Tässä on viides osa LaRouche -liikkeen perjantaisia webcast -seminaareja. Annan sen puhua puolestaan, joten en selittele tai kuvaile sitä nyt muuten kuin tuolla alla poimien tuttuun tapaan kysymykset esille ja lainaamalla joitakin Lyndon LaRouchen alustuksen kohtia. Yhdysvaltain presidentinvaalit ovat nyt tiistaina (keskiviikkoon Suomen aikaa) ja ensi perjantaina tulee vielä ainakin yksi webcast tähän perjantaisarjaan vaalituloksen jälkipuintina...
Tähän väliin vielä bloggaamisestani: Viimeisen reilun viikon aikana on ollut erittäin suurta tapahtuma- ja uutistulvaa, joista olen ollut halukas tuottamaan bloggauksiakin, mutta aiheet kasaantuvat ja on vaikea hallinnoida niiden kirjoittamista; on ollut mm. Saul Schubakin lapsilisät pois -möläytyksiä ja sen Sandy -hirmumyrskyn tiimoilta jälkipyykkinä olisi vaikka kuinka paljon kirjoitettavaa - tutkittavaa... Facebook -seinäni aiheiden yhteenvedoiksi koostaminenkaan ei ole edennyt. Bloggaaminen siis aktivismini osana ei edelleenkään tunnu kovin mielekkäältä ja aiheet viivästyvät - karsiutuvat, mutta yhä yritän ja ajallaan tulee jotain...
Nyt on kuitenkin eräs kliimaksikohta geopolitiikassa eli nämä Yhdysvaltain presidentinvaalit, jossa valitaan transatlanttisen eliitin käyttöön jompi kumpi nukketyypeistä näillä näppäimillä, jolleivät vaalit kohtaa odotettuja suuria ongelmia (vaalivilppi, myrskyalueen äänestysongelmat jne.)...
Sinänsä ei ole mitään väliä kumpi valikoituu, sillä taustan taloususkonnollis-imperiaalinen eliitti-oligarkkikartellisysteemi pysyy ennallaan määräämässä joko yhä Obamaa tai uutta Romney -kätyriä... Koostan tähän vaaliin liittyen vielä asiaa, mutta sitä ennen tässä omana kirjoituksenaan viime perjantain imperialismin ja rahataloususkonnon vastaista LaRouche -asiaa ko. vaaleilla toki sävytettynä -->
Lyndon LaRouchen webcast -seminaari perjantaina 2.11.2012: On the Eve of the Election
Text Transcript
Keynote (Lyndon LaRouchen alustus): "First of all, it's to recognize that we're immediately in a situation where we're headed toward the threat of global thermonuclear warfare. And by that I mean very soon, as probably after the election attempt, which will not be conclusive in itself. But we're headed toward a thermonuclear warfare. If it occurs, it will be global; it will probably be started, in effect, the actual global war, will be started by the United States.".
"The second thing to consider in this series, is the fact that Obama is continuing the policies of Adolf Hitler, in terms of health care. The T-4 health care program by Adolf Hitler, which was the beginning of the genocide under the Hitler regime, is the exact precedent on which Obama is operating today. .....as I said, in dealing with Obama, you're dealing with a Hitler type mentality. Precisely. His health care policies, called T-4 health care policies were the origin of this policy. The same policy has been in process from Britain under the relevant British figures: Tony Blair. Tony Blair is] the precedent, in Hitler's policy, in terms of health care, for the United Kingdom. It's the T-4 policy all over.
What Obama has introduced, step by step, since his inauguration, especially since the spring of that year, April of that year, what he's been pushing for, is a similar T-4 program, which has been in operation inside the United States, against U.S. Citizens, though it's not reached it's full maximum yet, by any means.".
"The other part of the problem which we have to deal with, which is slower and deeper, is the so-called "green policy." This is contrary to all physical, biological, economic principles. Any species which does not increase its effectiveness within the range of species, to rise in energy flux density, is a doomed species. If the United States were to continue with the so-called program and environmentalism, which is the Queen's policy, which she herself has emphatically defined, her policy as one of genocide, with the immediate target to reduce the human population of the planet, from the present level, estimated at seven billion people, to one, or less.".
