Supporters of the movement to declassify the 28 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry Report on 9/11 achieved a dramatic breakthrough on Tuesday, June 2, with the Capitol Hill press conference hosted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), at which he announced the introduction into the U.S. Senate of S.1471, the “Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Victims and Survivors Act of 2015,” to force the declassification of the 28 pages, which strongly implicate Saudi Arabia in the financing of global terror. The event was live-streamed on LaRouchePAC.com, and is now posted in full on larouchepac.com/28pages. A summary video which begins with a forceful statement by Rep. Walter Jones and followed by excerpts of the press conference, is now available, and will be featured at an upcoming conference in New York City this weekend at which activists in the New York area will be called upon to mobilize for this bill.

Video of THBy5TNafLw
Special message from Rep. Walter Jones and excerpts from the June 2, 2015 press conference on S. 1471 to declassify the 28 pages.

The Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), is cosponsored by two Democratic Senators, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), thus making the effort to declassify the 28 pages a full-fledged bi-partisan and bi-cameral movement. This fact has greatly moralized the House sponsors of H.Res. 14, the original House Resolution to declassify the 28 pages, and will provide a significant multiplier effect in increasing support on the House side for this issue.

  Full Transcript of Press Conference on S. 1471

Additionally, Senator Paul’s announcement of his determination to introduce the Senate bill again as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), is a major upshift in the pressure on President Obama to make the secret 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report public. The NDAA is a must-pass bill which should be on the Senate floor next week, so Senator Paul’s fight to amend it will provide a high-profile opportunity to put the Senate on record demanding the declassification. Paul’s choice of the NDAA is entirely appropriate and germane, because the fundamental issue of the 28 pages is the actual British-Saudi source of global terrorism, the United States’ adversary in the so-called “War on Terror,” and bears on the role of both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations in covering-up for, and in fact encouraging the creation and growth of that adversary.

The potential NDAA amendment was the focus of Politico‘s front-page coverage of the June 2 press conference; it was also covered on the front page of National Journal and prominently in The Hill, saturating Capitol Hill and forcing this fight to the attention of other lawmakers. Countless other articles and interviews continue to appear around the United States and internationally, including in the UK, Russia, several European countries, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

The surprise announcement that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), a prominent Democratic New York Senator, was cosponsoring the Senate bill, represents a significant strategic shift and escalation. Sen. Gillibrand is very close to Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, likely the next minority leader, who authored the original 2003 letter to President George W. Bush demanding declassification of this part of the Congressional report on 9/11.

Another new element introduced into the debate was former Senator Bob Graham’s revelation at the press conference that there is another report on Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda, done by the U.S. Treasury, which has also been completely buried for years. Senator Graham, at the podium, dramatically flipped through the pages of that report, all of which were completely blacked out. This fact serves to further substantiate Senator Graham’s assertion that the 28 pages are only emblematic of a pervasive, all-consuming cover-up of the Saudi role in financing 9-11 throughout the agencies of the federal government, which he called “a pattern of withholding information, unnecessarily, and to the detriment of the American people… This is an important issue that goes to the fundamental three words of American democracy—”We the People.” This government is a government of the people. People deserve the respect to know what their government is doing in their name.”

Press conference participants were interviewed at length by numerous television and print media, including London Guardian, Russia’s main TV1 channel and TV International, Sputnik News Service, the Alex Jones Show, on C-SPAN, and by the major Capitol Hill publications. The website 28Pages.org, a national hub for activists on this issue, hosted the LaRouchePAC TV live-stream of the press conference, and published a thorough and effective article summarizing the event, titled Rand’s Next Stand: Declassifying Foreign Government Ties to 9/11.

Join the ever-growing movement to declassify the 28 pages!

SEE “Declassify the 28 Pages”

Supporters of the movement to declassify the 28 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry Report on 9/11 achieved a dramatic breakthrough on Tuesday, June 2, with the Capitol Hill press conference hosted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), at which he announced the introduction into the U.S. Senate of S.1471, the “Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Victims and Survivors Act of 2015,” to force the declassification of the 28 pages, which strongly implicate Saudi Arabia in the financing of global terror. The event was live-streamed on LaRouchePAC.com, and is now posted in full on larouchepac.com/28pages. A summary video which begins with a forceful statement by Rep. Walter Jones and followed by excerpts of the press conference, is now available, and will be featured at an upcoming conference in New York City this weekend at which activists in the New York area will be called upon to mobilize for this bill.

Video of THBy5TNafLw
Special message from Rep. Walter Jones and excerpts from the June 2, 2015 press conference on S. 1471 to declassify the 28 pages.

The Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), is cosponsored by two Democratic Senators, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), thus making the effort to declassify the 28 pages a full-fledged bi-partisan and bi-cameral movement. This fact has greatly moralized the House sponsors of H.Res. 14, the original House Resolution to declassify the 28 pages, and will provide a significant multiplier effect in increasing support on the House side for this issue.

  Full Transcript of Press Conference on S. 1471

Additionally, Senator Paul’s announcement of his determination to introduce the Senate bill again as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), is a major upshift in the pressure on President Obama to make the secret 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report public. The NDAA is a must-pass bill which should be on the Senate floor next week, so Senator Paul’s fight to amend it will provide a high-profile opportunity to put the Senate on record demanding the declassification. Paul’s choice of the NDAA is entirely appropriate and germane, because the fundamental issue of the 28 pages is the actual British-Saudi source of global terrorism, the United States’ adversary in the so-called “War on Terror,” and bears on the role of both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations in covering-up for, and in fact encouraging the creation and growth of that adversary.

The potential NDAA amendment was the focus of Politico‘s front-page coverage of the June 2 press conference; it was also covered on the front page of National Journal and prominently in The Hill, saturating Capitol Hill and forcing this fight to the attention of other lawmakers. Countless other articles and interviews continue to appear around the United States and internationally, including in the UK, Russia, several European countries, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

The surprise announcement that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), a prominent Democratic New York Senator, was cosponsoring the Senate bill, represents a significant strategic shift and escalation. Sen. Gillibrand is very close to Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, likely the next minority leader, who authored the original 2003 letter to President George W. Bush demanding declassification of this part of the Congressional report on 9/11.

Another new element introduced into the debate was former Senator Bob Graham’s revelation at the press conference that there is another report on Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda, done by the U.S. Treasury, which has also been completely buried for years. Senator Graham, at the podium, dramatically flipped through the pages of that report, all of which were completely blacked out. This fact serves to further substantiate Senator Graham’s assertion that the 28 pages are only emblematic of a pervasive, all-consuming cover-up of the Saudi role in financing 9-11 throughout the agencies of the federal government, which he called “a pattern of withholding information, unnecessarily, and to the detriment of the American people… This is an important issue that goes to the fundamental three words of American democracy—”We the People.” This government is a government of the people. People deserve the respect to know what their government is doing in their name.”

Press conference participants were interviewed at length by numerous television and print media, including London Guardian, Russia’s main TV1 channel and TV International, Sputnik News Service, the Alex Jones Show, on C-SPAN, and by the major Capitol Hill publications. The website 28Pages.org, a national hub for activists on this issue, hosted the LaRouchePAC TV live-stream of the press conference, and published a thorough and effective article summarizing the event, titled Rand’s Next Stand: Declassifying Foreign Government Ties to 9/11.

Join the ever-growing movement to declassify the 28 pages!

SEE “Declassify the 28 Pages”

Supporters of the movement to declassify the 28 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry Report on 9/11 achieved a dramatic breakthrough on Tuesday, June 2, with the Capitol Hill press conference hosted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), at which he announced the introduction into the U.S. Senate of S.1471, the “Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Victims and Survivors Act of 2015,” to force the declassification of the 28 pages, which strongly implicate Saudi Arabia in the financing of global terror. The event was live-streamed on LaRouchePAC.com, and is now posted in full on larouchepac.com/28pages. A summary video which begins with a forceful statement by Rep. Walter Jones and followed by excerpts of the press conference, is now available, and will be featured at an upcoming conference in New York City this weekend at which activists in the New York area will be called upon to mobilize for this bill.

Video of THBy5TNafLw
Special message from Rep. Walter Jones and excerpts from the June 2, 2015 press conference on S. 1471 to declassify the 28 pages.

The Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), is cosponsored by two Democratic Senators, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), thus making the effort to declassify the 28 pages a full-fledged bi-partisan and bi-cameral movement. This fact has greatly moralized the House sponsors of H.Res. 14, the original House Resolution to declassify the 28 pages, and will provide a significant multiplier effect in increasing support on the House side for this issue.

  Full Transcript of Press Conference on S. 1471

Additionally, Senator Paul’s announcement of his determination to introduce the Senate bill again as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), is a major upshift in the pressure on President Obama to make the secret 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report public. The NDAA is a must-pass bill which should be on the Senate floor next week, so Senator Paul’s fight to amend it will provide a high-profile opportunity to put the Senate on record demanding the declassification. Paul’s choice of the NDAA is entirely appropriate and germane, because the fundamental issue of the 28 pages is the actual British-Saudi source of global terrorism, the United States’ adversary in the so-called “War on Terror,” and bears on the role of both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations in covering-up for, and in fact encouraging the creation and growth of that adversary.

The potential NDAA amendment was the focus of Politico‘s front-page coverage of the June 2 press conference; it was also covered on the front page of National Journal and prominently in The Hill, saturating Capitol Hill and forcing this fight to the attention of other lawmakers. Countless other articles and interviews continue to appear around the United States and internationally, including in the UK, Russia, several European countries, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

The surprise announcement that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), a prominent Democratic New York Senator, was cosponsoring the Senate bill, represents a significant strategic shift and escalation. Sen. Gillibrand is very close to Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, likely the next minority leader, who authored the original 2003 letter to President George W. Bush demanding declassification of this part of the Congressional report on 9/11.

Another new element introduced into the debate was former Senator Bob Graham’s revelation at the press conference that there is another report on Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda, done by the U.S. Treasury, which has also been completely buried for years. Senator Graham, at the podium, dramatically flipped through the pages of that report, all of which were completely blacked out. This fact serves to further substantiate Senator Graham’s assertion that the 28 pages are only emblematic of a pervasive, all-consuming cover-up of the Saudi role in financing 9-11 throughout the agencies of the federal government, which he called “a pattern of withholding information, unnecessarily, and to the detriment of the American people… This is an important issue that goes to the fundamental three words of American democracy—”We the People.” This government is a government of the people. People deserve the respect to know what their government is doing in their name.”

Press conference participants were interviewed at length by numerous television and print media, including London Guardian, Russia’s main TV1 channel and TV International, Sputnik News Service, the Alex Jones Show, on C-SPAN, and by the major Capitol Hill publications. The website 28Pages.org, a national hub for activists on this issue, hosted the LaRouchePAC TV live-stream of the press conference, and published a thorough and effective article summarizing the event, titled Rand’s Next Stand: Declassifying Foreign Government Ties to 9/11.

Join the ever-growing movement to declassify the 28 pages!

SEE “Declassify the 28 Pages”

The website 28pages.org has announced that Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) will introduce a Senate resolution, the Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Victims Act, to declassify and publicly disclose the 28 pages from the December 2002 Joint Intelligence Committee Report which concern a finding on foreign government support of the 9/11 hijackers. Sen. Paul’s office said that Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) will co-sponsor the resolution, and that the resolution is a companion to the existing House Resolution 14 (H.Res.14), which asks that the President declassify the 28 pages.

The announcement further says that Senator Paul will make his resolution public at an outdoor Capitol Hill press conference on Tuesday, June 2, at 10:00 am, joined by Representatives Walter Jones (R-NC), Stephen Lynch (D-MA), Thomas Massie (R-KY), and former Democratic Senator Bob Graham of Florida. Jones, Lynch, and Massie introduced H.Res. 14, and Graham, who was co-chair of the joint investigation which issued the original reports, has aided them in securing support in the Senate. Senator Graham appeared at a press conference earlier this year in the House of Representatives on January 7, along with Reps. Jones and Lynch, as well as leading representatives of the 9/11 families.

Video of BKRExGJXhH0
Video of full Jan. 7, 2015 press conference with Senator Bob Graham, Reps. Jones and Lynch, and members of the 9/11 families.

SEE “Declassify the 28 Pages”

28pages.org points to eleven Senators who are logical co-sponsors of the bill, as they were signators on a 2003 letter to President George W. Bush protesting his decision to redact the 28 pages and urging him to release them: Patrick Leahy (VT), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Harry Reid (NV), Barbara Boxer (CA), Patty Murray (WA), Dick Durbin (IL), Jack Reed (RI), Chuck Schumer (NY), Bill Nelson (FL), Tom Carper (DE) and Maria Cantwell (WA).

Join the movement to declassify the 28 pages, and help build overwhelming support for the new bill as soon as it is introduced into the U.S. Senate.

Video of m-bYPhDbbIA
Short promotional video for the movement to declassify the 28 pages on 9/11.

SEE “The Untold Story of 911”

The Drudge Report gave prominent coverage late Wednesday afternoon to a story from news.com.au, warning about a growing danger of world war—as early as this summer. The article began with a note from military analyst John Schindler, who received a commentary from an active non-American NATO official this week, that simply said:

“Probably be at war this summer. If we’re lucky it won’t be nuclear.”

From there, the article noted that NATO has been engaged in some of the biggest maneuvers “on Russia’s front door,” in Ukraine and off the Baltic coast. One naval maneuver, involving 18 battle ships and submarines from 10 NATO countries plus Sweden was called “Dynamic Mongoose,” and took place throughout much of May. It immediately followed ground maneuvers in Estonia, right on Russia’s Baltic border.

Across the world in the Pacific, the war of words between the United States and China has escalated to a crisis shrill, following US surveillance overflights in the Spratley Islands, which are disputed between China, the Philippines, and several other Asian Rim countries. George Soros recently told World Bank officials that a growing alliance between Russia and China could develop if China’s economy falters. After urging the IMF to give the Chinese currency trading status, he warned that, if China and Russia fully align, “then the threat of a third world war becomes real.”

Needless to say, what is missing from this otherwise precise warning of the immediacy of the danger of all-out war is the real underlying reason: The entire trans-Atlantic British-Wall Street financial system is about to blow, and the Greek debt negotiations, which come to a head by June 5, are one immediate, obvious trigger for a desperate move to war to “save the British empire.”

SEE “Stop WWIII”

The Wall Street Journal flashed its neocon colors today, in an open call for war on Russia and China as soon as possible. Titled “Russia, Iran and China are advancing as the U.S. retreats,” the Editorial says that Vladimir Putin’s sale of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Iran is “the latest evidence of an emerging new threat to world order and U.S. security: the rise of authoritarian regional powers. China, Russia and Iran are taking advantage of American retreat to assert political and (perhaps eventually) military dominance over their corners of the globe. They share a goal of reducing U.S. influence, bending neighbors to their political will, and ultimately using that regional base of power to diminish the global sway of Western democracies, especially the U.S.”.

China, however, is the greatest threat, they argue. “Perhaps the greatest long-term regional threat is a rising China with its rapid economic growth and desire to restore the Middle Kingdom to what its leaders see as their rightful dominance in East Asia. New Supreme Leader Xi Jinping has jettisoned Deng Xiaoping’s strategy of foreign-policy caution in favor of a new muscular nationalism,” building up China’s military and building bases in the South China Sea.

These “anti-democratic” regimes go beyond asserting power in their own region, the Urinal writes. “They protect other despots and search for ways to undermine U.S. allies. They can also form alliances with one another [BRICS, perhaps? — ed.], as Russia has with Iran on Syria and by selling its anti-aircraft system to Tehran. Over time regional powers can also become global threats, as Japan and Germany did a century ago, especially if they form authoritarian alliances.”

Most interestingly, the editorial dredges up the completely discredited neocons, whose ideology was famously exposed in the book Children of Satan:

“Americans can’t say they weren’t warned,” writes the Journal. “Twenty-three years ago, in the waning days of the George H.W. Bush Administration, the Pentagon planning shop published a strategy document that set blocking the rise of regionally dominant powers as one of America’s most important security goals.”

This clearly refers to the the Defense Planning Guidance from 1992, known as the “Wolfowitz Doctrine,” after Paul Wolfowitz, who co-authored it with Scooter Libby, Zalmay Khalizad, Dick Cheney, Andrew Marshall, Richard Perle, and the father of the neocons Albert Wohlstetter. The doctrine argued that, since with the fall of the Soviet Union, the US was the “only superpower,” and must prevent any other nation, or group of nations, from achieving the power which could threaten the preeminence of the US — by military means if necessary.

The Journal claims that “For 20 years and through administrations of both parties, the U.S. managed to contain the emergence of such regional threats. But that containment has broken down in Europe, the Middle East and East Asia during President Obama’s second term.”

Therefore, prepare for war, they conclude:

“The next President will need an urgent strategy to contain and counter the rising threat.”

Greek ministers continue to make the point that the era of austerity and debt payments has to end. Deputy Minister of Social Insurance Dimitris Stratoulis told Mega TV that Greece’s inability or unwillingness to pay the IMF installment in early June would not constitute a “credit event.” Stratoulis underlined that the payment of salaries and pensions and the funding of health care and education have priority over the payment of the IMF. “If we decide that there is no money left for the IMF, we have repeatedly said that our priority is to pay salaries, pensions, health, education,” he said reported enikos.gr news site.

Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, in a commentary on the Project Syndicate website, wrote that it is the demand for more austerity by the European Commission, European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, that is blocking the talks between Greece and these institutions.

“The problem is simple: Greece’s creditors insist on even greater austerity for this year and beyond — an approach that would impede recovery, obstruct growth, worsen the debt-deflationary cycle, and, in the end, erode Greeks’ willingness and ability to see through the reform agenda that the country so desperately needs,” said Varoufakis. “Our government cannot — and will not — accept a cure that has proven itself over five long years to be worse than the disease.”

He also pointed out that the creditors are “demanding unsustainably high primary surpluses (more than 2% of GDP in 2016 and exceeding 2.5, or even 3, for every year thereafter),” which, of course, would require even more austerity, including cuts in the already diminished pensions.

A closer review of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) FOIA release to Judicial Watch of information concerning the September 2012 Benghazi attacks, which we reported several days ago, compels the conclusion that the great body of the information released by DIA was disclosed, solely because DIA chose to do so, consistent with a pattern by responsible parts of the U.S. government to curb the Obama Administration’s overwhelming prideful incompetence.

While much of the text of the documents, written in 2012, remains withheld under FOIA exemptions, key passages in them have been released by the DIA, as we reported, showing Obama Administration misfeasance in the matter of its reports on the Benghazi incident, confirming the long-rumored transfer under U.S. oversight of Qaddafi-regime weapons from jihadists in Libya to jihadists in Syria, and forecasting the emergence of a jihadist political entity in eastern Syria and western Iraq (an entity which in fact emerged calling itself the Islamic State). The wholesale release by U.S. intelligence agencies of any intelligence information which is less than several decades old, is unusual to say the least, for such information is said to contain the “holy of holies” of such agencies: facts or hints about the agencies’ intelligence “activities, sources, and methods.” Much of the material still withheld from Judicial Watch is indeed classified as concerning activities, sources, and methods. Much of the released material was originally classified, probably for that reason.

But more important to consider, is that by law, the DIA is practically immune from being forced to disclose anything to the public, under FOIA or otherwise. Indeed, much of the still-withheld information — classified or not — is withheld under the Federal statute 10 U.S.C. section 424. Section 424 says that except “as required by the President” or providing information to Congress, “no provision of law [notably, the FOIA—ed.] shall be construed to require the disclosure of (1) the organization or any function of” a Department of Defense organization named in the law; or “(2) the number of persons employed by or assigned or detailed to any such organization or the name, official title, occupational series, grade, or salary of any such person.” The DOD organizations named which are thus the subjects of this law, are the DIA, the National Reconnaissance Office, and the National Geo-Spatial Agency.

What this means, is that the DIA, which “owns” the documents which were released to Judicial Watch, could probably have withheld most or all of the text which it did release, if it had chosen to do so. This law and similar laws about NSA-activities or CIA-operations information, are considered a lock for the government, in FOIA litigation. Note, for example, Seymour Hersh’s report about the bin Laden killing, that information about the raid was conveyed and stored in such a way that it cannot be accessed by FOIA, because of the CIA-operations law.

But the DIA chose to release information that it did not have to release to the public. The DIA’s entirely discretionary release of this information is a new instance in a pattern over the past several weeks, of assaults on the Obama Administration’s credibility and its crimes, by forces which Lyndon LaRouche has characterized as in aggregate “the institution of the Presidency.” A previous part of this pattern can be seen in Hersh’s article on the killing of bin Laden, the main U.S. source of which Hersh described as “a retired senior intelligence official who was knowledgeable about the intelligence about bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad,” the SEALs’ training for the raid, and the after-action reports. Less exotic, but nevertheless extremely important, were the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruling that the FBI/NSA bulk-collection program regarding Americans’ phone calls was illegal, and passage by the House of Representatives of the USA FREEDOM Act severely limiting that program. The unexpected resistance in the Senate to the Administration’s demand for fast-track authority to negotiate the TPP and other foreign-trade pacts in secret and without involvement of Congress in consequently changing U.S. laws, is likely part of this pattern as well. At the very least, a whole lot of the people who participate at a high level in governing the U.S., have gotten drastically fed up with the Obama Administration.

A similar moment occurred during the Nixon Administration in the early 1970s, when such institutions decided enough was enough, with emergence of the “Watergate” scandal. As a Senate committee investigated Nixon and Company’s corruption and undermining of Americans’ constitutional rights, and moved toward impeachment of Nixon, and a Federal grand jury appeared to be moving toward indictments of Administration officials, Congressional leaders told Nixon it was time for his resignation. Improbably, that man holding the most powerful office in the world complied, and announced his resignation. How soon the present institutions will so act regarding the Obama Administration remains to be seen. It simply cannot be soon enough.

by Matthew Ogden
May 21, 2105

Wilhelm Furtwängler died on November 30, 1954. The epitaph which Furtwängler chose for his own tombstone were the words of Saint Paul:

“Meanwhile, these three: Faith, Hope and Love abide with us, but the greatest of these is Love.”
Wilhelm Furtwängler’s grave, in the Bergfriedhof cemetery outside of Heidelberg, Germany. Inscribed on the tombstone are the words of St. Paul: “Meanwhile, these three: Faith, Hope and Love abide with us, but the greatest of these is Love.”

Not coincidentally, these are also the last words of Johannes Brahms’ final vocal composition, Die Vier Ernste Gesänge (Four Serious Songs). Brahms’ lifelong friend Clara Schumann had suffered a massive stroke in March of 1896, shortly after playing her last public concert at which she performed Brahms’ Variations on a Theme by Haydn. Brahms, anticipating that Clara Schumann would soon die, composed this series of four songs based on biblical text. Brahms himself would die the following year.

Brahms asks us, what is the meaning of our lives? Is man nothing more than a beast? Do our lives amount to anything more than the dust which we become? As animals die, so our bodies do as well. Are all of our pleasures, sufferings, trials, aspirations, our experiences between birth and death nothing greater than mere idle vanities, ephemeral and lost in time? A breath in the wind? A droplet in the rushing flood?

Or can we see beyond our deaths, as “through a glass, darkly,” to something which abides after our flesh is gone? To the future, into which the meaning of our lives will persist? As the poet Percy Shelley wrote in verses composed shortly before his own death:

Music, when soft voices die,
Vibrates in the memory…
And so thy thoughts, when thou art gone,
Love itself shall slumber on.

As Wilhelm Furtwängler said of Johannes Brahms in a speech commemorating the centenary of his birth: “Particularly in the last years of his life, he lived with the future, with eternity, in mind.”1Furtwängler on Music: Essays and Addresses, Ronald Taylor, trans., “Brahms” (London: Scolar Press, 1991), pp. 123-124
 

Unheard Melodies

Immortality is not merely the unceasing extension of mortality. It is not a never-ending longevity of the flesh. Rather, just as infinity is not the sum of an unlimited number of finites, eternity exists above time, outside of time. The eternal is not contained within and cannot be attained through the additive aggregate sum of temporals. The sequential chronology of what we call elapsed time is merely the unfolding shadows of something higher – the meaning of each moment cannot be located within the moment itself, but only from the standpoint of the greater flow of which it is a passing part. And without the prior existence of the whole, there could be no possibility for the existence of the parts.

How can we transcend the experience of the moment to participate in the eternal, the universal which created it? How can we be living participants within that whole which supersedes the existence of its subordinate parts?

Just as he said of Brahms, Wilhelm Furtwängler himself lived always “with the future, with eternity, in mind.” In fact, the capacity to live in the future – to participate in the eternal – is, in a very real way, the secret that lies behind the almost timeless quality of the experience of a performance by Furtwängler.

The absolutely distinct quality of Furtwängler’s performance will immediately grip any sentient listener, and is instantly recognizable. The relentless quality of suspension, a tension always pulling the listener forward from the very beginning through to the very end, an absolute coherence, an unbroken unity – all of these words describe the effect of the almost magical power that Furtwängler commanded over his music and his audiences. The conductor Claudio Abbado describes the effect that even the presence of Furtwängler exerted over his orchestra:

“Even when Furtwängler walked into the pit, there was tension around him – like electricity… And slowly, this wonderful warm sound came out of the orchestra, and the tension, always this wonderful tension from beginning to end. He was one of the few musicians who could create tension even in the pauses when there was nothing but silence.”— C. Abbado 2As quoted in The Devil’s Music Master: The Controversial Life and Career of Wilhelm Furtwängler, by Sam Shirakawa (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 349-50

A seemingly paradoxical idea: a musical tension which exists even in the moments when there is no audible sound. How can there be something in what seems like nothing? For Furtwängler, the notes were not the music, but were merely shadows dancing to a higher music, one which lurks silently but powerfully behind the sensual sounds. As the poet John Keats famously wrote in his Ode on a Grecian Urn:

Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear’d,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone.

