Lyndon LaRouchen webcast -seminaarien perjantaisarja loka- ja marraskuussa 2012: Osat 1 ja 2

Tämän lokakuun alusta alkaen LaRouche -liike on järjestänyt perjantaisin webcast-seminaarien sarjaa, missä kaksi on jo pidetty loppujen jatkuessa aina Yhdysvaltain presidentinvaaleihin saakka marraskuussa. Tämä webcast -sarja käsittelee Lyndon LaRouchen johdolla maailmantilanteemme vakavasti rappiollistavia käänteitä ja potentiaaleja ekonomiasta, (geo)politiikasta, tieteestä, filosofiasta jne. kuvaten yhteiskuntiemme em. käänteitä ja potentiaaleja synnyttäviä / edesauttavia vikoja, harhoja ja moraalittomuuksia. Tärkein LaRouche -sisältö on esittää niihin lääkkeitä.

Yhdysvaltain kannalta tietysti on tärkeää tuo presidentinvaali, jossa istuva presidentti Barack Obama hamuaa jatkokautta ja haastajana on Mitt Romney. LaRouche -liike on tullut viime vuosina tunnetuksi kyseenalaistamalla Obaman hallintokauden totaalisesti ottamalla esille monia jopa USA:n perustuslakien vastaisia rikkeitään ja välinpitämättömyyksiään. Keskeistä osaa siinä näyttelee Obaman hallinnon epäonnistunut ulkopolitiikka militarististen rikosten sävyttämänä sekä ekonomian hoidon antihumaanisuus lännen pankkiiri-oligarkkikartellin rahataloususkonnollisessa talutusnuorassa.

Barack Obaman "epäonnistunut persoona" on ko. sopassa vakava merkki diktatuurin - totalitarismin sosiaalisista piirteistä osana Yhdysvaltainkin alistamista rahataloustotalitarismin aiheuttamaan neofeodalismiin. Toisaalta LaRouche -liike on ilmoittanut, ettei Mitt Romney ole myöskään mikään kunnollinen vaihtoehto presidentiksi; vielä ainakin aikaisemmin he ovat suositelleet vaaliratkaisuksi Obaman tilalle jotakuta uutta presidenttiehdokasta...

Koko maailman kannalta on oleellista se, kuinka Obaman hallinto on ollut osa ns. Brittiläistä imperiumia, joksi LaRouche -liike kutsuu transatlanttista rahatalousparasiittia kartelli- ja imperiaalirakenteineen NWO -agendansa kera ja jonka keskuspaikkana on ollut "perinteisesti" erityisesti Lontoon City ja pääsuojelijanaan / päätukijanaan siellä Britannian monarkia.

Transatlanttinen talousjärjestelmä on ollut kuitenkin moisten imperiaali- ja eliittisysteemeiden takia järjestelmävikaisena lopullisen perikadon tilassa eskaloituen kiihtyvänä romahdusprosessina, jonka havaitsemisessa, varoittamisessa ja paremman vaihtoehdon sen tilalle luonnissa Lyndon LaRouche on ollut maailman johtavia aktivisteja jopa jo vuosikymmentenkin takaa.

Tähän transatlanttisen talousjärjestelmän perikato-ominaisuuteen on kuulunut etenkin vuoden 2001 WTC -iskuista saakka myös militaristinen imperialismi, jonka tarkoituksena on ollut mm. turvata lännen ko. "järjestelmän" "turvassa" elävälle eliittisisäpiirille jatkoaikaa tulevaisuuteen. LaRouche -liike on ollut tämänlaisen geopoliittisen mahtailun ja sotavaaran esilletuojana myös maailman johtavia tiedustelulähteitä, missä varoitukset ja ennustukset ovat lennelleet viime vuoden puolelta kiihtyneesti jopa Kolmannen maailman sodan uhasta.

