them out fast! Get together people who will sum up to an affirmation of the memory of our great leader, Alexander Hamilton. That’s the way to do it; go for victory. Now, he was killed by a British agent; and people in the system condoned his assassination. And that’s a fact we should remember. Let me just add one thing here. Putin was as a child of a family of Russians who were fighting the Nazis as such. He, in the course of his life, developed a very strong and efficient understanding of what has to be done to protect humanity against evil; evil like Chechens, for example. The Chechens are your typical evil ones of this time. So, what he did — and I followed him; I didn’t actually meet him personally, but I followed him in great detail during major parts of his career. I understood what he was doing, and I understood the effect of what he was doing. So, you’re getting an Alexander Hamilton similarity for Russia; not only Russia, but for Asia! For all of Asia, practically. That’s a pretty big item. Therefore, what we have to do is understand, what’s wrong with us, that we believe in the kinds of ideas which condone in us, ideas which are stupid? That’s where the problem lies. We have to get the act of our people cleaned up. Don’t go around and say [whining], "Well, that’s not too bad." It stinks buddy, and let’s get rid of it. Q: [follow-up] If I could follow up, Lyn. This week there was also this horrible, incredibly stupid and evil interview between Charlie Rose and Mike Morrell, who was formerly Acting Director of the CIA. In which there’s really an exchange whereby Morrell says we need to make the Russians and the Iranians pay a price; and Charlie Rose says, do you mean by killing them? And Morrell jumps at it and he says, "Yes! Absolutely!" and he’s got this Cheney grin on his face. But this made me really angry, and I’m sure it made a lot of other people angry, too. But my question is, will there be a kickback against the fact that there’s such a bald desire for war? Should we be thinking in those terms? Or is it really — LAROUCHE: Forget about war as such. We don’t want to have a war! And we want to stop anybody who wants to have a war, and stop them. That’s what Putin did. All the idiots of the trans-Atlantic order, have believed that Putin is a second-hand or third-hand creature. Now, he’s the leader, the master, of the whole thing; including his strong alliance with China, with India, and Japan, and so forth and so on. This is the kind of situation which we have to deal with on that basis. And we have to realize that we’re hopeful that what would be done by Putin would come forth. I think it is going to come forth; I think it is coming forth. Look at India, for example; look at the areas that have been absorbed in that way. So therefore what Putin represents is not something we have to go out and have a flag about this thing, flag about him. But we have to recognize explicitly what Putin’s role is; and what his role should be, despite the fact that he’s not a U.S. citizen. Q: [Joseph Stalleicher, Germany] Hello, Lyn. Greetings from Manhattan! I gladly received The Hamiltonian and my question is, as a continuation of the debate that we have here about Putin: What is the aspect of Bismarck in this connection, because it reminds me a lot of the work Bismarck did in Europe to create a situation of a long duration of peace between East and West and every country in Europe. The question is how we can enforce this debate? In Germany, for instance, we have Steinmeier, we have other people who want to work with Russia. How can we put this Bismarck emphasis into this debate? LAROUCHE: What’s needed in collaboration, not dictation, and not imposition of any kind. But what you have to do is examine what Putin has been doing. Now, I have a certain substantial experience with Putin. I never really spoke to him directly, is the funny thing. But I was in the same battle that he was in, from a different card, all through most of his career, either passively or actively, but always very actively, because I knew what he is; I understood him. I don’t know everything about him. I haven’t talked to him, obviously, directly, but I do know what his history is; how he dealt with the Chechen’s for example. Now, the Chechen thing is still going on, but Putin has created a mechanism to deal with one of the most evil forces in the planet, the Chechens, who are chronic evil persons. I had a photograph which I produced, of the Chechen marches against Russia, and these were things that I did. And I shared these kinds of things and experiences with Putin indirectly — I never spoke to him directly, but I was on the same course he was on, on the same thing for Russia. And now, what he’s done, in his history, is that he has recognized the way to deal with the way in which the Nazis en masse killed many of his family, and many Russians as well. And so therefore, it’s not vengeance as such, or things like that, it’s the fact that we all have to take, as I did in my support of Putin; that is, I was not one of his