"Mankind's survival, as a species, has depended on a number of things. First of all, mankind is the only species known to us, which is capable of voluntary creativity. All other species, like many of our inferior, say, Wall Street types, do not believe in the creative, noëtic powers of the human species, but rather think that you can only forecast the past, not the future. The typical person says you can only deduce the future from the same technology which you're living in now. The fact of the matter that only as the human species, in particular, is able to increase it's unique capability in creativity, that mankind has the ability to meet these challenges. And, we have to meet these challenges, not only for the living species of man, we have to also meet these challenges for the purpose of animal life, and so forth, as well.".
"...And, so that's our situation, that Mankind has to realize that this Presidency, and many Presidencies before, have been failures. For example, President John F. Kennedy was actually an heir, in terms of devotions, to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This devotion was prompted, in the case of Jack, by the widow of FDR, Eleanor Roosevelt. Her advice and influence, to bring her husband's approach to policy to bear, was the basis for the Kennedy administration. This does not mean that Kennedy himself did not have a lot of originality in his work independently, but the principle that he expressed in his work as President, was an echo of what Eleanor Roosevelt represented in terms of the memory of her husband.
This is the kind of thing we must go to.".
"We must restore progress in science-driven progress. We must extend our reach to space. We must develop further what we have started on in terms of Mars. And the recent development is extremely important in this respect.".
"We must remove those obstacles such as Obama, who should simply be thrown out of office for his criminal behavior. The fraud, for example, of the way he took over a war in Libya and expanded in violation of the U.S. Constitution, this man should have been thrown out of office already. And we're simply looking for the right group of people who are patriots, real patriots who will throw Obama out of office, and we can get our nation back.". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä muuta Lyndon LaRouche sanoi -->
Question 1: Hurricane Sandy: "So with a large contingency of both organizers, associates of LaRouche PAC and supporters in the New York/New Jersey region, a question has come in quite a bit: What can be done in the aftermath of the destruction of Hurricane Sandy? I mean, what we're already looking at on the ground is approximately 88 deaths in the United States, billions of dollars worth of damage. Oddly enough, Wall Street was closed for a few days, but they opened up on Wednesday, after the Monday storm — someone might say they got a bail-out from the heavy rains. But on a more serious note, you have Staten Island is decimated. People who have been cut off from power might not get it back until November 11, which is obviously after the November 6 elections. The access to food, to refrigeration, to gasoline, has all been cut off for a hugely populated area of the country. And so, with that situation on the ground, we have a similar situation above ground, in terms of our ability to — what our forecasting ability was during Hurricane Sandy, where due to the satellite systems that we have in place, the geo-stationary orbiting satellites that we have in place over North America, we were able to see this hurricane, forecast its path. But, that system is — and has been under the Obama administration — being cut progressively. So that satellite system has been cut, our eye in the sky, as well as our feet on the ground with major cuts to the Army Corps of Engineers. So, I'd like you to answer a very widespread question: What is to be done in the aftermath of this hurricane?". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->
Question 2: The Election: "Well, on the subject of economics, you'd mentioned flood prevention, the surge prevention program that could have been implemented in Manhattan, the kind of flood-control that Providence, Rhode Island does have, and if you think about it, you might say, well, there was a presentation made in 2009, to New York, about the proposal for building a flood-control system. They didn't do it. Obviously, the cost would have been much less than the expense of this hurricane. And you might say, well, there's probably a lot of projects like that around the country. This wasn't the only one that wasn't built, and it gives you a sense of how much is needed, in terms of what could be done with the whole economic revival.
Now, what I wanted to ask you about was the election, and our political system. There's obviously a lot of difficulties as regards voting, in New York and New Jersey, where many polling stations have no electricity, are full of sand, don't exist any more, are now a tent; and the State of New York is providing generators, but not the ability to install all of them — so there's a real potential for a great deal of chaos, as regards the voting there.