Tämän vuoden aikana ko. varoitukset ja ennustukset ovat jo varsin paljon osoittautuneet todeksi, kun EU:n alueella velkakriisi osana ko. järjestelmävikaa on eskaloitunut jatkuvasti huolimatta muka-parantavista tukitoimista (Oikeasti siis rahataloususkonnollisista virhehallusinaatioista).

Samalla Lähi-idän räjähdysherkkyys laajamittaiseksi sodaksi on myös kasvanut etenkin Syyrian tilanteen eskaloituessa. Juuri siinä länsieliitillä on ollut sormensa hyvin kyseenalaisesti ja moraalittomasti pelissä, joka on puolestaan kasvattanut vastakkainasettelun vaaraa lännen ja Venäjän välillä niin ekonomisesti, poliittisesti kuin militaarisestikin. Venäjän sisäpoliittisista sisällöistä huolimatta juuri Venäjä ja osaltaan Kiinakin ovat olleet kuitenkin kansainvälisen moraalin ja lain puolella vastustamassa länsikartellin moisia eskaloituvia sota- ym. rikoksia ja moraalittomuuksia.

Niinpä tätä taustaa vasten nämä LaRouche -liikkeen webcast -sisällöt ovat nyt erinomaista antia tarkastella maailmamme tämän hetken ko. megaongelmia ja pohtia niihin humaaneja, moraalisia ja rakentavia ratkaisuja koostavan luovasti sen sijaan, että jättäisimme itsemme hajeellistuvasti ko. rappiokierteen vietäväksi mahdollisesti jopa neokeskiaikaiseen perikatoon päätyen...

Tämän takia otan kaikki nämä webcast -sessiot tänne blogiini esille, jotka listaan pedagogisen voiman takia seuraavaan tapaan: Poimin kustakin seminaarista esille LaRouche PAC -sivustolle laitetut video-osat, joissa seminaarisisällöt on pilkottu teemoittain helpottamaan sisällön omaksumista. Aluksi niissä on Matthew Ogdenin esipuheen myötä Lyndon LaRouchen alustus ja sitä seuraa kysymysosio, jossa LaRouche -liikkeen Leandra Bernstein ja Jason Ross esittävät ja välittävät Lyndon LaRouchelle kysymyksiä vastattavaksi. Vanha tuttu webcast -tapa heillä siis jo vuosien takaa.

Lainaan kunkin seminaarin kustakin video-osasta seuraavat sisällöt: Alustusosioista Ogdenin esipuheen keskeisiä kohtia sekä kysymysosioista kysymyksen keskeiset sisällöt (Lähteenä kunkin seminaarin tekstiversio ja / tai kunkin video-osan kuvailutekstit). Lisäksi suomennan kunkin kysymyksen otsikkosisällöt ja maalaan ne punaisella fontilla. Nämä pohjustavat sisällöstä kokonaiskuvaa ja ohjaan teidät sitten sen tiimoilta kuuntelemaan / lukemaan Lyndon LaRouchen esittämät asiat / vastaukset kysymyksiin, mikä on täten syventävää tietoutta. Pidemmittä jutuitta itse asiaan eli kahden jo pidetyn seminaarin aineistot uusimmasta vanhempaan --->  

Lyndon LaRouchen webcast -seminaari perjantaina 12.10.2012: To Save The Nation

Text transcript

Keynote (Lyndon LaRouchen alustus): Matthew Ogdenin alkupuheesta --> "Let me just say that this series of webcasts began last Friday, in the immediate wake of the first of the presidential debates that occurred on Wednesday of that week, in which we saw Obama, absent the adoring fans, absent the cheering crowds, exposed for precisely what he is, and what he has been: an Emperor Nero, a failed personality.

Now, since then, President Obama has become increasingly isolated. You saw this week the hearings that were convened in the United States House of Representatives, around Benghazi-gate, which revealed just how many lies, cover-ups, and frauds have come out of the Obama Administration, on what really happened on Sept. 11 of this year. And similar investigations are now being pursued surrounding the illegal contributions solicited by the Obama campaign, and possibly even on the falsification of the employment statistics that were used in the latest jobs report.

