Library: MorningBriefing062407

[A7-25-7/BFG001]:BFG:L: 41 Pages

 TO:ALL POINTS                    BY: LAR/MOB/PBG/KRN
 |                                                               |
 |                                                               |
 |                       MORNING BRIEFING                        |
 |                                                               |
 |                     Sunday, June 24, 2007                     |
 |                                                               |
 |                                                               |

                 - NEW BAE DOSSIER TO APPEAR: -

 LPAC issued three releases June 23, based on leading points of
 Lyndon LaRouche's June 21 webcast on the expanding global
 financial crisis and its biggest loose end. The releases (below)
 are in preparation for a new, tight dossier on the BAE
 megascandal, to be done by June 26 and issued as a PDF for
 leaflet production. The leading edge of that dossier, will be the
 question: Will House Speaker Nancy Pelosi drop her sabotage of
 impeachment of Dick Cheney, and thereby end a year of impotence,
 and betrayal of American voters and citizens, on Capitol Hill?


    - LaRouche: The Great Danger of a Financial Crash Today -

 June 23, 2007 (LPAC)--As banks scrambled to organize a Bear
 Stearns hedge fund bailout--``the largest since the 1998 bailout
 of the Long Term Capital Management hedge fund'' whose collapse
 threatened a general financial crash--Lyndon LaRouche had this
 comment in his June 21 Internet broadcast speech in Washington:
 	``The great danger of a financial crash today, is that most
 people, in what they call economics, believe actually not in
 economics: They believe in gambling. It's called a financial
 system. It's a gambling system. And people understanding that,
 ever since Galileo came up with this idea about gambling as the
 basis of discovering how markets would work, everyone has tried
 to get a better statistical system for gambling. Like breaking
 the bank at Monte Carlo, making a killing at Las Vegas, probably
 one's own. And therefore, these guys who are running the
 financial world today, depend on the assumption that they've got
 a `better system'--as they used to have at the race tracks, a
 `better system' for handicapping the horses. And it would really
 handicap the bettor, in the end, as he found himself on the
 street without cash--and being pursued by his lenders.
 	``But what you've got today, as was typified in the calamity
 that occurred in August through October of 1998, was that the
 bettors now rely upon mathematics. And computers have helped them
 to do this: They can now bet faster, they can do mathematics
 faster than ever before, statistics faster than ever before. But
 they're all trying to find the best system of gambling. And
 they're all competing to get in on what they believe is the best
 system of gambling. The result is that, when all the gamblers
 come close to the same system of gambling against each other, but
 they're all gambling according to the same formula, what happens?
 They all go down together, in one big flop!
 	``And that is what we saw, in a [1995] forecast of the
 events of the LTCM collapse in 1998: Was a general collapse of
 the system based on confidence, and competition, using the same
 system, as a world system, {which doesn't work at all.} And they
 all went bankrupt.
 	``And President Clinton and his Secretary of Treasury
 collaborated with others to organize a bailout, to postpone the
 inevitable collapse of the entire world system, which was
 implicit in what happened in September-October of 1998. We have
 never paid the bill for that bailout. We have been bailing things
 out more and more ever since.
 	``And we now have reached the point, the system is about to


  - LaRouche: Today's BAE Scandal, and the Force Behind 9/11 -

 June 23, 2007 (LPAC)--Discussing the exploding British
 mega-scandal around the huge BAE Systems arms firm, at his June
 21 Washington webcast, U.S. statesman and economist Lyndon
 LaRouche touched on the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
 Speaking of the current war and economic crisis, LaRouche said
 that BAE ``is not the cause of the problem, it is a symptom of
 the problem: Is that more and more, under a system which was
 established, a change in the system established with the election
 of a non-person as a President, George W. Bush, Jr., under his
 chimpanzee keeper, the Vice President, that the world was being
 run, more and more, by {what is behind the BAE}. The BAE is
 actually better known as the British Empire. Some people call it
 the `Brutish Empire.'
 	``Now, not all the people in England are guilty of this.
 Many of them, even who are Brits, or who believe in the imperial
 system, or the British Empire or whatever, think that what is
 being done now by BAE is insane. They think that other things are
 insane: They know that the idea of a global warming swindle is a
 hoax--they know that. They know it's totally unscientific, and
 could not be sold to a society in which science was still known
 as a subject for most people of that generation. And therefore,
 not because they are anti-British, but because they know that the
 system which is being run by the Blair government and its
 associates in the British system--being run by Blair's friend
 Cheney, and others--that this system is clinically insane. And
 therefore, they object to it. And they raised objections to it,
 which are registered in places like the London {Guardian}--called
 Guardian Unlimited these days--and the British BBC, and other
 	``There was virtual silence on the subject of this, at least
 to its substance, inside the United States itself. It was only in
 the past three days, that there has been any appearance in the
 major English-speaking American press, of {anything}--even
 hinting at what has been the {ongoing reality of this Bush
 Administration, since before the President was sworn in, in
 2001.} The world has been living under a system, which is the
 9/11 system, which already existed, as I warned at the beginning
 of 2001, before President George W. Bush was inaugurated for the
 first time in January of 2001. Where I said: The world system has
 reached the point, that an onrushing collapse of the system is
 now in process. We can not determine exactly when or how this
 will occur, but we know the following two things: Number 1, we
 know that this President and this Presidency can not deal with
 this crisis. Therefore, we must expect that the entire world will
 be subjected to the kind of thing we experienced in February of
 1933, when Hermann Goering, the man behind the throne, the sort
 of Dick Cheney of the Hitler administration, orchestrated the
 burning of the Reichstag as a terrorist event. And this terrorist
 event was used on that night, or the following day, to install
 Hitler with dictatorial powers, which Hitler never lost, until
 the day he died!
 	``And I said then: The danger is that something like this
 will occur, under present trends in the United States, and it did
 occur: And it was called 9/11.
 	``Now, without going into the details of what we know and
 what we don't know about how 9/11 was orchestrated, we know that
 the only means by which this kind of thing is orchestrated, is
 found in {one} location: in a financial complex which is centered
 in the identity of the BAE.
 	Now, that's the mystery of 9/11. How it was done, the
 mechanics, that's irrelevant. We'll find out. And everybody in
 and around government who understands these matters, knows that!
 And that's where the heat is, here.''