workers, I was not one of his representatives; but I was one of his leading supporters in a certain moment of his history. And so what people should have to do, is do the things that are the good things, which make the good manifest, among the people. And wherever you go along in life, wherever you have a chance to do good, do good. Q: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche. It’s Patrick from Connecticut. I missed our talks, I’m happy to see you. Last week I tried something new; I always have a different strategy and it was Wednesday or Thursday, I finally got this group of activists put together; there’s five of us. And for the first half-hour, 45 minutes, I explained about the 9/11, the 28 pages, and then the Four Laws. And they understood what we were supposed to do: It’s the petition to get signature. And I think we went to about 15 houses and we got about 22 signatures. And not only that, for two of the pamphlets we got donations from, for the older ones, the orange ones. And we’re supposed to go back on Friday to go down the rest of the street. Because of the weather on Thursday, it cut us short, but it was very effective. So Friday, I said, look, let’s put it off until Monday, because there’s something new that’s in the works, so I want to get everything to fight this thing. The thing is, I feel like, among the Delaware River ready to cross; because on Monday night, I have the Thomas Paine letter that he wrote to Washington and with this, we are going to put out a lot of these broadsheets. And people right now, when you go in a group they know you mean business, and we’re not selling vacuum cleaners or anything; we’re selling them insurance for their life. I don’t know how it’s going to work, but I know this is the only way you’re going to get the word out and get people involved. You just have to go door to door — wake ’em up! LAROUCHE: I think there are many ways to get people to wake up because there are many kinds of ways that have an effect. You have the people who have the deliberate intention to create an effect, and you have those who realize that they are responsible to create an effect. There’s quite a different question. So therefore, the question is, what does mankind see in himself or herself, which is worth fighting for? It’s that simple. That’s the essence of the matter. There are many specific aspects to this process, but just grabbing on one of them is always a good beginning. Q: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche. Now, my question is about the time period of August — NATO and the breakup of NATO. Now, I watched the interview between Jeff Steinberg and the congressman [Virginia State Sen. Richard Black, "Time To Close Down NATO"; https://larouchepac.com/20160812/interview-va- state-senator-richard-black], and I was thinking to myself a lot of people are predicting the breakup of NATO anyway, but I was thinking there’s something we could do here on the street to further that cause a little quicker. I’d like to do know what you think about that? LAROUCHE: Well, what we have to do, in Manhattan, for example, that we have a relatively small but important organization and this organization for which I’m speaking, and this is very important. So the provision of that is very important. The development of that process is important. But then there are other things which may not be in the access of people for larger operations, but is a certain quality in terms of an individual; when an individual has said "I am committed. I am committed" and therefore they have a sense of commitment, a burning sense of commitment, not to let evil happen. Tear it apart! End the evil war, and make the good happen. And the most important thing is to make the good happen. Q: Hi Mr. LaRouche, My name is H— C— and I’m new to the Manhattan Project. I’ve been a follower of you for a number of years, and I admire you and respect you, sir. I happened to be walking on the Upper East Side, and I stopped by the booth and I met a gentleman by the name of John Scialdone, and he mentioned, when I first saw the little magazine with the Hillary and that headline, it drew me to it immediately, so we had a little discussion, and he invited me to this group. And the term "political action committee" implies to me that they’re a group of people that are thinking and that are trying to figure out solutions and are involved in the process and are astute as to what is happening in our country and in our world. And that in itself is refreshing to meet people of that mindset and that are of the same mindset in terms of what is going on in the world. I’ve been a student of the quote/unquote "new world order" and geopolitical landscape for a good 20, 25 years; and quite frankly, I’m old enough to say that I haven’t voted Barry Goldwater. [laughter] And the reason for that is that I don’t enjoy participating in a criminal activity and that is exactly what the political process is in this country. We’ve never had a choice. The country and the world has come to a very critical time in history, where nuclear weapons are proliferated around the world, and countries are against countries, and cultures are against cultures, and there are wars, there are murders, there’s terrorism. And if we don’t stop it, we’re going down a very dark hole. I know you mentioned and you alluded to Satan; and this is a fight between Satan and God, and good against evil. And throughout history, and you mentioned Alexander Hamilton, throughout history there have been men that have turned the course of history and turned the tide; because I’ve always maintained that any organization even if it’s two people, or a small committee or a corporation or a country, or a world, there has to be a leader at the top. There has to be one man or a woman, who can call the shots, and bring about change. And as an aside, if someone emerges on the side of good, as oppose to the side of evil and is willing to go against the powers that be, the neo-cons, the new world orders, the Cheney crowd and all of these people that control puppet Obama and Hillary, and are going to continue doing that if it’s not stopped... SPEED: Can you let him respond to you? Q: Yeah, I’m going to come to my question. My question is this, — long story short — I want to know why I haven’t heard anything here about supporting the only person that has come out of the political shadows, out of no place, and has been brave enough to stand up and fight, and speak against this; and has put his family and himself at risk to come against the new world order and to come about and run for or President of the United States; and I support everything that’s happening here, but I’d like to understand why there isn’t complete support for Donald Trump for President of the United States? That’s my question. LAROUCHE: OK, well, let’s clean this thing up a little bit. And I know answers which were not the answers that you were looking for, but which would be useful in illustrating for you, what the problem is that I have to deal with on this thing. Now, the thing is that was significant was that my relationship with Bill Clinton. I was allowed to get out of prison, which I’d been put by the Bush family, and it was a crime all the way through; a lie and a crime! And the Bushes and so forth were always liars. There has not been a good Bush, anywhere. You try to burn the Bushes and they don’t burn, they just stink. But in any case, what happened is that Putin a remote connection to Bill Clinton. And what Bill had done, he had actually fought a legitimate campaign for leading issues on every leading issue of leading importance, while he was President up to a certain point. Well, he acted as a practical President. He had a very bad Vice President. What happened was, is that he was framed up, and a sex charge was put against him. What had happened is that he had moved to prevent a crisis in German policy and Russia policy as well, that would have saved the situation at that time. What happened was, the Queen of England, and by name her leading representatives, the head of the organization of the Republican organization in the United States, all pulled off to frame up Bill Clinton. As a result of that, Bill Clinton, being stunned and labeled as he was, and it was by the Republican Party largely that did it, but it was the Queen of England who did it; and it was she and her party who did it. This was a frame-up. The result of this was a breakdown, of the order of government, of the United States, because of that. In other words, it was a charge against him; I knew what his characters were, I did not always approve of what he was doing, but he was an honest person. He had a cause, to save civilization and it was destroyed by the Queen of England, on her personal order, and her institutions. And by the Republican Party. And they destroyed him! As a result, what they got from Bill Clinton, was filth — not from him, but from those who acted against him. So you’ve got to be careful of these things. Don’t try to assume that you know this is right and that is right, and this is wrong and that is wrong. It doesn’t work that way. You’ve got to have a deeper insight into how things work and the problem is that many citizens of the United States don’t know the truth. Why don’t they know the truth? Because they don’t know how things work, and therefore they cannot trace out, the consequences of evil. But what did we get? Yes, we got Bill Clinton thrown out of office. But! look what he got; look what his wife got. What was she? She became an agent, of Obama. And Obama was essentially an agent of one of the most evil persons on the planet. He was actually the leading figure of Satan, of Satan around the world. That’s not a good choice of discussion. Q: [Lynne Speed] Hi Lyn. One of the things that we’ve been running into with the organizing, generally, and then also some of the organizing that we’re doing in connection with this 9/11 Living Memorial, is you just mention the idea of this election, and people are almost universally completely disgusted. And it’s across the board, so you