Now, overall, the sum accumulation of everything that's occurred over the last week and a half, is that the pretense of an inevitable Obama victory has now evaporated completely. However, as the events occurring on the Syria-Turkey border should make very, very clear, including now bringing Russia into this, the threat of the outbreak of a global war, possibly even before the elections, looms as a very real possibility. And even Rand Paul made statements to this effect on CNN the day before yesterday.".

Question 1: The potential for Obama to launch war to win the election (Obaman potentiaali laukaista sota voittaakseen vaalit): "On the subject of the election, we have a remark that came in from Professor of Constitutional Law Francis Boyle, and he made the remark after seeing the outcome of the first Presidential debate, saying that if the people controlling Obama believe that the only way he can win the election is to bomb someone, well, they have several targets to choose from, be it Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, etc. He points out that the USS Stennis has now arrived in the Persian Gulf, which is a third aircraft-carrier strike force. And very soon, the United States and Israel will begin massive military maneuvers, that could easily go "hot." And he says, this is potentially why they've scheduled for now, for this time period.

So, essentially, after the debate with Romney, it could very well be the case that Obama and his backers believe the only way to win the election is for such a strike to occur. And as you've pointed out, and as many others have pointed out, including the Republican Party, the potentiality for an outbreak on the border of Syria and Turkey is immense, as the shellings continue, as the questions go unanswered as to where the weaponry is coming from?

So I'd like you to address, what exactly the potentiality of this kind of electoral stunt, what the potentiality of that is?". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 2: The fraudulent contributions to the Obama campaign (Obaman vaalikampanjan petokselliset tuet): "I wanted to ask you about the financing of Obama's election: According to the Federal Election Commission, Obama's reelection campaign raised $180 million in September, far more than Romney's campaign. Of that money, 98% came in amounts below $200, which means that it would require about 1 to 1.5 million people must have all, during that month, contributed to the Obama campaign. Seems hard to believe, given his slipping in the polls among such voters.

The importance of this, is that such contributions, under $200 aren't reported. Unless the FEC audits the campaign, there's no reporting of this, and the FEC won't audit the campaign, because Obama's not getting matching funds.

Now, the Government Accountability Institute, a nonpartisan group, just published a report showing that Obama's campaign has failed to have even the most basic safeguards against credit card fraud! Against verifying the card, against verifying the address of the person supposedly giving the contribution, which means that creating many, many credit card numbers, or using prepaid cards purchased by other means, a lot of money could be funneled into the Obama campaign.

In particular, with Obama, one "bundler," Robert Roche, who has companies based in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands, and resides in China, has created a website to which most of the visitors are foreign coming to this website, that solicits contributions for Obama; which is illegal for non-citizens to give such contributions.

Now, you had said in the past, and just now, that in 2008, the Obama campaign was heavily financed through illicit means, offshore funds, drug money, you mentioned George Soros: What could you say, if you'd like to say more, about the fraud of the financing of the Obama campaign then and now, and what that means for us with the election coming up?". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 3: The death of the monetary system and creation of a credit system (Monetaristisen järjestelmän kuolema ja luotottavan järjestelmän tilalleluominen): "I have a question for you about Wall Street, and since we're trying to reinvigorate the democratic process, through arguments in order to arrive more at the truth, I'd like to raise you're three-point proposal: The proposal for Glass-Steagall, national banking/credit system, and major productive projects like NAWAPA XXI.

Now, there's nothing really more bipartisan in this country right now, than Wall Street, and you even have bipartisan support and proposals coming from top CEOs, like Jamie Dimon, and Lloyd Blankfein, who are apparently trying to hedge their bets in a close Presidential race, and hoping to realize what the program implicit in the Simpson-Bowles Commission, which makes the European austerity look light.

So, you have that bipartisan proposal, and you have the people who LaRouche PAC members, organizers are speaking to, especially on Capitol Hill, and they will profess their support for Glass-Steagall. And they profess it all day long! But, I'm not sure, in getting into discussions, whether they fully comprehend the credit system.

So, for example, since 2007, 460 banks have gone down, and a lot of them have been community banks, who would make the loans to small-time agriculture, small-time business in inner cities, that sort of thing, and that's where the credit came from. And that credit is, on the one hand no longer available, and those institutions are, at the same time, no longer in existence. So where do you go to get credit? Where do you go, if you're in small business, if you're a start-up, where do you get the credit from? Are you going to go to your local Federal Reserve Bank, and ask for a loan?

So, that being said, you've talked in discussions about Glass-Steagall, about eliminating Wall Street — but! When Wall Street, and a company selling their debt on the free market is the only way that they see to get credit, — you're going to have to explain to people, because that's the line of thinking: The only way to get money, the only way to get credit is, via Wall Street. So, I'd love to hear your response.". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 4: Sharing technology and the Strategic Defense Initiative (Teknologian jakaminen ja Strategisen puolustuksen aloite): "Well, yesterday, members of the LaRouche PAC had a meeting on Capitol Hill with staffers from several congressional offices, to discuss our planetary defense proposals. There's some questions that came up during that. I wanted to pose one to you, with some small alteration here. Now, this is regarding saving the Earth from asteroids, rather than man, as environmentalists would like to do. Now, in discussion of U.S.-Russian collaboration on projects for asteroid defense, one of the things that came up, was the fact that this involves the most advanced technologies that we have. There was some concern expressed about the wisdom, or how one would go about sharing such technological innovations with Russians, without giving them the upper hand — this is, I think connected also with sort of, I think, strange position we have with regard to China, where there's like a total non-collaboration on space questions with China right now.

So I'd like to ask you: Is there a role, is there a place for secrecy in national security on scientific matters? And if you have any thoughts on how the discussion around the SDI, related to this, about how to successfully share technologies which are potentially very powerful, with other nations?". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Lyndon LaRouchen webcast -seminaari perjantaina 5.10.2012: The Moment of Our Greatest Crisis

Text Transcript

Keynote (Lyndon LaRouchen alustus): Matthew Ogdenin alkupuheesta --> "Now, Mr. LaRouche has decided to initiate this series of webcasts for a very specific reason. We're in the middle of a very dangerous situation, and this series of events is required, because of Mr. LaRouche's direct involvement in, not only the debate process going into the Presidential elections, but the outcome of the very significant events that will occur over the next five weeks, is of critical importance, as it has been up to this present date. The next five weeks is a period in which we expect a lot to change, which is contrary to what many people, who had been duped into believing in the predestined inevitability of an Obama victory in this November 6th election, had thus far believed.

Now, these people—anybody who believed in such a predestination, need only look at the events of the past month, to see that they were acting as, frankly, fools. Not only the events that happened on Sept. 11th in Benghazi, what Mr. LaRouche has aptly named, "9/11 Two," in which you had, not only the foreknowledge of the danger to Ambassador Stevens' life from inside the Obama Administration, but also a consequent cover-up, after the fact. What has been aptly named by such significant political leaders as former Governor Huckabee, "Obama's Watergate" or "Benghazigate."

Now, this is only syptomatic of a much broader cover-up that the Obama Administration has been complicit in, which you can look at the refusal to release the redacted 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission Report, which documented the Saudi-British financing of the first 9/11 attack. Now, this is the kind of impeachable crimes that the Obama Administration is guilty of.

Secondly, what happened Wednesday night. And, if people watched this debate, which I'm sure you did, because there was the widest possible viewing—70 million viewers across the country watched Obama's narcissistic personality be put on full, naked display. What Lyndon LaRouche has said all along, since April of 2009, about Barack Obama's failed personality—a clinical Emperor Nero case—was put on display for the entire world to see, as he was forced into a situation where he was challenged by none other than Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney's decision to put him up against the wall on the IPAB—the so-called death panels in the Obamacare bill—remember this is why the LaRouchePAC put the Hitler mustache on Obama in the first place. Also on the too-big-to-fail in the Dodd-Frank bill, and even Obama's green energy policies. These are very significant.