 - LaRouche: Iraq War Author Blair Won't Fly as `Peace Envoy' -

 June 23, 2007 (LPAC)--Asked about the proposals to make outgoing
 British Prime Minister Tony Blair into a new EU chief executive,
 or a U.S. special envoy to the Mideast (reportedly Dick Cheney's
 initiative), Lyndon LaRouche commented at his June 21 Washington
 webcast speech:
 	``Well, you have to know, you've got to get the thing right.
 Blair does not work for Cheney. Cheney works for Blair.... What's
 Cheney? Cheney is a human failure. A complete failure in life,
 and his wife, who became a British asset, if not a British
 agent--you see, they were out there in Wyoming, and he was the
 lug from the football team, sitting sullenly and admiring the
 campus QUEEEEEN, who later became his wife. And he went out and
 he flunked out of college, couldn't get a decent job, was a
 drunk, bad driver, and so forth. All these charming qualities.
 And so she decides that she wants this thing as something on her
 mantle, as sort of a trophy, the former football lug. And so, she
 was the one who got the leading contacts. She did her work, and a
 British fellow who was actually the spiritual founder of the
 Fabian Society, and she became an attachment, an American
 attachment, of the British Fabian Society. And like a certain
 Senator from we don't know where, but he's from Connecticut
 technically, she is a British asset. She played a key part in all
 his appointments, largely which came from London, including some
 of the juicy business things he got in the process, were through
 her. SHE is the boss in the family. And as I've said often, I
 think she locks him up outside at night, except on two occasions
 when she gave birth to daughters.
 	So, SHE got him the connections, and he is a British asset.
 Typical British asset.
 	``And the word is, of course, that the former Saudi
 Ambassador Bandar, is also a British agent since the age of 16.
 So, you're dealing with an empire, the British Empire, and Blair
 has to go from the Prime Ministry. He's just worn out all the
 rugs to walk on there. And they have various roles. [French
 President] Sarkozy wants him to be the head of the European
 Union, as a new kind of institution which is part of the world
 government on the European continent. These other positions. And
 this is simply the faction which Blair has worked for.
 	Blair--not Bush, not Cheney--orchestrated the war in Iraq.
 Blair! The Blair government. The Blair government lied. The Blair
 government kills, and the Bush says `Yesssir'!
 	``So, Cheney is in trouble, because he's failed, he's failed
 to keep the lid on this story. And I don't think Blair's going to
 make it, under these circumstances, not with this scandal,
 because all the bridges could come down with this one. And we are
 not going to be idle, in the meantime.''



 {Lyndon LaRouche had a lengthy discussion with the LaRouche Youth
 Movement nationally on June 23, in the aftermath of the June 21
 LaRouchePAC webcast.  Lyn made some opening remarks for a little
 over an hour, and then opened it up for discussion for another
 two.  His keynote appears below; the transcription of the
 discussion will be completed as soon as possible.}

 	LAROUCHE: Well, I did something the other day, you may have
 noticed.  You may have noticed and I shall do a little
 appropriate [s/l Nachricht?] now, over the issue.
 	The crucial thing, which has several implications.  First of
 all, those who've been "down in The Basement"--The Basement is
 the stairway to Heaven.  [laughter]  You get to meet the most
 interesting cats down there.  The meals are tremendous!  And the
 conditions are absolutely wonderful, because it forces you to
 rely upon your imagination. Therefore, it forces you to think.
 	Now, the key thing is to be understood, and actually you
 probably noticed, that what's happening in the basement, since
 particularly Kepler I, has radiated throughout the organization
 as those who read this material or discussed it, or it's been
 discussed, circulates more and more throughout the organization.
 And you find that what's being developed in the organization,
 especially among the youth in the particular--some guys are hard
 of hearing, you know, when they get past the age of 40 and old
 sets in--that there is actually a different culture is developing
 in the leadership of this generation within the organization, a
 culture which is intrinsically superior to that of the general
 culture of the earlier generations.
 	The earlier generation, especially the Baby-Boomer
 generation is problematic.  It has no inclination towards science
 as a generation--none.  It has an inclination toward gambling,
 and mathematics as an art of gambling, but it does not have a
 sense of physical science, of reality--it has no interest in it.
 Because, to them, the Boomers in particular, the restrictions of
 scientific thinking are just against their ethics.  It's
 restrictive.  "I would like to make up my own mind.  I don't want
 science telling me how the universe works.  I want to make up my
 own mind, my own opinion, my own little opinion.  My circles, we
 may not agree with this stuff."  And therefore, they are hostile,
 as we saw this in '68, especially hostile to science, hostile to
 any form of Classical art, which they consider an encroachment
 upon the right to freedom: The freedom not to think.
 	So, what you observed probably the day before yesterday, is
 the problem for the audience in general was a certain, "this
 science stuff."  It's a problem.  And yet, we problem saw that
 the connection between the politics and the science as I
 presented it the day before yesterday, is essential.
 	Now, take this one example, which is probably the best
 example now, because most people have been exposed to this work
 from The Basement, working your way from the bottom up,
 approaching the stars from below, is this idea of gravitation,
 the principle of gravitation [inaudible] of the fundamental
 principle of all competent science: That you have a principle in
 which the apparent infinitesimal is the most powerful force in
 the universe.  That gravitation is expressed in the form of an
 infinitesimal interval of action.  And that is why I laid it out
 the other day again, just briefly though, is that because the
 pathway of the Earth through its orbit, and that of other
 planets, is not determined by the image of some orbit.  The orbit
 does not determine the pathway of the planet:  The pathway of the
 planet determines the orbit.  And this comes up now for those who
 are wrestling now with the Gauss determination, in which the
 motive is crucial.  It is not the orbit that determines the
 pathway, which is what was the mistake of all observers, but for
 Gauss, in that period.  But, rather, it is the pathway as such,
 which determines the orbit.  And that's how Gauss was able to
 solve that problem.  Which you will learn, probably, from the
 right group of people, when they finish their work in the coming
 weeks and months.
 	And, this is true of everything:  an infinitesimal!  The
 most powerful thing in the world is an infinitesimal.  The most
 powerful thing in the universe, is an infinitesimal!  Or
 comparable things, which are also infinitesimals.
 	So, science is essentially--competent science--is the study
 of infinitesimals.  Also, art!  All competent art, is also based
 on the concept of the infinitesimal, not on the basis of naïve
 sense-certainty.  And this is where the problem lies. And this is
 where, in the LYM, in the seepage of the effects of this work in
 The Basement, and related things, a culture is building up within
 the generation now, or within the core of the generation, a
 culture is building up which is beginning to think almost
 instinctively in terms of the infinitesimal, as the most powerful
 forces in the universe; as opposed to the thinking about
 sense-certainty as the origin of truth.  What you learn from
 science, the fundamental thing you learn from science from the
 beginning, of competent science, is that what you see, is not
 what is; what you hear, is not what is; what you smell, above
 all, is not what is.  [laughter]
 	So, therefore, the distinction is, is also the same
 distinction of the concept of immortality:  There's no animal
 which is capable of thinking, in scientific terms--none.  Because
 the human mind functions in this domain of the infinitesimal.  No
 animal knows a universal physical principle!  They know a habit.
 They know a conditioned habit.  They know how to build on
 combinations of habits, by reacting, by combining habits, new
 habits and old habits, always operating on the basis of
 {sense-certainty}, as the map which they use to guide themselves
 in life.
 	When the animal dies, the animal's dead.  The animal kingdom
 does not change, in terms of its behavior, as a result of those
 animals which have died.  They simply adapt to their animal
 nature, or the nature of animals within their domain.  Human
 beings willfully change of the human species as a whole with
 respect to the universe.  Human beings willfully change the
 behavior of mankind, in such a way that mankind increases
 mankind's power to exist in the universe, and control it.  No