This “silent form,” which lives outside of time, “dost tease us out of thought as doth eternity.” The eerie presence of a ghostly something visiting our present time from beyond time itself is the effect we experience through the music of Furtwängler. We are transported beyond the momentary experience of the part to an apprehension of the existence of a greater, superior whole, which is constantly exerting its power and control over each passing present moment in time.

Perhaps the most readily available example of this are Furtwängler’s recorded performances of Franz Schubert’s Symphony No. 9 in C Major, the so-called “Great” Symphony. Furtwängler’s rendering of this masterpiece remains the standard which no other performance of the work has since achieved. Furtwängler’s performance of this Schubert symphony was described by the great Russian conductor Valeri Gergiev in a recent interview3Interview by Gilbert Kaplan with Valeri Gergiev, published on New York Public Radio, WNYC, Mad About Music, June 1, 2003, in which he described Furtwängler as a giant, unequaled among all others, the conductor whom he admired most:

“The most difficult thing in conducting is not to slip into mechanical beating. So this restless search for a real tempo, a real pulse, of practically each bar of music, rather than just one tempo for one movement, is something what very few conductors could ever master. Not many conductors will confess, maybe, that it will be something difficult for them to do, but then they will go and compete with Furtwängler, and most probably lose. Because it’s a kind of God-given gift, a genius quality, which one conductor contributes to the playing of the orchestra — I describe it in the following: You can’t possibly imagine this same orchestra play the way they play with Furtwängler if you just remove him from the podium. It is just not possible to imagine they will do the same thing. They will be even maybe more organized, they’ll be very focused in a certain ensemble, but they will never deliver this kind of incredible expression which he is able to bring to life once being in front of an orchestra…

“Take the example of his performance of the “Great” Symphony of Franz Schubert… The quality of symphony and the quality of interpretation. Amazing. I believe in every movement there are so many changes of tempo. First, fantastic theme with horns are playing, and then, in the Second Movement – it seems to be very settled but then it becomes so desperately dramatic. And again, the Third Movement, it’s not just going like a clock, you know, da-da-da-da-DA-da-da-da-DA – it has a bite, it has a freedom, it has a fire.”

 

Video of xNTva5JCHuM
Recording of Wilhelm Furtwängler conducting the Berlin Philharmonic in a 1953 performance of Franz Schubert’s Symphony n°9 in C-Major, D 944.

The constant change in tempo so characteristic of Furtwängler’s music indicates the presence of a higher law, a higher time, dictating the unfolding of each moment in time. These are not arbitrary changes, not precalculated mathematical values, but the pulse of a living, breathing organism united by a single all-embracing coherent process of development, proceeding always into the future, residing in what is yet to come. The performer subordinates himself to that power, that higher law, striving always towards the apprehension of the unity which brings coherence to the multiplicity of the parts – an almost religious quality of devotion.
 

Listening to the Future

“Let us consider the activity of artistic creation… When we look closely at this process, we find we can distinguish two levels. On the first, each individual element combines with those adjacent to it to form larger elements, these larger elements then combining with others and so on, a logical outwards growth from the part to the whole. On the other level, the situation is the reverse: the given unity of the whole controls the behavior of the individual elements within it, down to the smallest detail. The essential thing to observe is that in any genuine work of art these two levels complement each other, so that the one only becomes effective when put together with the other…

“The artistic process that has as its starting point the unity of the whole, rests on the concept of a more-or-less complete vision of that whole. For the artist at work, this vision is the goal he seeks to attain; the star that, unbeknownst to him, guides his steps through the maze of obstacles and temptations that beset his path and shows him how to unite the forces at his command. Only at the end of the journey, therefore, will the vision emerge in its totality, not only for the listener, the receiver of the work of art, but also – and this is a vital point – for the composer, the creative artist himself. The total vision only achieves its full radiance when it merges with all the individual sources of light from within the work, the over-all and the particular interacting and stimulating each other. It is not that the vision is present, ready-made, from the beginning and is only waiting to be filled with artistic substance. On the contrary: the joy that the artist feels comes not from possessing the vision but from the activity of turning it into reality.” — W. FurtwänglerThoughts for All Seasons4Furtwängler on Music: Essays and Addresses, Ronald Taylor, trans., “Thoughts for All Seasons” (London: Scolar Press, 1991), pp. 123-124

The forgoing typifies Furtwängler’s insight into an actually ontological principle, one which extends far beyond music per se, which is as true in science as it is in art. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Furtwängler’s contemporaries Max Planck and Albert Einstein were themselves devoted musicians as much as they were scientists. In fact, Furtwängler’s composition teacher when he was a young man, Joseph Rheinberger (who was himself a friend and collaborator of Johannes Brahms), had also taught composition to the young Max Planck.

Einstein asserted that the paradoxes pertaining to time and causality presented by Planck’s discovery of the quantum would actually be resolved from the standpoint of a higher understanding of music. In an interview published as an appendix to the book Where Is Science Going?5Where Is Science Going?, Epilogue, A Socratic Dialogue: Planck, Einstein, Murphy (New York, W.W. Norton & Company, 1932) pp. 203-204, Einstein asserted:

“Our present rough way of applying the causal principle is quite superficial… We are like a juvenile learner at the piano, just relating one note to that which immediately proceed or follows. To an extent this may be very well when one is dealing with very simple and primitive compositions; but it will not do for an interpretation of a Bach Fugue. Quantum physics has presented us with very complex processes and to meet then we must further enlarge and refine our concept of causality.” — A. Einstein
Albert Einstein, like his friend Max Planck, was a passionate musician. Einstein said of himself: “Artistic premonition plays a not insignificant role in my life… If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician. I often think in music. I live my day dreams in music. I see my life in terms of music.” Elsewhere, he said of his discovery of relativity: “The theory of relativity occurred to me by intuition, and music is the driving force behind this intuition. My parents had me study the violin from the time I was six. My new discovery is the result of musical perception.”

The implications of Einstein’s allusion to Bach’s fugues are very revealing when considered in light of his contemporary Furtwängler’s insights as quoted above. When we consider the necessary existence of a unified whole in music, which as Furtwängler says “controls the behavior of the individual elements within it, down to the smallest detail,” we must ask: where does that whole exist? If the whole cannot exist in any part, nor in the aggregate of all the parts, where and when can we locate the existence of this unifying whole?

Only by listening to the future, to that totality which can never exist in the sequential temporal experiences of the ear, but only in the imagination which can consider the entire composition as a one, existing as a unity outside of time. By hearing that single unified Being and following it as it guides us through the inexorable evolution of its own Becoming. By allowing the inaudible echo of that yet-to-be-experienced future to resonate within the audible sounds of the present, each meeting and mutually interacting with one another at each unfolding moment in time. At no one moment of the sensed experience in time can this whole perceived, however it is present at all times, above time, guiding the behavior of each moment of the unfolding experience of time.

Furtwängler expresses this as the intersection between the Nah-Erleben and the Fernhören, the interaction between “near-experience” with the “distance-hearing,” also citing the fugues of Bach as exemplary of the most perfect expression of this principle:

“Bach remains today what he has always been – the divine creator on his throne above the clouds, beyond the reach of others… Here we find concentration on the moment in time united with the unheard expanse; the immediate realization of the part paired with the truly sovereign overall vision of the whole. With its ever-conscious feeling for the near and the far at the same time; with its unconstrained fulfillment of the here-and-now joined with an ever-present subconscious feeling for the structure, the current of the whole; its ‘near-experience’ (Nah-Erleben) with its ‘distance-hearing’ (Fernhören), Bach’s music is a greater example of biological certainty of purpose and natural power than we will find anywhere else in Music. Precisely this is what makes Bach’s music so truly unique… Bach, the creator of these choruses and these fugues, seems to be not a human being, but the spirit that rules the world, the very architect of the universe… It is this that makes him for us the greatest of all composers, the Homer of music, whose light still shines out across our musical firmament, and whom, in a very special sense, we have never surpassed.” — W. FurtwänglerBach

In Bach, we experience at every moment this intersection of the near with the far, the part with the whole, the microcosm with the macrocosm, the temporal with the eternal. As Furtwängler describes elsewhere, the mission of the artist is always to seek “the fulfillment of the moment within a larger process. Each individual thing has its own function and this within the development of the whole. The two meet and intersect at each moment. It is not always easy at first to grasp the fact that every detail has its function within the whole, and is not only ‘arranged’ within this whole, but often has an effect on the whole that goes far beyond its individual importance… This single-mindedness of purpose, this clear and unmistakable cohesion of the whole can only be created through real laws, based in nature.” – W. Furtwängler, Notebooks, 19466For this and following fragments, see: Wilhelm Furtwängler: Notebooks 1924-1954, Shaun Whiteside, trans. (Quartet Books, 1995) See also: Wilhelm Furtwängler, Ton und Wort: Aufsätze und Vorträge 1918-1954 (Wiesbaden: F.A. Brockhaus, 1955)
 

“If I Have Not Love, I Am Nothing”

“Love – love that is forever being seized and shaken by the work – can never be replaced. Love alone creates the preconditions for the visionary and correct understanding of ‘the whole’ in the work of art, for this whole is nothing but love. Each individual part can be more or less understood intellectually, but the whole can only ever be grasped by the living feeling of love. It is the only thing which is appropriate and fitting to the whole work of art as an image of the active and living world. Everything else, however skillful it may be, is limited, and therefore profoundly boring to me.”— W. FurtwänglerNotebooks, 19367Wilhelm Furtwängler: Notebooks 1924-1954, op.cit.

As the 19th Century drew to a close, Johannes Brahms’ setting in his Four Serious Songs of the words of St. Paul speaks almost as a prophesy, a warning to musicians, a eulogy for art in the century to come:

“Though I may speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but I have not love, so am I become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.”

Furtwängler insisted, without the dedication to the “the living feeling of love” which is required to grasp the understanding of a work of art in its wholeness, music dies, and becomes nothing more than the intellectualized assembly of individual separate parts rather than a single, living, organic whole. In the essay cited previously8Furtwängler on Music: Essays and Addresses, “Thoughts for All Seasons”op. cit., Furtwängler asks the question: what is the emotion which is required by the artist to grasp this fundamental unity of the whole?