However, we're here to make the point that the reality still stands. As long as Obama remains in office, we do remain on the cusp of a global thermonuclear war. And I think Sergei Lavrov's statements on Charlie Rose last weekend really get directly to the point, that the fear is, that an Arab Autumn will be followed by a nuclear Winter. And this remains the danger for as along as Obama remains in office. And that is why we've convened this webcast here today.".

Question 1: Will European banks intervene in US elections to preserve their bailout? (Aikovatko eurooppalaiset pankit väliintuloa Yhdysvaltain vaaleihin varmistaakseen tukipakettinsa?): "The first question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th, 2012 webcast: "Mr. LaRouche, the Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, has criticized the too-big-to-fail bailout provisions of the Dodd-Frank bill, and has said that he'll replace Mr. Bernanke as Chairman of the Fed, if he is elected. This has caused considerable concern among European Union and European Central Bank officials, who fear that the deals they have struck with Bernanke to continue to provide Fed funds to bail out the European banks could be cancelled with a Romney victory. How do you see this? Might the European banks and allied institutions attempt to intervene in the U.S. elections, to preserve the hyper-inflationary deal?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 2: Why is Bill Clinton supporting Obama? (Miksi Bill Clinton tukee Obamaa?): "The second question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "A question that has been kicked around through a lot of Democratic circles is about the recent endorsement by Bill Clinton of President Barack Obama, which resulted in an immediate boost in Obama's approval. Now, there's a certain idea, among these circles, that, because Bill put his support behind Obama, that it's somehow possible that Obama could be "tamed" in a second term, by the circles around Bill Clinton." ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 3: Monetarism versus Real Economics (Monetarismi vs. reaalitalous): "The third question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "The economics discussion that we were treated to the other night, on television, left out many of the essentials of what actually has to be discussed - the real threat of thermonuclear war, the real threat on the economy. For example, on the food front, we're being starved to death, where corn supplies are at a near all-time low, the President has refused to lift the bio-fuel mandate, where even as food supplies are shrinking, corn and other crops are still being used to make gasoline. This despite the opposition of some 200 members of Congress. I was hoping you could say more about the kind of thinking, behind the use of government to propose and finance specific projects, you know, a dirigistic policy approach, as opposed to setting monetary policy, in hopes that something good will come out of it on its own." ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 4: How much did Obama know about the September 11, 2012 attack in Libya? (Kuinka paljon Obama tiesi 11.9.2012 hyökkäyksestä Libyassa?): "The fourth question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "But I say this, because our next question comes in from, really, a slew of state legislators, who have similar questions on what's happening in Libya, what's happening with Obama's complicity and criminal complicity and coverup of what some have called "Benghazi-gate" but could more accurately be called "9/11 Part Two. How is it, that the United States supported, and armed, al-Qaeda militants? How it is, that the administration has gotten away, so far, with their negligence? How much did Obama know?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 5: What is the motive for pushing a thermonuclear war? (Mikä on motiivina ydinsodan lietsomisessa?): "The fifth question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "Given that there's no winner at the end of a massive thermonuclear exchange, given that there's the potential for the complete elimination of the human species, who gains? Would they really go that far?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 6: What is your forecasting method? (Mikä on ennustamisesi metodi?): "The sixth question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "I'd for you to elaborate on your forecasting method, and how it is, that you can hold onto the principled stand, your program, as a way out for humanity, despite everything that appears to be in front of us?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->

Question 7: What can the mission of planetary defense mean for international cooperation? (Mitä merkitystä voi olla planeetan puolustamismissiolla kansainväliselle yhteistyölle?): "The seventh and final question from Lyndon LaRouche's October 5th Webcast: "Please say more on your concept of planetary defense as a mission for mankind, and what it could mean internationally, for a real prospect for cooperation?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->