The other thing is early voting: Now, having paper ballots provides a trail. I mean, having paper ballots isn't a bad thing, but the numbers of these of are pretty astounding now. Over 600,000 people have already voted in Nevada; almost 600,000 in Iowa; 1.2 million in Ohio; 1.5 million in Colorado so far; record levels in other states. The thing with this, if somebody gets one of these ballots by mail and then decides to vote in person, they have to cast what's called a provisional ballot, and there has to be time to check it, see if they sent in the mail ballot, whatnot, it definitely means that you're definitely not going to be able — unless the victor is quite clear — there's no guarantee in having a final electoral result on the day of the election, as you've been discussing. You know, in New York, if you postmark your ballot on time, they're allowing two weeks for it to arrive by mail, so they can't really call any election until Nov. 19th, for example.
Now, you had said that a real deal of excitement's going to be taking place after the election, after, at least the day of the actual election. I'd like to hear if you have some more to say about that. Also, I wanted to let viewers know, if they're not aware, that in 2000, in the Bush-Gore election, again, the weekend before, you in a discussion with some of your associates in California had said that it was not certain that the election would actually be decided on Election Day — which is, indeed, what happened. So, I'd like to know your thoughts on that.
And then also, in a more specific sense, in times like this, it seems rather nebulous how the political system functions and makes you wonder: Well, if we've got these two Presidential candidates, neither of them is really deserving to serve. You've mentioned the importance of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in preventing general war, already, the necessity for the Presidency itself as an institution. What do you see is the relationship between the population generally, and the institutions that are going to be able to direct the nation, to the end that the general population is an appropriate audience for that?". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->
Question 3: The Two Party System: "Well, I have a follow-up to those remarks. We've got a question in from Kesha Rogers, who is the Democratic [Congressional] nominee for the 22nd District in Texas, and she sends her greetings to you. And for those who are not aware, Kesha Rogers, she won the Democratic primary this year, along with the Democratic primary in 2010, and won it on the platform of defeating Obama, restoring NASA, and this year, on the three-point program.
So what she says is, "As you know my campaign here for the past few years has represented a defiance of party politics, and represented a truly post-partisan campaign. It doesn't just represent a local campaign, but a campaign that is out to transform the nation."
The campaign has identified a platform above all the parties and for the future, and they're finding a very open response to the three-point policy. And people understand that they're not just election issues, or election promises, but these are solutions that every patriot should be fighting for, and that the nation must unite around.
So that being said, and Kesha taking on the role she has in Texas, not just sloganeering, but providing leadership, providing education in every forum that she speaks in, every organizational meeting that she holds, she asks you two questions, similar questions: "Now that you have put the issue on the table of destroying the party system, what must be the strategy for like-minded patriots in continuing forward away from the corrupting influence of party loyalty?"
And second, she believes "it's very important for people to understand the relationship of the institution of the Presidency, to the President himself, and how that relationship would function when the partisan system is no longer in effect?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->
Question 4: Beyond Geo-Politics: "This comes from a visiting fellow at Georgetown and a reporter in Hong Kong: He says, "Dear Mr. LaRouche: During George W. Bush's time in office, anti-terrorism became the tool of Republican Party policymaking. However, despite the fact that Obama professed himself to change that policy when he came in, the actual military pressures against America's so-called geostrategic enemies increased even more, this time, in the name of 'humanitarian intervention.' This policy outlook, quite frankly, puzzles many countries around the world.
"But the question I would like to ask you is on a slightly different subject: Thanks to the warming of the Arctic region, it is said that the Arctic ocean will become navigable for seven to eight months of the year, and I think the question of how we can best utilize the Arctic will increase in its significance in world affairs. So my question to you is this: Can there be a new force, which comes to power in the United States to lead this type of development in the world, shifting away from the current outlook of geopolitics?" ". Käy kuuntelemassa linkistä / lukemassa tekstiversiosta, mitä Lyndon LaRouche vastasi -->
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment