July 3, 2015 – LaRouchePAC Friday Webcast

Transcript—JASON ROSS: Good evening. This is Friday, July 3, 2015, and you’re watching the regularly-scheduled Friday-night webcast here at LaRouchePAC.com. I’m Jason Ross, I’ll be hosting this evening, joined in the studio tonight by Jeff Steinberg of Executive Intelligence Review and by Benjamin Deniston of the LaRouche PAC science research team, “the Basement.” We’re definitely meeting at a countdown time, with decisions that are by no means certain regarding Greece, as well as the more-general war threat. We had a discussion with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche this morning, to get his guidance on the webcast tonight, and so I’ll start by posing the institutional question that came in this week, and ask Jeff to deliver Mr. LaRouche’s response.

The question is: Mr. LaRouche, on Sunday, July 5, Greek voters will be voting on a referendum on the latest Troika austerity demand. What, in your view, is the appropriate course of action for Greek voters and the Greek government? Please give us your assessment of the larger context of this historic vote. Jeff?

JEFFREY STEINBERG: Thanks, Jason. I’m going to really start by asking everybody watching this broadcast to put on your thinking caps and be prepared to consider a very complex answer, because nothing short of that would make sense, given the nature of the current strategic showdown moment that we’ve reached. So I’ve made an attempt to put together a summary of Mr. LaRouche’s comments that, as Jason said, took place over the course of about a ninety-minute discussion earlier today involving ourselves, Mr. LaRouche, Mrs. LaRouche, and so by no means am I presenting a verbatim transcript of what Mr. LaRouche had to say. But I think it captures the essence of the point that he wanted to make in response to the institutional question. And after I’ve read through that, I’ll make a few further comments which would be inappropriate until you hear what Mr. LaRouche himself had to say.

He said, there is no way to anticipate the outcome of Sunday’s vote. Greek voters will take advantage of what is available, but there’s a great deal of confusion. For example, we’re seeing different policy voices emerging in Britain. British opinion is not uniform. We know there is growing resentment against the Monarchy. The situation is up for grabs, and a few things can shift everything. Remember: we are on the edge of thermonuclear war. A decision on that showdown has not yet occurred. We can define what the results should be, but we cannot say at this point what the results will be. The British royals have super-Nazi views, while others in Britain have different attitudes, and dislike what the Monarchy is doing. Much of the actual outcome of this fight in Europe, in Greece, will be determined by the United States. It will be a bad decision if Obama prevails. If the key European nations adopt a consolidated view, that can also lead to a different outcome. Greece can take a different turn, based on opportunities presented by Russia and China. But if the British-Obama policy prevails, then you have Hell. Our policy is what should happen. China and other Asia factors will impact the events around Greece, and South America, in the larger BRICS context, is also quite important. One crucial factor is, how the Obama case is dealt with. High-level anti-Obama forces in the United States for the moment appear to be caving in, but this can change. For now, there is no known factional decision yet made. Guts and nerve will be key factors in determining the outcome. As in war, there are no pre-determined results. For now, no courageous decisions have been yet made in the U.S.

And Mr. LaRouche noted, were I in the command position today, I would know how to act decisively, but that is not the case. There is a growing prospect of Merkel being dumped in Germany. She is unpopular, and she could be brought down by an inside coup at any moment. There is serious pressure to dump her. And furthermore, if German institutions don’t move to dump her, there could be no Germany as we know it, very soon. If Merkel is not dumped soon, no part of Europe in fact will survive. We’ve reached one of those critical moments, where you could also expect to see a wave of assassinations of prominent persons, as we did see in 1989, and of course as we’ve seen throughout the history of the U.S. Presidency, virtually every outstanding President of the United States was either assassinated, or there were attempts to assassinate them. Lincoln was assassinated. McKinley was assassinated. There were attempts to assassinate Franklin Roosevelt, there was an attempt to assassinate Ronald Reagan, which greatly weakened his Presidency. So of course, this history begins with the case of Alexander Hamilton, who, while he was not President, was the key framer of our Constitutional system, as our first Secretary of the Treasury after being one of the essential people at the Constitutional Convention. He was assassinated by the British, through a British agent named Aaron Burr. And again, in Germany, starting with the assassination of Mr. Herrhausen in 1989, we had a whole series of assassinations that shaped the future of Germany and Europe from that point on.