“Corresponding to the power that works inwards, from the whole to the parts, a power which proceeds from a more or less complete vision of the whole, is an emotion that springs from the artist’s relationship to the world at its most profound and most meaningful – an emotion one may call love, humility, reverence, worship, awe, and many other things… a love of the world, which comes to us as the eternal gift of God. If only modern man would grasp that it is impossible to understand and shape the world as it confronts us without loving it! And that it is equally impossible to love it without seeking, in the context of this love, to understand it!”
Portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven, of whose music Furtwängler wrote: “In the form of Being, a constant Becoming is at work… to experience Becoming in Being, and to let others experience it — to grasp the fleeting life of the moment in the solid form — that is true reproduction.”

For Furtwängler, the late compositions of Beethoven represented the high-point in this ideal of cohesive artistic unity in which the parts became absolutely subordinated and inseparable from the whole – an ideal which, however, was increasingly abandoned following Beethoven’s death.

“With Beethoven, the parts increasingly lost their independence, to the point where they were incomprehensible without reference to the whole; no part made sense without reference to that which preceded it and that which followed. Up to the time of Beethoven, musical development had taken place with the tacit assumption that the work of art emerged like an organism… Whereas Beethoven sought to bring out the whole with ever greater clarity and power, his contemporaries but even more his successors turned away from this approach, and the concept of the work of art as an organic whole crumbled in their hands…”

The irony, however, of the rejection of the concept of the organic whole, is that since the very existence of the parts depends upon the existence of the whole, in the absence of this whole there also ceases to be the possibility of the parts!

“Today the concept of overall form has lost its central, dominant position. No longer does it appear to be able to assert itself over the material. No longer is it the whole that controls the behavior of the parts. …The whole has been consumed by the parts, with the result that, not only is there no longer a whole, but there are also no longer any parts, because these can only exist so long as there is a whole to which they can refer! Everything exhausts itself in the individual moment, no heed being paid either to what has gone before or to what follows. The consequence is a concentration on the effect of the moment, effect for its own sake, in harmony, in rhythm, in orchestration, and through numerous little titillating details.”

Thus, quite literally: “Though I may speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but I have not love, so am I become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” Furtwängler clearly identified what he saw as the tragedy of music’s decline as being fundamentally rooted in the loss among his contemporaries of the capacity for love.

“Our only hope of salvation, a return to the inspiration that comes from the living masterpieces of music, is all too often stultified by bad performances. The inability to feel the fundamental emotional content of a work through its entire course, from beginning to end, is at its most glaringly obvious in those works of whose living example we stand in greatest need today. It is those works that receive the worst performances because they are the very ones that make the greatest spiritual demands on the performer.”

 

The Music of Our Soul

Pope Francis recently stated in an interview, that for him, the most “Promethean” of all conductors is Wilhelm Furtwängler, citing Furtwängler’s performances of Beethoven and especially Bach, specifically his St. Matthew Passion, saying: “The piece by Bach that I love so much is the Erbarme Dich, the tears of Peter in the St. Matthew Passion. Sublime.”9Exclusive interview by Antonio Spadaro with Pope Francis in America: The National Catholic Review magazine, “A Big Heart Open to God”, September 30, 2013 issue

And indeed, Furtwängler’s music has a reverential, devout, almost religious quality to it. The orchestra under Furtwängler, becomes fused into a single instrument, a single organism, and becomes in his words “a point of entry of the divine.”

“The sense of the orchestra as an artistic medium is that this body, constituting of 90-100 different people, different heads and hands, becomes one instrument through which a soul, a feeling, an intuition is communicated to the listener in its tiniest details. The more it achieves this, the more it loses its vanity of wanting to be something itself, the more it becomes the mediator, the communicator, the vessel and point of entry of the divine, speaking through the great masters.”— W. FurtwänglerNotebooks, 192910Wilhelm Furtwängler: Notebooks 1924-1954, op.cit.

Furtwängler sought to transport his audiences from the mere temporal experience of the passing moment and into the universal, the eternal, the whole. This becomes the almost sacred devotion of the true artist and the true scientist alike. As Albert Einstein wrote in 1930 in an article published in the New York Times Magazine11Albert Einstein, “Religion and Science” New York Times Magazine (November 9, 1930), describing the what he called the “cosmic religious feeling” which motivates the great scientist:

“The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims, and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole.

“How can this cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another…? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.”— A. Einstein

Furtwängler’s music allows us to do just that. Furtwängler enables his audiences to escape that prison of shadows and sense-experience, and to experience instead the unheard music which lies beyond the notes. Each sound may quickly die, but the music which created it is eternal.

As Furtwängler’s great friend and collaborator, the violinist Yehudi Menuhin said:

“There are many conductors, but very few of them seem to reveal that secret chapel that lies at the very heart of all masterpieces. Beyond the notes, there are visions, and beyond those visions, there is this invisible and silent chapel, where an inner music plays, the music of our soul, whose echoes are but pale shadows. That was the genius of Furtwängler because he approached every work like a pilgrim who strives to experience this state of being that reminds us of Creation, the mystery which is at the heart of every cell. With his fluid hand movements, so full of meaning, he took his orchestras and his soloists to this sacred place.”— Y. Menuhin12As quoted in “Wilhelm Furtwängler: In Memoriam“, Société Wilhelm Furtwängler

 

Video of _NUvy-LSrDQ
Recording of Yehudi Menuhin performing Ludwig van Beethoven’s Violin Concerto in D major, Op. 61 with Wilhelm Furtwängler in 1953, one year prior to Furtwängler’s death.

SEE “Classical Renaissance”