have Democrats up in East Harlem who are saying "This is the worst thing I’ve seen in 47 years, since I’ve been in the country, since I’ve been voting"; you have conservative, Tea Party types that have tried all kinds of organizing in the past through the activism and so on who say, "we can’t do it that way, we’ve got to do something which also approaches this at a higher level, a cultural level which is the way in which you’re going to cause people to begin to think." And at the same time, people are very, very eager for an alternative, not another candidate, but actually something that both uplifts them, and gives them the power to organize their fellow citizens around a higher conception. So this week went down to one of the venues where we’re going to be doing one of the concerts, and it was a very interesting discussion, because this particular area, this church is located in an area where there was a firefighters’ battalion who were over in Brooklyn; they were the closest people to Ground Zero outside of the Ground Zero itself. So they all rushed over when the call came that the Towers had been hit, and they were all inside the building rescue people taking them down the steps for about an hour and half, until the building collapsed. The entire battalion was killed, 42 firefighters. And so every year, there’s a special ceremony where they go to the 9/11 memorial and then they march across the bridge and they march to this church where there’s a Mass. And we will be singing the Requiem as part of that Mass, our New York Schiller Institute chorus will be participating in that. What was interesting about this discussion, is that the people in the meeting from the church really got an idea, from Lynn Yen who was there at the meeting, and John Sigerson, that this was a unique idea of doing this Mozart Requiem as part of the Mass, and also because of the way in which we were doing it, at the proper tuning, and because of the entire context, with this being the 15 anniversary of 9/11; and very inspired, they said, "this is what people need. They need to be uplifted, they need to be made spiritually optimistic about the true nature of humanity." So I just wanted to give you that report and see if you had any comments? LAROUCHE: Well, this is extremely important. It’s a fact, of course, it’s an important fact; it’s a fact which is full of all kinds of illustrations of the way human life goes on. And what we all have to do, is we have to first recognize that we have to fight evil. You have to eliminate evil. And if you don’t do that, you can’t do that, or just won’t, then you are either bad, or you’re a failure. And most people in the United States have lived on, in the past immediately centuries, have been failures. And then people say, "well, I want to be a good guy," but they haven’t earned it; they haven’t earned the credentials. And the important thing is to recognize what the credentials are or what they might be, and to spread that which might be, at least, and do that. And that is the only way I know of, in which you can reliably, indicate what the policy of life in humanity has to be. Q: Hi Lyn. I had pretty much the exact question that Lynne Speed just asked, but I’ll put it in another way now. The experience that Americans had on 9/11, the evil that they were forced to respond to, had a very specific effect on the minds of the population, in what they allowed to happen in the response to that event, or that process. And it seems to me, when we’re organizing people, the challenge is to give people a sense that they have to experience something else that is necessary. That is, we’re going to have a series of concerts, they’re going to be musical concerts. But the most important thing about them, I think is something that Maestro John Sigerson said in a chorus rehearsal on Saturday night, when he was warming us up for getting us to sing. He said, "Look there’s a lot of sound;, don’t worry about the sound. We have to tune up the chorus so that we can get across the most important idea, which is silent. That’s why we’re doing the work." So the reason why we have to get people to all four, or one performance, or two performances, is because as a counterposition to what they experienced as the evil of 9/11, they have to experience the emotion that’s going to be attendant with them sitting through the Requiem, experiencing the Requiem, — that’s the audience and the singers alike. And you also said what I thought you may have said, but if you have some comment on the fact that this — Americans have to experience this in the near term if we’re going to get a solution. LAROUCHE: Well, this is a very simple thing to look at. Where was the evil, where’d the evil come from? Well, it came from, members of Congress! It came from the President of the United States, and his associates! They’re the ones who did it; they made the agreement. Now, here’s what they did. The British Empire, working together with the Saudis, created 9/11 in the United States. And those same people, inside the United States, members of the United States who would support this terror operation and still do, the time has come to throw these bums out of the Congress! and to punish them for what they’ve done as crimes! Because as long as you have not done that, to clean that thing up, you have no warrant for authority on morality. Now, I’ve done that. I’ve done it to the degree I’ve been allowed to, enabled to do that. I was one of the first to expose what was done in the United States, by great Britain and Saudi Arabia. I was one of the people to expose it — I and an associate of mine, who did it, we were doing it. We were still on the register, of the leading people for exposing the Satanic operation has been! Obama is himself Satanic! Everything about him: If you look at his history and know what the heritage is, you know he’s Satanic. Everything about him is Satanic. This is not charge, this is not an accusation. This is an identification! And when you look at it that way, then you know what went wrong. We let the Congress lie. Now, that’s a terrible government, to have a government which lies, where the majority lies. And that’s what happened: The Bushes, the Bush family, Obama, they’re all in it. And yet, you say you’re a citizen of the United States, you are supporting leading, and you want to say that you’re doing something good? Hey, buddy, you’re way off! SPEED: Lyn, I have to ask you a question on behalf of Alvin, who called in because the apartment from him upstairs has a bad leak and it’s leaking into his place, so he is not here. Here’s his question: Last week when I talked with you at the meeting here, I informed you of our actions around the 28 pages petition, the Institute’s musical intervention into Spanish Harlem; and then I said, what was missing from our good deeds? You again raised the example of Einstein, as the model for the kind of quality of mind, we are required to develop, if we are to actually move our people into action beyond "good efforts," or "good deeds." Could you please elaborate this further? I have so much, I still have a long way to go to understand this. It is a difficult concept to grasp fully." That’s his question. LAROUCHE: OK, well. The Einstein question. The problem is that there’s only a tiny, tiny, tiny part of the citizens of the United States in particular, which has any understanding of Einstein, including people running around describing themselves as prophets of Einstein. And this doesn’t work either. You see because, the point is people are saying, they’re trying to find a prophet, or something like a prophet, in terms of Einstein. Einstein discovered this, Einstein would discovered this... Einstein.... it didn’t happen that way! What had happened was, that Einstein, step by step increasingly understood what was wrong with the way that the people of the world consider how the world works. Now, then the point is, people say, "well the good guys and the bad guys" — buddy, that does not really wash! Because Einstein is not something that you can play with. Einstein was a hero, a great hero of the people of the Universe. Because he dared, to make the charges which had to be made, in order to engineer what mankind can do to save the development of the human species. And all these guys who run around saying "this is the recipe for Einstein’s this, Einstein’s that, Einstein’s this — it’s bunk! Absolute bunk! Einstein had a real insight into the nature of the Universe, the nature of the Universe, not] the good deeds of somebody else; not the byproducts of good deeds. And there are very few people in this Universe right now, who know what Einstein really was. If you want to argue about it, I’ll be pleased to do something about that to help you understand this thing better. Q: Thank you, Mr. LaRouche. I didn’t anticipate this opportunity to talk to you. I’ve heard about you over the years, and I was very happy to see one of the people from the LaRouche movement yesterday down by the City Hall where I work, and he invited me to come and participate in this meeting. And I salute you and the LaRouche movement for your leadership in exposing the truth about 9/11; for defending Vladimir Putin and I want to thank you for that. It takes courage, and it’s going against the grain of everything we were raised to — in schools we were taught to hate Russia, to hate China, instinctively. So I salute you for that, Mr. LaRouche. Thank you, sir. LAROUCHE: Thank you. Q: Good afternoon. My name’s O— from Staten Island. Last night I was here (forgive me for not being here as much as I should), you touched on the infancy in terms of one’s mindset, and stuff like that — something to that effect. But I just want to know, do you have any books on that? LAROUCHE: What, on Einstein? Q: [follow-up] Yeah, on Einstein, and the stuff you’re bringing up, or... because this is some fascinating stuff. LAROUCHE: No, this is actually science, it’s pure science. And what’s happened is that there have been people who struggled to understand this sort of thing, and Albert Einstein, in several series of steps