Hi! Welcome to the LaRouche PAC Weekly Reportfor December 23, 2016.

My name is Benjamin Deniston; I'll be hostingthe discussion today.

We're happy to be joined by Mike Billingtonof Executive Intelligence Review here in the studio; and over Google Hang-outs, we haveDiane Sare, leader of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee joining us from the New Jersey-NewYork area.

So today we have, I think, a rather excitingand important discussion.

We're here on the eve of Christmas Eve; andwe thought it was very important to do a show today and have a discussion, because thisis an extremely intense and important political situation right now.

We hope all of you have a sense of the importanceof the situation in the immediate hours and days right now; and are not too swept up inthe festivities of the holidays.

Despite the massive fake news operation, otherwiseknown as the mainstream media, despite what you're hearing from that, there is a majorhistorical and strategic shift underway right now globally.

I think just to highlight one element of this,there's been a major freak-out around a leaked Pentagon transition memo from the incomingTrump administration, which explicitly does not list Russia as an existential threat tothe United States.

This alone is one more small but importantindication of the type of transition we're seeing.

There's a lot of questions around the Trumpadministration, but what's been absolutely clear consistently is that he is looking totake this entire geopolitical threat of World War III off the table.

This is just another indication showing thathe is not willing to play this Obama-Hillary Clinton going back to the George Bush administration,geopolitical game of trying to threaten, undermine, and destroy Russia and China to try and maintainsome kind of Anglo-American global hegemony.

This is completely terrifying Obama and thepeople behind him in the United States, in Europe, in London and related places.

This is creating on the one side obviouslya clear opportunity; but also a rather tense and dangerous situation.

It was just a few days ago that Mr.

LaRoucheemphatically warned that in this period, even if it seems like we're close to the inaugurationof Trump, we still have a very dangerous transition time; and you have Obama sitting there asa killer, as a murderer, who has committed acts of murder around the world, destroyednations around the world, killed Americans, completely ripped up Constitutional measuresand those grounds.

And he is sitting there, still in office,still in power; and it was only in the immediate hours and days after that that you had almostby the book, a wave of terrorist-type activity launched all over the planet.

You had this terrorist event in Germany, whichis still creating major hysteria over there, and there are still major questions aboutwhat actually happened with that operation.

You obviously had the assassination of thisRussian ambassador in Turkey, which was a direct threat to the entire operation that'sbeen run successfully by Putin to bring stability and an actual fight against real terrorismin that region in connection with a series of other terrorist threats and attempted actionsaround the world.

It's almost a by the book response of thischaos operation blowing up.

But what we're going to discuss more todayis going to be very useful.

Mike is going to put some depth in where theworld is actually going and could be going; assuming we can solidify this strategic shift;and why the new directionality of the planet under the leadership of Putin, China, andallied forces is really threatening to overturn this historical paradigm that's crushed theworld for many decades at this point.

I want to hand it over to Mike; and we'regoing to get into the discussion.


I'm certainly glad to be here.

It is an incredible moment in history; itreminds me of the opening of Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities, where he says, "It was thebest of times, it was the worst of times.

" He meant it, and it's true; we are in a revolutionaryperiod, there's no question about that.

This is sweeping the globe; it's already largelytaken over Asia, and the Brexit and the Italian vote, the Trump vote, and so forth, indicatethat people have finally reached the limit to the power of tyranny over their economy,over perpetual warfare.

But a revolution doesn't necessarily havea positive outcome, and that's actually what Dickens was talking about.

The French Revolution came soon after thehistoric and wonderful American Revolution based on a new conception of man; based uponscience and technology and a new financial system under Hamilton's ideas to defeat thepower of the British Empire which lay in their global financial empire.

But the French Revolution was taken over actuallyby the British; but turned into chaos.

It's what Schiller said was "a great moment[in history] has found a little people.

" So, instead of a great republic, you endedwith the guillotine; you ended up with Robespierre saying the revolution has no need for science,and ultimately this led to the emergence of the first fascist � Napoleon.

So, we cannot be complacent; we have a tremendousvictory in the defeat of Obama and his clone, Hillary, and their British operation.

But we certainly cannot sit back and crossour fingers and hope that Trump is going to do the right thing.

It's going to be up to us.

We should reflect on how the American Revolutionsucceeded.

It succeeded because it was focussed on atremendous sense of history and philosophical thought; the Founding Fathers put togetherthe Federalist Papers, the writings of Alexander Hamilton, which we've recently published.

If you read these, these are not easy; yetthis was the basis on which the so-called common men and women studied and came to theconclusion that in fact this small group of leaders were leading them in the right direction,and had created a future.

It was based on poetry.

In fact, Schiller was known as the Poet ofFreedom and was treasured for 100 years after the American Revolution as the poet of theAmerican Revolution; despite being German and writing in German.

But this was known to the American people.

The music; the great Messiah by Handel wascomposed in 1741 � it was known.

Our Schiller Institute just performed a phenomenalversion of this great work � the Messiah � at the Co-Cathedral of St.

Joseph in Brooklynlast week in an extremely moving ceremony.

These are the kinds of ceremonies that tookplace at that time; that lifted people to a higher sense of their humanity, of the dignityof man, and of creating a future.

So, which of these two paths are we goingto be taking today? Well, it's obvious which way Obama was going;we've made that very clear.

His intention was war; not only the perpetualwars in the Middle East, but leading to a war with Russia, a war with China.

These are not completely resolved, but asBen said, we're a long way away from that horror, which was facing us had we not defeatedthat in this final election.

But the result of these 16 years of Bush andObama can be seen in what's happened to our own country; not just the Hell that's beentaken to the Middle East and other parts of the world.

We now have a decline in life expectancy forthe first time in our nation's history.

We have a drug epidemic in which 1 out of15 Americans are addicted to heroin or its substitutes; 1 out of 15 Americans.

This is not a problem; this is a disaster,a collapse of civilization which is not only tolerated and supported openly by our President,who promotes legalizing drugs and who is doing everything in his power to stop the emergenceof a war on drugs in the Philippines, which I'll come back to.

So, on the other hand, we see that Russia,under Putin's direction, has intervened to stop this series of regime-change operations.

What's happened in the tremendous victoryin Aleppo against terrorism, is that Putin has demonstrated that if you work hand-in-handwith sovereign nations, with their leaders, you can defeat terrorism.

And he basically exposed the fact that Obama� like Bush � was on the side of the terrorists; under the guise of fighting terrorism, wasopenly working with the Saudis and the British, who were arming and creating these terroristmovements to overthrow regimes who refused to follow their dictates � the so-called"regime-change" movement.

That's been probably crushed; this is notcompletely solved, but what's happened in Aleppo not only stops the disintegration ofSyria, but it should � if properly pursued � mean the end of the regime-change criminalityof both Bush and Obama once and for all.

I'm going to read to you � today happenedto be the day that Putin gave his annual end of year press conference.

I think just reading one section of part ofthat, and paraphrasing a few others is important.

It's important for people to watch Putin;it's done with an English voice-over.

It's useful to watch to see why it is thatthe oligarchy is so terrified of this man.

I'm just going to read you � actually itwas a question that came from a man named Yevgeny Primakov.

It turns out that he is, indeed, the grandsonof the great Yevgeny Primakov who died recently; but who was the original architect of theidea of China, Russia, and India collaborating to form a new core of nations that could appealto America to join them.

Which is, of course, what has to happen, asa basis of reversing the imperial decline of the human race; and which led to the BRICS,it led to the New Silk Road.

So, his grandson asked a question which said,"Mr.

Putin, Barack Obama, who is still your official colleague, said that 37% of the Republicanssympathize with you.

And hearing this, Ronald Reagan would haverolled over in his grave.

" So, he says, "Our western colleagues oftentell us that you have the power to manipulate the world, to designate Presidents and tointerfere in elections here and there.

How does it feel to be the most powerful personon Earth? Thank you.

" So, with that humorous, but very insightfulquestion, Putin said the following: "The current US Administration and leadersof the Democratic Party are trying to blame all their failures on outside factors�.

"We know that not only did the DemocraticParty lose the presidential election, but also the Senate, where the Republicans havethe majority, and Congress, where the Republicans are also in control.

Did we, or I also do that?.

"It seems to me there is a gap between theelite�s vision of what is good and bad and that of what in earlier times we would havecalled the broad popular masses�.

[a] substantial part of the American people sharesimilar views with us on the world�s organization, what we ought to be doing, and the commonthreats and challenges we are facing.

It is good that there are people who sympathizewith our views on traditional values because this forms a good foundation on which to buildrelations between two such powerful countries as Russia and the United States, build themon the basis of our peoples� mutual sympathy.


I'm not so sure who might be turningin their grave right now.

It seems to me that Reagan would be happyto see his party�s people winning everywhere, and would welcome the victory of the newlyelected President so adept at catching the public mood, and who took precisely this directionand pressed onwards to the very end, even when no one except us believed he could win.

"The outstanding Democrats in American historywould probably be turning in their graves though.

Roosevelt certainly would be because he wasan exceptional statesman in American and world history, who knew how to unite the nationeven during the Great Depression�s bleakest years, in the late 1930s, and during WorldWar II.

Today�s administration, however, is veryclearly dividing the nation.

The call for the electors not to vote foreither candidate, in this case, not to vote for the President-elect, was quite simplya step towards dividing the nation.

Two electors did decide not to vote for Trump,and four for Clinton, and here too they lost.

They are losing on all fronts and lookingfor scapegoats on whom to lay the blame.

I think that this is an affront to their owndignity.

It is important to know how to lose gracefully.

" Helga LaRouche commented when I read thisto her, that this is a call not only to the Democrats in America, but to the oligarchsthroughout the world who are acting as if this revolutionary change is not taking place;as if they still have the power to dictate policies, and who are hysterical about whatis happening in America.

Putin concludes this way; he says:"But my real hope is for us to build business-like and constructive relations with the new Presidentand with the future Democratic Party leaders as well, because this is in the interestsof both countries and peoples.

" So, this is leadership; what we so sorelymiss here in the United States.

There's much more; more will be made availablein the EIR.

Now let me turn to Asia.

Asia today should � in fact China in particular,but not just China � be seen as the model which America must follow if we are to pullourselves out of the morass that we're in today.

We've discussed this in this program and inour publications many times: the entire Silk Road development, the development of corridors.

I want to put some maps up, and just veryquickly review some of the incredible development projects that are going on, virtually everysingle day.

This [Fig.

1] is a map published just in thelast few days by something called MERICS [the Mercator Institute for China Studies].

They have a competent article on the wholeSilk Road process.

They've marked in this red graphic where someof the corridors are; they're not all there.

Of course you have the original corridor,which was the Trans-Siberian Railroad; which was developed with consultation and advicefrom Henry Carey and the American System, who worked with the Russians to replicatewhat had been done in the United States with the Transcontinental Railroad, not just tobe from one end to the other, but to develop the entire region in between.

DENISTON: It's the black-gray dashed lineof the existing rail lines.

BILLINGTON: Yeah, this one here, where I'mrunning that thing.

Now, you see the lower one that goes throughChina, through Xinjiang Province, into Kazakhstan.

This is the New Silk Road, which was developedfollowing the 1990s, with the fall of the Soviet Union.

Helga Zepp LaRouche helped organize in Beijinga conference in 1996 on what the Chinese call the New Eurasian Land-Bridge.

Helga called it the New Silk Road even then.

This led to the building of this rail whichis now functioning.

It has several branches, both in China, and,on the far side, in Europe, as well as branches down into central Asia.

It's being upgraded.

It's not connected, it doesn't have the samegrade, most of it is not high-speed.

So this is a work-in-process.

Now look at what's happened just in the lastcouple years.

This red line down here, is what's calledthe Pakistan Corridor.

This is a connection by rail, from China,down through Pakistan, into Baluchistan (the southern part of Pakistan), and to the GwadarPort, which is being transformed into a major hub for oil from the Middle East, for tradewith India.

Hopefully, if the India/Pakistan relationshipcan be resolved.

Then � not on this map � right aroundhere in southern Iran, is the development of the Chabahar Port, from which there arerail connections up through Iran to Teheran, and then into Azerbaijan, and into Russia.

Another north/south route; so, you have severalnorth/south routes.

Over here, you see this red line that goesfrom Kunming in southern China, through Thailand, Myanmar, and into India.

This is the old Burma Road that was builtduring the Second World War.


Lyndon LaRouche had a hand in buildingthe Burma Road (or worked along that Road).

That's now being reconstructed.

It will eventually be a rail connection.

And you see that this pipeline � the blackline here � is an offshoot from China all the way down to the coast of Myanmar, wherethey are now taking in shipments from Middle East oil and piping it up into China.

Over here, this corridor.

You already have rail connections from Kunmingdown to the Laos border, and now the Chinese are building a high-speed rail through Laos,down to the Thai border.

Just in the last few months, they've concludedtheir plans to build a high-speed rail from the Laos border down to Bangkok.

At this point, there's only an old railroadfrom Bangkok down to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia � down here.

But that will eventually be done; and in themeantime, probably the Chinese, maybe the Japanese, are building a high-speed rail fromKuala Lumpur to Singapore.

So, eventually, you'll have all the way fromKunming down to Singapore.

In Indonesia, the Chinese are building a railroadfrom the capital of Jakarta to Bandung.

Many of you have heard of Bandung from thefamous Bandung Conference in 1955, which was the first meeting of Asian and African leaderswho had formerly been colonized, meeting without their colonial masters � the so-called Asia-AfricaConference that was organized by Sukarno and Nehru and Chou En-Lai (from China), and others.

So that's in the process; other developmentsthere.

If you look at this part of the Africa map[Fig.

2], these are some railroads that have already been constructed.

Go to the next map of the two Africa maps.


This [Fig.

3] is fromEIR's report "The NewSilk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge".

This shows, on this side, the existing railstructures as of a few years ago.

You see that basically there's no way to getfrom one capital to another.

You can only get the raw materials from themine out to the port, where it was shipped off to Europe and America.

That's all the colonial powers cared aboutin developing Africa.

What you see here, is a general map of thekind of commitment that the Chinese have made to connect every capital of Africa with high-speedrail, several cross-continental railroads.

The Chinese need raw materials, just likethe Europeans did, but they're paying for it; they're building nations.

They're building nations that have industry,agriculture, water, power, education, using a model which we used to call the AmericanSystem, but which we've deserted in our country.

The same in South America.

You can go to the next map [Fig.

4] here.

This is also from our report.

It's not quite accurate for what is in theprocess now, actually, because the Chinese are talking about building two trans-oceanicrailroads: one that goes from Peru directly into Brazil and to the coast; one that goessouth of that through Bolivia.

The Bolivians, of course, want that railroadto go through Bolivia.

So, again, transforming the world in a waywhich, of course, the U.


long ago ceased to do; becoming more of a British-style colonialpower which looted the raw materials, imposing huge amounts of debt, and then using thatdebt as a weapon to keep the countries in a state of backwardness.

Now, I'm going to look at two other aspectsof Asia: the Philippines and Japan � where huge transformations are taking place.

Most of you have seen � either in our materialor just in the daily news � about Rodrigo Duterte, the new [philippine] President whotook office in June of this year, who has totally transformed the Philippines, withmassive, massive support from the population, estimated at more than 80%.

Why? It's because he took on the reality that thecountry had been destroyed.

The history of the Philippines, in brief,was that in the 1970s and '80s, they were viewed by the rest of Asia � including Korea,by the way � as the model for development, under Ferdinand Marcos.

They had built the first nuclear power plant.

They had made the country self-sufficientin rice, by direct support for infrastructure for agriculture.

They had built 11 major industrial infrastructureprojects.

They had built rail and road infrastructure.

Imelda Marcos, whom most of you know onlybecause she supposedly was wildly extravagant and had millions of pairs of shoes.

Well, the reason she had the shoes was becauseshe built a shoe industry in the Philippines.

She brought in Italian shoemakers; she shippedin cattle from Australia, for the leather; she created a shoe industry.

And those who produced the shoes in the Philippineswere so grateful that they gave her the first pair of any new shoe they developed.

That's the reality, contrary to the "fakenews" that we received back in the 1980s, when the neo-cons, under George Schultz andHenry Kissinger and others decided to overthrow Marcos, to make a horrible example of him;that they would not allow Third World countries to have nuclear power, to be self-sufficient.

The result is, that what was once the greatestrising power in Southeast Asia, has become the basket case of that region.

And this is what Duterte is acknowledging.

He's saying, "We've been destroyed by theso-called big-brother, who looks down at the little brown brothers in the Philippines.

" And he said, "We're not going to tolerateit anymore.

We're going to crush the drugs that have beenbrought into our country and are destroying our children.

And we're going to reject the U.


dominationof our economy, where all they want is our raw materials, and to use our bright youngpeople who graduate from college who have no jobs as engineers or scientists or teachers,or nurses or doctors, even, but who can only work all night long in call-centers, answeringcalls from the master back in the United States who has a problem with his computer or hisbanking code.

" This is how the country was destroyed.

So, he's turned to China; he's turned to Russia.

His Defense Minister, Delfin Lorenzana, hasgone to Russia; he's going to China.

They're going to build that country.

They're going to end this drug epidemic.

And for that, he's being told he's going tobe taken to the International Criminal Court for extra-judicial murders, for human rightsviolations, by the fact that drug dealers who fight back are being killed.

Well, this is rather hypocritical, I wouldsay.

If you count the tens of thousands, hundredsof thousands of people that Obama has killed through extra-judicial murder � no court,no due process, no proof.

Just the king decides: "This is my list ofpeople to kill this week"; he and John Brennan, Director of the CIA.

This is rather hypocritical.

What's really behind it? The British don't want to stop drugs.

The banking institutions in London and NewYork are drug dependent, meaning they're drug-money dependent, in addition to the fact that manyof the bankers are high on cocaine and heroin.

They're drug dependent in the sense that thebiggest business in the world is propping up these bankrupt Western banks who do nothingbut speculate.

This is the reality of this.

And of course, the main thing is that theydon't want to see this war on drugs brought home.

One out of 15 Americans addicted to heroin;this is mind-boggling! And they know that the American people, ifthey're given a sense, like we did with our War on Drugs policy under LaRouche's directionback in the '80s and '90s; that this could capture the American people.

Lastly, let me mention Japan.

The British-American strategy for containingChina and Russia in the Asian side, has always been South Korea, Japan, the Philippines,and Australia.

And Singapore is in there someplace.

Many of you know Korea's in total upheaval.

The President who started off wanting to workwith Russia and China, and was somehow completely taken over by Obama, turned against the collaborationwith Eurasia; agreed to bring in these U.


THAAD missiles, supposedly to protect themfrom North Korea.

But these are missiles that go up into thehigh altitude.

North Korea is 30 miles away from Seoul.

You don't need this for Korea! You need them for China and Russia, for war.

They were in the process of turning the Philippinesinto a massive U.


military base, under an agreement with the former puppet-President.

In the Korea case, the President is now beingimpeached.

She'll probably be out in April or so.

The Opposition wants to stop that THAAD deployment.

The Philippines we know; we've just discussedit.

Just in the last week, Duterte repeated thathe's probably going to absolutely cancel the strategic agreements with the United States.

"We don't need foreign soldiers in our country,"he said.

"We're not going to have a war with China.

" Now, Japan.

Lyndon LaRouche has always said that thereare two Japans.

There's the Japan that came out of feudalismwith the Meiji Restoration, which was highly influenced by the American System.

Key people who brought in the work of HenryCarey, Friedrich List, which gave rise to this great industrial explosion in Japan;which turned them into the leading nation of Asia at that time, that superseded the5000-year old culture and tradition in China in terms of its strength.

But there was also the Japan of the BritishEmpire; the British came at the same time, and basically said, "Look, Japan, you're anisland nation like we are.

You need to get raw materials, you don't havethem in your own country.

The only way you're going to get them is byhaving a mighty military and colonizing; taking over countries and taking their raw materialslike we have � the great British Empire.

" Without going through all the details, asyou know, this eventually won out in the sense that Japan adopted a militarist policy andunleashed the horror of the Second World War, which started long before Pearl Harbor.

It started with the invasion of China andthe looting of China; but then led to the destruction of China and other countries andultimately to the destruction of Japan.

So, President Shinzo Abe represents both ofthese things.

He has had his problems with China; he haswanted to remilitarize to get out from under the Constitution in Japan, which basicallyforbade them to fight war � a Constitution worked out after World War II with GeneralMacArthur's collaboration.

And he wants to be what he calls a "normalnation".

But, he also recognizes that he's gotten nothingfrom the collapsing Western financial system; and he sees the future of Japan in the realdevelopment of Russia and China, of Asia; and not by taking it over this time, but bycollaboration through the New Paradigm, through the New Silk Road.

Through the collaboration especially withRussia.

His grandfather, who was a prime minister,and his father, who was a politician, were committed to developing good relations withRussia; and he is now on course.

So, what's happened this year? It's an extraordinary transformation takingplace.

It began with his visit with Putin in Sochiin May; at which point he laid out an eight-point program for the development of the RussianFar East using Japanese technology and resources and financing.

Also, in May, there was a meeting of the G-7in Japan.

Russia wasn't there, because they threw Russiaout of the G-8; it became the G-7 again.

So, he didn't meet Putin there; but at thatevent, Abe basically said to the other G-6 leaders � including Obama � that we wereon the brink of a horrible financial breakdown crisis � worse than 2008.

This was absolutely rejected.

Obama said "No, we're in a recovery; it mightbe too slow, but it's going well.

" He didn't say this, but because there's lotsof money being printed to keep the speculation going in the banks; there's lots of drugsflowing everywhere, things are going fine.

So, Abe was crushed on that; the final communiquédidn't mention what Abe had said, but everybody knew.

Then, in September, he went to Vladivostokfor a conference organized by Putin on the development of the Far East; and they wentfurther ahead with these development projects.

And then, finally this month, Putin came toJapan; and he went to Yamaguchi, Abe's hometown; he then went to Tokyo.

He visited the karate teacher that had Putinone of the great black belts.

But at that, they knew they would not be ableto overcome the still-festering problem of the territorial issues of the so-called NorthernTerritories, or the Kurile Islands.

At the very end of the Second World War, theRussians had come in to help with the war in Japan; had taken the Kuriles, which hadbeen back and forth throughout history.

These are basically four islands north ofJapan.

Both sides claim sovereignty; the Japanesewant them back.

But, what they agreed to was that they wouldgo with a policy that had first been put forward in 1956 to divide the islands two and two,which had been stopped by the US.

The Dulles brothers came in and said, "Don'tyou dare; you must demand all of these islands back from the Russians, or else we won't turnOkinawa back to you.

" So, the Japanese backed away from that deal,and after that, the Russians said, "OK, that's it.

You're not going to get any of them back.

" So, now Putin has said, "OK, we can startjoint development of these four islands.

Joint development.

And over time, we can go back to the 1956agreement and come to a settlement; meaning that we'll be able to finally have a peacesettlement to World War II by probably 2018.

" But in the meantime, huge development projects.

They made agreements for $2.

5 billion of infrastructureprojects throughout the Russian Far East; ports, rail, agriculture, nuclear, pharmaceuticals,education, cultural exchanges, $1 billion joint fund which can be leveraged into more,and this framework for peace.

So, just as Putin has largely unified theentire Middle East � he's even now talking to Bibi Netanyahu and the Saudis; becausehe's in charge.

Obama and the British game is largely defeated.

So, they're basically creating a common policyof common interests of all these nations.

And in the same way in Asia; the China SilkRoad process, the new financial institutions are bringing all of these nations together.

There are still a few problems, but it's anew world; it's a new world which the United States can and must join.

It's the only option.

And again, I'll repeat that while Obama'sPivot to Asia is dead, the TPP is dead, the regime-change policies are largely dead; butdon't just sit back and say, "Yahoo! Trump's going to do it for us!" Because that is not the case.

This is going to be done by us; we createdthe environment in America and around the world which made it possible for these revolutionarychanges to take place.

It's the power of ideas that moves history;it's Lyndon LaRouche and Helga LaRouche and this institution who fought for these ideasbefore they became popular.

In other words, we fought to bring these ideasinto circulation; which made it possible for the emergence of people who recognized thetruth of those ideas and have begun to take them up.

This is doubly true now; we're at a momentwhich is going to go one way or the other.

It's going to depend on you and me; on makingsure that we take this fight now at a crucial moment � what Schiller called a great moment� and make sure that we define a future that uplifts people to a level of the dignityof their true humanity through activating the creative powers that they have by theright of being human beings created in the image of God.

This is our task, and this is where we standtoday; and it's a great time to be celebrating Christmas, but you should be thinking aboutGeorge Washington leading the fight across the river on Christmas Eve.

That's the way we have to approach the fightthat we have on our hands today.

A good fight; one that gives us reason tobe happy, but which is deadly serious.

Thank you.

DENISTON: I think that was excellent, Mike;and I liked your concluding point.

We're seeing a lot of horrific, awful thingsbeing removed; but I think Helga Zepp-LaRouche's focus on this being the potential transitionto a new historical paradigm centered around a new positive conception about the trulycreative nature of mankind, is our mission, is our unique task today.

As our viewers know, Mr.

LaRouche definedNew York City as a critical point of intervention on that level; to really revive that trueAmerican spirit and true American insight and understanding into this historical unifyingmission for mankind that we're talking about.

So, I know Diane was part of our discussionswith Mr.

and Mrs.

LaRouche earlier today, and she was raising some of the critical aspectsthat we have to focus on in terms of getting the American people to realize that you'renot just passive observers in this process.

Like you were saying, we're not just goingto sit back and root for who we think might do this or that.

We have a critical leadership role � includingour audience, everyone involved with us � to actually take this fight to this higher level.

So, I think that Diane has some remarks onthat; I know she would like to contribute here.


LaRouche said something thismorning that I think is very important, which is that in a period where everything is stable,then the subjective factor is not as crucial.

That is, if everybody gets all worked up overa particular celebrity's drug addiction problem, or various fads, various emotional thingsthat people get tangled up in; but when you have a moment like this, which on the onehand, I'm really glad that Mike just went through what he did, because I think mostAmericans have absolutely no idea of this incredible picture of what's happening inthe world.

And also, should reflect a little bit on wherethese countries are coming from; what did China look like 45 years ago, for example,compared to how they look now? You'd get a sense that there is no reason,except a subjective reason of the mindset of the American people, why our nation cannotsimilarly be self-transformed to a completely different domain, a completely different culture.

I'll say here this past weekend, we had anothermusical intervention.

The Schiller Institute chorus, which I helpedto organize and direct, sponsored by the Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture in aperformance, a unity concert in Brooklyn of African-American spirituals, the Bach WachetAuf cantata, and Handel's Messiah.

But what was so striking about this particularperformance is, my sense was that the musicians were completely engaged.

In other words, it wasn't like a stuffy thingthat you go to at Lincoln Center, where everyone is going through the motions; and of course,the tuning is way too high anyway, so their voices are strained and they need all kindsof electronic adjustments and things like this.

But the thing really was from the heart; andthere's clearly a potential where Americans have a sense, they want something substantive.

Who actually doesn't want their life to havehad a purpose? What we have right now, is a moment of extraordinaryopportunity; it is also dangerous, because as you said, Ben, at the beginning, Obamaissued these threats, this intent to kill as LaRouche put it, a week ago today at hiscrazy press conference and interview on NPR.

Saying, with no evidence whatsoever that Russiahad any involvement in hacking, that we will retaliate at a time and place of our choosing.

Those are murderous words, and therefore,we're not at a moment of stability; and it requires from us, as Schiller would say, acertain sublime quality of thinking where we look down on the world as if from above,and consider what are the common aims of mankind and what mankind can do together.

And the potential that we have, given thatthe defeat of Hillary Clinton was really a defeat of Bush and Obama; it was a defeatof a 16-year legacy of evil.

It doesn't guarantee � as Mike said � thatwhat comes in under Trump is going to be good; that is for us to determine.

It just indicates that there is a tremendouspotential for this, as we see with the communication between President-elect Trump and VladimirPutin; that's very promising.

There are other aspects of a potential withChina that are very promising, and then there are some appointments that are not so promising.

It is definitely a moment for each of us toconsider our responsibility to future generations; because we have a moment, hopefully a revolutionarymoment where we have not found a little people, but a people who will grow into the situationand will take the actions that LaRouche has outlined.

Specifically, the Four Laws; beginning emphaticallywith Glass-Steagall, but not ending with Glass-Steagall.

The fourth law is not an end, but is reallya beginning; which is the development of mankind on the imperative of exploring the Universe,of mastering thermonuclear fusion and getting ourselves out of this Solar System.

I think that's the challenge: To objectivelyaddress where we are; to not get flustered by every piece of crap that gets put in themainstream press, which is a bunch of propaganda designed to make everyone hysterical; andto really fight for the direction that is required.

DENISTON: Another thing that does lie in thatissue of the creative development of mankind, and I was also struck in some recent discussionswith Lyndon and Helga LaRouche.

Helga was making the point that what we'reseeing now is really the realization of this World Land-Bridge perspective that she andLyn had fought so hard for.

We were discussing how this really shouldbe seen from the standpoint of Mr.

LaRouche's unique insights into the fundamental natureof human creative progress and human creative revolutions.

And in a sense, what we're seeing � whatMike just presented � what's being led by China, the potential for that to expand globallywith the United States jumping on board, really is a certain potential culmination of a certainplatform of development for the entire planet.

What that sets the base for, is the next leapfor the expansion into space and the creative development of nearby space first; as KrafftEhricke had been one of the leading visionaries for as a basis for the expansion further intothe Solar System.

I think this idea of continually definingthe next levels of creative leaps, creative developments is absolutely critical; becauseit's not that we are completing some process of some steady state level of development,but it's the fact that mankind is always participating in creative revolutions.

Every generation should be focussed on a completerevolution in the very nature of mankind.

The very understanding of mankind's existenceis continually being reshaped, recreated on higher and higher levels.

That's the positive principle of this NewParadigm.

BILLINGTON: What Diane referred to that Helgasaid this morning about certain moments in history in which the subjective becomes crucial,is a reflection of what Percy Shelley said in his "In Defense of Poetry" which we'vequoted often.

He develops the concept of great revolutionarymoments in history, at which he says, in his describing why the poet is the legislatorof history in moments of great crisis like this.

But he describes how in such moments, thecommon person who normally doesn't have to think about profound ideas, is suddenly capableof understanding very profound concepts about man and nature � both about society andabout scientific reality of the Universe.

That's clearly where we stand; where we'vereached a point at which there's nothing holding back any human being.

Perhaps he's been drugged; perhaps he's beendegraded; perhaps he's been left unemployed, driven out of the workforce.

But nonetheless, it's a moment in historyin which everybody can, in fact, bring themselves up to those creative capacities that theywere blessed with by being a human being.

To activate that now, in learning huge amountsof things in a very short period of time, is possible and necessary.

DENISTON: I think that definitely definesour mission for the next coming year � 2017.

This can be the year of the shift of the UnitedStates under the leadership of what we're doing.

So, I think we gave people a very good overviewof where the world stands today, and what the challenge is before us.

So, unless Diane you want to have any additionalending comments, I think we're coming to the conclusion of our discussion today.

SARE: I would just like to encourage peopleover this holiday period, as we're about to enter a new year, which could be a very differentyear, to protect your mind and not engage in degraded cultural activities.

But take advantage of the LaRouche PAC website,which has phenomenal educational material.

You can choose to study the Four Laws of Mr.

LaRouche; read the papers of Alexander Hamilton; watch the video on Operation Phoenix � thereconstruction of Syria.

There's just an abundance of material herethat, if you set your mind to it, to determine that between now and the beginning of nextyear, to be a more ennobled human being, and more able to articulate these profound ideasand organize your friends and neighbors; then we'll be off to a very good start.

DENISTON: With that, I think we have our missiondefined before us.

We thank you for joining us, and we will beback next week for the next Friday webcast; and we'll be sure to be delivering some materialfor you between now and then.

So, thank you for joining us.