Mr. LaRouche continued, the current situation, however, despite certain parallels on the assassination pattern in 1989, has no precedent. Merkel is held in contempt, but there is a tendency in Germany, to not act until it becomes an issue of absolute survival. And now we’re at that point. Some people have to sit down with Merkel, and tell her that she must change policy, or she is out. This is no chess game. We are at a breaking point. Anyone decent, with a military experience, can appreciate that the current situation is unacceptable and must change. Schäuble and Merkel do not function. If their policies continue, it means the total disintegration of Germany. For the moment, there is no unanimity in Europe. There is at once, a tendency for submission to the existing structures, and a great restiveness against those structures. There is no stable point of authority in Europe. The crucial point to be drawn from all of this, is that history is always made, is made by the willful actions of key historic figures. It is never pre-determined. Look at the Twentieth Century. Look at what happened to Germany and Japan. And Mr. LaRouche emphasized repeatedly throughout our discussion, you cannot take a deductive approach to history. You can’t take an array of historical and current facts, and assemble them, and in any way come up with a prediction or a determined outcome of events. One single factor can intervene, and twist events in a totally different direction. Yes, always consider the current prevailing trends, but then consider what will overthrow those prevailing trends. So, you cannot make fixed predictions. Only predict what you can willfully cause to happen. You can make decisions based on proximate insight. Remember, history is made, and predictions never work. A few people can shape history, and in the current situation, we may not yet even know who those people are. No master-plan ever worked. Mankind is a unique species. Only mankind can willfully make history, create a future. Our knowledge of that unique quality of mankind is one of our only crucial advantages.

So, we are at a moment that Mr. LaRouche described as a point of crucial indecision. Merkel must be ousted in the coming weeks. Everything she represents is a catastrophic failure for Europe. We do not know whether this will happen or not. We do know that if Merkel is dumped, and reliable German leadership is freed from Merkel and what she represents, this factor alone can change the correlation of forces in Europe and beyond. And remember that we have the BRICS summit meeting coming up in Ufa, Russia, that begins on the 8th of July — in other words next week — and will be immediately followed by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s [sco] summit. So, as these events are unfolding in Europe, you will have a gathering of the leading BRICS nations and all of the SCO nations. Russia and China represent a strategic military factor. India represents a major global factor, whether or not it’s a factor that’s involved in the military correlation.

Mr. LaRouche continued; he said, the British monarchy is going for general thermonuclear war, and that must be stopped. War will happen unless European forces are organized to stop the British. Obama must be dumped in the United States for the same reason. The Greek leaders are intelligent leaders; they’re also desperate. They need a break-out. Europe is self-destroyed, and this now greatly heightens the prospect of thermonuclear war. To conclude, we do not what will happen on Sunday; we know what should happen. The Greek debt cannot and should not be paid; it’s illegitimate debt, every penny of it is illegitimate. The entire trans-Atlantic system is hopelessly bankrupt; and the only proper course of action is Glass-Steagall. Glass-Steagall in the United States, in Europe, and globally. Remember, the unexpected factor makes history, and there is no such thing as an inevitable future.

Now, to just underscore the points that Mr. LaRouche made in our lengthy discussion, just in the last 72 hours there have been some very dramatic shifts in the situation that add to the unpredictability. The European heads of state have clearly made a determination that they are going for regime change in Greece. In other words, a group of European heads of state, representatives of the Troika institutions — the European Union, the European Central Bank, the IMF — have come to the conclusion that they must go for regime change in Greece. Think about the implications of that: Greece is a European Union country; Greece is a NATO member country. And the mere idea of contemplating regime change using some of the same exact methods that we saw in 2013 and early 2014 in Ukraine, is in itself unprecedented and a sign of absolute desperation. The IMF had a report prepared, which they withheld from Greek negotiators for the last 5 months, but which concluded that Greece could not pay their debt; and that any solution would have to involve a major write-down of the Greek debt — one of the essential points that the Greek government has been making all along. That report was never presented to the Greek government; it was presented to certain members of the German Bundestag, who leaked it to the German media. And as a result of that, the IMF was forced to publicly release the report and post it as of yesterday on their website. In the United States, Associated Press produced a lengthy historical account of the 1953 London Debt Conference, where half of the German debt, the war debt from both World War I and World War II, was written off and the other half of the debt was stretched out over a 30-year period to allow for the German “economic miracle” recovery. Greece, ironically, was one of the participants in that London conference, and approved of the idea of that restructuring and writing off of much of Germany’s debt.

So, all of these factors are at play right now. You have fraudulent polls being issued ’round the clock, aimed at impacting the outcome of the Greek referendum. So, these are just the events of the last 48-72 hours. There are events that are going on continuously that drive the situation towards a strategic thermonuclear confrontation with Russia; which could happen at virtually any moment. And it’s the desperation coming out of London and London’s allies, and Wall Street and some other capitals around Europe, that is the driving factor behind war. So, the essential point, again, to summarize Mr. LaRouche’s evaluation: We don’t know what’s going to happen on Sunday, and history is made by willful decisions and not by some kind of pattern of deductive analysis and predictions. So, the next few days, the 4th of July holiday weekend, is, itself, an historic and also very critical phase-shift moment in the history of the entire planet.

ROSS: Thanks, Jeff. So, the other topic to take up this evening is the suicide policy being promoted by the British Empire, whose agent, Hans Joachim John Schellnhuber — I guess I left out the British knight commander, etc. part — who played a key role in the Pope’s adoption of the recent encyclical Laudato Si, which demands speedy action to avert a purported disaster of manmade global warming. To address this concept and the broader areas of understanding in science and mankind that allow it to come about, Ben Deniston has some prepared remarks.

BENJAMIN DENISTON: Thanks, Jason. I think just to start, there’s I think two aspects to this issue as it’s been put forward. On the one side, we have — as we’ve documented on the LaRouche PAC website, as Mr. LaRouche has said repeatedly, as we’ve said on these webcasts, as we’ve said in Executive Intelligence Review magazine — we have an active Satanic policy. A stated explicit commitment from the British royal family and their associates, to reduce the world population to one, maybe two, maybe a few billion people. So, on the one side, this is an active factor of evil, of Satanic evil pushing this population reduction policy. And we’ve covered this in depth; we’re going to be covering this in more depth, nailing this for what it is — an oligarchical, Zeussian mentality attempting, going for the biggest genocide mankind has ever seen. And willing to pick any fraud they can, and promote any fraud they can to promote their pre-established policy, their pre-established ideology. Currently, a lot centering around this fraud of some manmade climate change catastrophe. So, that’s on the one side; we have this active factor of evil. But I think there’s another element, which is the stupidity and the immorality of the general population who go along with this fraud. People who really should know better; but are either duped, or capitulate to going along with this evil policy.

And what I want to talk about today, coming off of some of Mr. LaRouche’s emphasis on this in the recent period, is I think the deeper issue in this is the profound lack of understanding of the true nature of mankind. What is the human species that we’re a part of, that we’re fighting for in this process? A lack of the needed positive conception of what mankind is, where mankind needs to go, to inform people as to how to win this fight. A failure to understand this absolute scientific distinction between mankind and the animals, and the world of the beasts. As we’ve been presenting, for example, a failure to recognize the critical importance of embracing this galactic principle which I’m going to talk about; and a failure to accept what this perspective tells us about the true meaning of mankind. So, I think in the context of what’s coming up around this encyclical, around this escalation in depopulation program of the royals, I think the central issue to be put on the table is the real nature of progress; the real nature of progress for mankind. The characteristics of truly human creative progress, and how that defines this distinction of man from beast. And Mr. LaRouche was emphatic earlier today, that mankind creates the future; the future isn’t deduced, it doesn’t unfold from prior events. It’s an actual process of creative action, of creation. It’s the bringing into being of something fundamentally new in the universe; something that did not just unfold from the prior state, something whose existence does not come from the past, but from the actions of the intervention and the actions of human individuals, human beings, the human mind.

For example, we’re now looking to the galaxy; these types of shifts. But specifically what the galaxy means for mankind. We didn’t create the galaxy, but we can create what the galaxy means for mankind; and we can ask what the meaning of the galaxy for mankind means for the universe. These are the important questions; these are the question we have to put on the table and address. Because mankind’s nature, his existence, is this process of the willful creation of these types of new states, new levels; like this galactic perspective provides. And without that, mankind degenerates; without that continual commitment to the creation of these new states, society degenerates, culture degenerates. And if we allow that to be destroyed — that commitment to the future — mankind will go extinct like an animal species. If we behave like an animal species, if we reject this human process; this uniquely human characteristic of the creation of the future, we will go extinct like other animals go extinct.

So now this, I think, gets at the heart of the fraud of this whole Green paradigm. Aside from just the absolute Satanic belief of Prince Philip, Queen Elizabeth, these degenerate royals, this broader disease has infected society; it has infected people who should otherwise know better. And for example, take what’s discussed often as the need for sustainability; that we have to go to a sustainable economy, we have to have a sustainable policy. This is tied together with this whole Green ideology. Well, what does this mean? To sustain something means to keep something at a certain level; to take a process and maintain that process as it is at that level. That’s what it means to sustain something. People are saying that’s what we should be doing; we should be finding a fixed level of existence with the environment and sustaining that level of existence. But this is insane; this is unnatural, this goes against the natural order. And not even just for mankind, this goes against the natural order even for the animal world. Even for the animal world itself, outside of the distinction of mankind, this is an unnatural idea. It’s unscientific; just look at the evolution of life on Earth. It’s not sustainable; it’s revolutionary. Look at the extinction rate of animal life on Earth. The estimates are that over 99% of every animal species that’s every lived on this planet has gone extinct. And the people who have done these estimates, put the number at somewhere over 5 billion species extinct; gone, never to be seen again. And these weren’t just like single events; this was a continual process of extinction, this continual background extinction rate. You might have periodic events — comet impacts, large catastrophic events associated with so-called mass extinctions; but those are just a few peaks of this activity. There’s always an extinction rate; there’s always a process of extinction going on. Species are going; new species are coming, other species are going. Why? Because the system is organized around a certain type of progress. What’s the characteristic of that progress? What’s the rule? Increasing energy-flux density, not sustainability. The species that are associated with or express a lower energy-flux density get replaced; they go extinct. They get replaced with the development of new species, expressing a higher energy-flux density. That’s what the entire evolutionary record shows; this directionality.

So, even in the so-called natural world, the animal world, this idea of sustainability doesn’t exist. The only thing that’s sustainable in the natural world, is the creation of new, higher-order states. For the animal world, that process is associated with extinction, and replacement of species with new species. Individual animal species don’t progress. At any one point, some species might express a stage, a certain stage in the evolutionary process; but they didn’t create that stage. They’re subject to it; and they’re replaced when the system moves forward — or maybe cast aside to some lower order role. So, that’s the nature of the animal world. For mankind, it’s profoundly different. Again, animals don’t create the future; they’re subject to the future. Mankind uniquely, something we don’t see anywhere in the animal world, has the ability to create the future. And this means something interesting; this means mankind provides for his own existence. The needs for mankind are not just something given to mankind by the natural world. Again, any animal species, its needs, its resources are provided by the natural world. For mankind, it’s not provided, it’s the product of man’s own action; it’s a creation of mankind.

I think this gets to a useful way to dismiss this insane fraud of this fanaticism with this Gaia cult; this worship of Mother Earth as the all-giving provider of everything. That Mother Earth brings us everything we need; it’s all a product of Mother Earth that allows mankind to exist as mankind is. And this crap even got into the encyclical. To just read a short quote, it says: “Praise to you, my Lord, through our sister Mother Earth, who sustains and governs us; and who provides various fruits with colored flowers and herbs.” So, Mother Earth, who sustains and governs us, and who provides for us. This is just wrong. It’s not scientific, it’s not based in reality; it’s ridiculous. It’s a form of pagan worship, but it’s even outdated; it’s a couple of centuries old, I would say. Because as we’ve discussed on these webcasts, on the LaRouche PAC site, if you really want to talk about the supposed bounties of the Earth, what’s provided by the Earth we live on, well, you can’t talk about it. We have to talk about the galaxy; what about the galactic system? The Earth doesn’t provide everything that exists on the Earth. We’re getting more and more indications that the characteristics we experience on Earth are products of these higher-order systems. We’re talking about the natural world, life, the biosphere, evolution. That takes us back to the galaxy. We see indications that the anti-entropic development of life, the process that created the biosphere we have now, shows a direct correspondence to the relationship of our Solar System with the galaxy. We see this kind of harmonic relationship between the periodic increase and decrease in the bio-diversity record, in the number of species living on the planet; which rise and fall in direct correspondence with the motion of our Solar System through the galactic system. Experiencing these different galactic environments. It indicates to us that if we want to understand life, we can’t just look at Earth; we have to look — and not at just the Sun and Solar System — we have to look at the galaxy, the galactic system.

And you see this in climate, as well. The Earth’s climate, the changes in the climate that people are so afraid of right now, are not produced by the Earth. The Earth’s climate is not a product of the Earth system; it’s not even a product of the Solar System. The Sun plays a major role, obviously, but if you want to take, for example, the largest periods of climate change over the past half billion years, the past few hundred million years, we see indications that it is the effect of our galactic system. These major shifts from so-called ice house to so-called hot house modes of the Earth’s climate, correspond to the motion of our Solar System through the spiral arms of our galaxy. We’re talking about huge climactic changes which last for tens of millions of years, if not more. So the largest quantitative change, the largest influence on climate change over the past hundreds of millions of years, is the effect of our galactic system. That determines the climate in which we live in; certain periods where it’s nice and warm and pleasant, other periods where it’s freezing — the ice ages — it makes it very difficult for life. These are not produced by changes on Earth; these are produced by the galactic system. And then subsumed within that, as kind of a lower order effect, you have changes in the Sun and the Solar System. So, you have this kind of nesting of causality, where the galaxy plays the biggest role in determining climate change; according to the records we have. Then you have the effects of the Sun and the Solar System more broadly; changes in the Earth’s orbit and things like that. And then you have, beneath that, changes in certain processes local to the Earth itself; changes in ocean cycles, things like that.

And as we’ve discussed, as we’ve made a feature campaign around this issue, this brings us to the issue of water. How water behaves on our Earth is not determined by Mother Earth; it’s determined by these larger scale processes. One of the most important aspects to the entire water cycle, the process of atmospheric moisture flows which bring water to the land; that’s why we have water on land. Because the Sun’s evaporating it; it’s moving through the atmospheric system, and the factors that govern how it behaves in the atmospheric system are these galactic influences. Galactic cosmic radiation effecting how the water vapor behaves; when it decides to fall as rain, when and where you get cloud formation. These are effects of these larger galactic influences. So, the Earth doesn’t provide all. The Earth is one planet, out of a whole Solar System, which created the Earth. And the Solar System is a tiny part, a hundred billionth of the entire galactic system. And these systems control, influence and control process on Earth, activity on Earth. These processes control Earth systems.

So, to be kind, we could at least say that these current pagan beliefs expressed are at the minimum outdated. If they wanted to worship something, they could at least worship the galaxy. They could at least pay homage to these magical galactical forces that give us clouds and shade, that bring us water, that brought us advanced life. If they wanted to have some type of sacred ritual praising in some pagan fashion, they could at least be up to date. You want to praise Mother Earth? That was a few centuries ago. We could at least get up to the real times.

Even this is addressing this on a lower level. I just want to come back to the main point here, which is that mankind does not depend upon the bounty of the Earth; whether that was created by the Earth itself or the Earth and the Sun or the Earth and the galaxy interacting. Mankind depends upon the bounty of mankind’s creation; that’s what mankind depends upon. You have this reference in this encyclical about the “fruits of the Earth”; that we “live off the fruits of the Earth.” Do we? Do we live off the natural fruits of the Earth? Have you ever seen natural corn, that wasn’t produced by human intervention? Have you ever seen the natural state of wheat, of apples, of fruit? These are tiny things, hardly any nutrition; no way you could sustain society on the natural bounty of the biosphere. What we eat is the product of generations and generations of human cultivation, human intervention, to massively the calories, the quality of the food available in these forms. If you compare modern corn that we eat today to the original corn that it comes from, it’s this tiny little thing that certainly wouldn’t look very tasty. And you’d have to eat a lot of it just to even try and get by. So, we’re not fed by nature; we’re not fed by the natural bounty of Nature. We’re fed by the creative actions of mankind improving Nature, changing Nature. Taking a certain baseline, but making it fundamentally new; fundamentally different, such that what we are sustained by is not that original state. What we’re sustained by the intervention and the process of intervention of mankind of past generations.

Or take another important example, in terms of what we utilize in terms of resources to sustain modern society. Take energy supplies; take power. Take different forms of fire. The energy sources which sustain practically all modern aspects of society, and just look at the process of the increase of the quality of these energy supplies. The increasing energy-flux density; and where these resources really come from. Now, we started with wood; you could certainly say that wood is a certain bounty of the Earth, it’s produced by the biosphere. Again, what mankind has done has been to cultivate forests, plant trees, increase the production of this resource so it’s not just the natural state. It’s again the product of man’s intervention. You could say it’s a bounty of the Earth, so to speak. But then we move beyond that; we went to things like coal, things like petroleum. And this I think is kind of interesting, because this is not just a real-time production by the Earth, by the biosphere in any one given state. This is the product of geological time scales; this is the product of evolutionary time scales of activity by the biosphere to produce these concentrations of energy sources. So in a sense, I think it’s kind of an interesting question, because in a way it’s mankind moving from acting with the biosphere in real generational time, to kind of interacting with the system over evolutionary time; with characteristics of the system defined by geological time periods. Kind of elevating mankind’s quality, the principle of mankind’s quality of interaction beyond just a real-time interaction into a higher state; into kind of a geological time scale, geological force.

It’s interesting, but there is a much bigger shift; something much more interesting, which is, you go to nuclear reactions. What about the vast energy stores provided by fissionable heavy elements? Uranium; thorium. Did Mother Earth produce uranium? Is that a product of the Earth? Did the Earth produce thorium? No; these are not products — they might be on Earth, you might find them on Earth, but these are products of much larger processes. These are products of stellar processes, of the activities of entire stars, of entire stellar systems, acting in kind of a quasi-metabolic process to produce the entire periodic table; to produce these heavy elements, which may have ended up on Earth, but they’re not a product of Mother Earth. But mankind has developed to the point where we can relate to these — which has nothing to do with Mother Earth — and they can provide orders of magnitude more energy, and higher qualities of energy than anything produced by the Earth processes themselves. Or toward the frontier where we really have to go right now, go to fusion. Combining lighter elements together to release energy. These lighter elements were not a product of the Earth.

So, when we just step back and look at this process, mankind moving to a fission/fusion economy; a kind of fission/fusion mode of existence in the universe, sustaining mankind — sustaining his growth and development by interacting with processes on this scale — is moving to the principles to interacting with the principles that subsume the Earth, that subsume and created the Earth system. That mankind, operating on these nuclear processes, can in effect redefine his relationship to the universe based on this new quality of interaction, is a fundamental leap; beyond just interacting with the Earth process per se. And interacting in principle, with the principles from which the Earth was created, and by which the Earth is controlled. Even though we might be doing it on Earth, it is the principle of mankind operating on a stellar and potentially galactic scale of activity. Those are the domains of activity; those are the processes which we are understanding, acting upon, and utilizing to change the way we can sustain ourselves.

So, these shifts in man’s relation to the universe, they’re the product of the actions of mankind. The substance of these actions are the creations of man, which generate entire new qualitative levels of existence for the human species. These are actual physical creations of man, for man, which man then depends upon; which man then exists upon. So we’re not dependent upon Mother Earth; we depend upon the creative actions of our own species. And I think when we adopt this proper scientific framework, understanding that this is the unique quality of intervention that mankind can make — that animals cannot make — then we get the proper framework where we can point in the direction of a kind of scientific conception of the immortality of mankind. Not the immortality of any individual, but a certain quality of action which we can associate with the potential immortality of our species; of the human species. Because it is only by this action of continually generating newer, higher-order states of existence that we can actually insure the continuation of mankind. And again, sustainability does not exist; the only real sustainability, the only real continuation is in creation; continual creation. And not just unfolding of present events, but the generation of qualitatively new states which are the product of the human mind.

And so, when you take this away, you’re dooming the human species. You’re denying people access to the quality of action that truly makes them human, and societies degenerate. Any healthy society has to be fundamentally premised on this as the highest expression of natural law. That every human individual, by his existence as a human being, has the right to participate in this process of creating a new future. Because if people don’t have a chance, don’t have an opportunity to participate in the process of creating a new future, you’re denying them their real humanity.

And just to conclude, I think really what we want to start looking toward is this galactic level; because this is the new, higher-order domain, which we don’t yet fully understand. We see this case of the water supplies; we see how mankind acting on the level of understanding the higher-order galactic system governing these climate processes, these water processes on Earth can enable mankind to act in a completely new way. But that, I think, is just scratching the surface; there is an immense amount we don’t yet understand about this principle of galactic systems. And the potential for mankind discovering these new levels; the new physics, the new science associated with these galactic processes will enable this next qualitative step. This next leap in mankind moving beyond just relating to the principle of the Earth; moving beyond just relating with the principle of the Solar System, so to speak, and defining what we could call a galactic mankind. Mankind who mediates his action with the universe by his ability to understand and control certain aspects of this galactic principle; and we have to commit to allowing people to create that and participate in the process of creating that. And anything less than that, is denying mankind his true right, his true dignity as a creative force. And I think this is the proper framework to see the true evil and the Satanic nature of this Green ideology, this Green policy; whether it’s expressed by Prince Philip in an outright conscious Satanic view, or just stupid people in our population who go along with this and accept this, and who will end up contributing to the same effect.

ROSS: Great; thanks very much, Ben. Well, that will bring our discussion today to a close. As an announcement, I do want to remind people that tomorrow if you’re in the New York area, you can come in person; otherwise, at 1pm on our website, Lyndon LaRouche will be engaged in a video connection discussion with Manhattan. So, look forward to seeing you again later on.