of progress has done the best job, so far, on what the nature of human beings is. See human beings are not located in the mere birth of human beings. What is important is what goes with that birth and the development of that birth. And therefore, you often have people who say, "well, this is a good person, this is an expert person, and they’re naturally given and this and that, and so forth..." No! No! The question is, can we induce, human beings to respond to what Einstein’s work really means? Einstein’s work was based on the knowledge — I’m not saying the "guess" or that or that, I’m saying "the knowledge"; the knowledge which he has demonstrated and presented, and documented himself. He probably is one of the few people in the Universe right now, who so far has been able to understand what the human mind is. The others are trying to come out and make midgets out of people. What happens is, the person who is creative, is actually creative. If the individual is not actually creative, then he’s not actually created. What do we do? We try to make him actively creative — how? By inducing him to understand what he or she can do, to make the human race better, in a necessary way. But there are all these guys, witch-doctors running around, saying, "this is the way you do this, this is way you inherit, this is the way you inherit..." nonsense! Einstein was very clear on this: You have to look sometimes at his later life works, and they have made that quite clear. And those people who have studied Einstein’s work in an advanced way, do understand. I understand. SPEED: That appears to be it for this week. There are a couple of things, Lyn, I wanted to bring up which were prompted by the last things you were saying, especially what you said about Putin and the Chechen business, what you did in 1999 with the "Storm Over Asia"; and something you did in 1994, when you got out of jail, and you had a group of us do a panel at the conference on what was called "The Palmerston’s Zoo." What happened was you got us to identify for people that the British Empire looked at people as animals and successfully had convinced them to carry out a set of animalistic behaviors, that they called many things: They called them "religious practice," they called them "educational policy," they called them "science," but they were all animal behaviors. And what we are seeing in the candidacies right now in America, is you just hear barking and whining from these ersatz people, who say they are candidates. And what just happened and what you just described concerning Einstein, and you earlier described around Hamilton, this is a different type: human identity’s different. So, what I just was caused to think about, around the Manhattan Project, which you designed, see, you’ve now said, "Hey, look, guys, you’re doing some good things, but it’s not ’good deeds.’ The question is what makes people human and how do we have a drive right now, to get rid of the non-humans in the Congress, the non-humans in the Senate, the non-human in the Presidency. We’re not declaring that people have to be non-human, it’s just that they are. It’s useful to identify that that’s the case! Because the British do that, and they have all these people identified as animals all over the world! We break that up. And I’d just like to have you say something about your whole method of organizing, which you’ve been discussing the whole time. Because as we proceed over the next four weeks, we pretty much have all of the pieces now that you’ve asked us to put together over the course of the year. Now, we’re ready — we’re ready to go. So the issue is, being faithful to a method that you’ve been outlining, to some of us for decades, and to some of us, for a few months or in a few minutes here. I’d just like you to say something about that. LAROUCHE: The whole business of discovery, discovery as such, various degrees of improvement in discovery, progress in discovery, all these things boil down to one thing: That a n human being is contributing to the human species, or to the members of the human species, in a way which enables them, to have children, to have circumstances of development of children, and so forth. This then extends itself to what Einstein proved. Einstein demonstrated that the Universe is shall we say, God’s Universe. That there’s a law, which is a law implicit in Einstein’s work, where he understood there was a force in the Universe which was a more powerful force of development of people, as species. And it’s that thing, if you cannot contribute to the development of the species of human beings, especially and most notably; the animal does not have that authority. Only the human being is capable of having that authority, the kind of authority which Albert Einstein had come to understand. SPEED: OK! I want to thank you for that, and I guess there’s nothing else — I don’t think there should be anything else, after that! So, thank you very much, Lyn. We’re going to move on and do the job you’re asking us to do. LAROUCHE: Thank you! [applause] |