 animal can do this.
 	Now, this is the central question of all human knowledge, is
 this essential existential question, which most people in the
 older generation have no sense of.  And even people who are
 scientifically trained and would be competent, in the sense of
 plumbers being competent at plumbing, they're competent at
 science in those terms and are able to think in those terms of
 practice.  But on the fundamental question of what is a physical
 principle, a universal physical principle, there are very few
 people alive today, who are considered specialists in the domain
 of physical science, who have any comprehension of the principle
 I stated in discussing the question of the orbit around the Sun
 by the Earth, during that conference, my presentation
 Thursday--none!  Therefore, they're not competent in science.
 Because they're incapable of grasping the most powerful thing in
 the universe, which is expressed as the smallest thing in the
 universe: the infinitesimal, the smallest existing thing in the
 	And the concept, of course, is the infinitesimal, as I
 think, many of you have either gone through it directly, or
 indirectly, of what the significance of the infinitesimal is in
 respect to the Solar orbit of the Earth in the Solar System:  Is
 that, no matter how much you divide the orbit into smaller and
 smaller intervals, the orbit is always going through a change in
 direction.  And it's this constant change in direction, which
 persists no matter how small you attempt to go, which is actually
 the force, the motive which is determining the orbit.
 	So therefore, you draw an ellipse--[dumbo voice] "that's the
 orbit!"  It is not the orbit!  That is the footprint of the
 orbit, not the orbit.  Like a woman marries a guy's footprints.
 [laughter]  Not a very fertile idea.
 	It is not the footprints that are reality:  Is that which
 {produces} the footprints, that is reality.  It is the motive
 which produces the orbit, which is the reality of the orbit:  It
 is the principle that governs that motion, which determines the
 orbit.  And when you try to catch the orbit in your hand, it gets
 smaller and smaller and smaller, and you call it infinitesimal,
 because no matter how small you try to make it, it's always
 changing.  Just think about this simple thing of the Keplerian
 orbit:  To understand what it does, it's the principle of
 constant change.  And every other kind of orbit.  And in physical
 science in respect to every principle, it's always the same.
 	So, science is the study of infinitesimals, it's the study
 of that which controls behavior in the universe, in the smallest
 imaginable degree.  The constant change in direction, the
 constant change in velocity--constant.  So, there is no point at
 which the division becomes meaningless.  And this is, of course,
 what Cusa discovered, in refuting the fallacies of Archimedes on
 the conception of the quadrature of the circle.  There is no
 significant mathematical quadrature which can adduce a principle
 from a trajectory of a principled form of physical action.
 	Therefore, {this change}, this change in the way of
 thinking, this change to what has been known throughout the
 history of European civilization since ancient Greece, this
 principle of change is the essence of scientific knowledge, as
 the {essence} of the question of truth as well as scientific
 knowledge.  And that's what I concentrated on, in a small part,
 on Thursday, but that's what's most crucial.  And that's the
 characteristic which must distinguish the leadership of your
 generation, from the failed leadership of the preceding
 generation.  This understanding of the infinitesimal.
 	It comes up, for example it came up beautifully in the
 Kepler II project, where the question of harmonics was the
 confrontation.  And I saw a lot of wrestling with good fun with
 the people who were going through that phase on the question of
 harmonics as we began to talk about the relationship among the
 planetary orbits, and the relationship of those from the Sun.
 Suddenly, it's apparent.  And then you look back at history, and
 it was {always} apparent in European civilization.  From its
 Pythagorean, and related roots, it was always obvious:  That the
 senses do not determine--do not lead you to an understanding of
 the causal features of the reality within which you're living.
 For example:  In formal mathematics, what is usually taught is
 corruption, how to be stupid.  And this is sometimes called
 Euclidean geometry.  You're told, [stuffy] "We must begin with
 certain self-evident principles!"  "We must have--definitions!
 We must have axioms, axiomatic assumptions.  And we have
 postulates, to clean up the mess afterwards."  [laughter] "Only
 then!  Only then, dare we presume to say `we know' something."
 Now, the point is, in the first instance, the first approximation
 of this is vision.  We have {sense-certainty}: "What I can see!"
 What I can see.  Then you have a different sense: What I can
 hear.  And we have another sense: What I can touch.  And how I
 can smell, which has interesting connotations.
 	So therefore, people start with what they consider {a
 priori}:  What is common knowledge.  What is generally acceptable
 common knowledge.  Sight?  Sound?  Touch, and smell.
 	So therefore, you say, "It is self-evident!"  what does it
 mean, "self-evident"?  It means, it is evident to this particular
 sense to which we are referring.  It's evident to the habit of
 seeing, and it's vision; the habit of hearing, which is called
 harmonics and sound.  The experience of touch, and the experience
 of smell.  Each of these becomes then a self-evident definition
 of experience, and we're trying to "interpret" experience.  So we
 start by respecting the experience itself.  What is experience?
 	Now, how the hell do you know anything from
 sense-perception?  What kind of a fraud is it you're trying to
 perpetrate by saying that sense-perception tells you something?
 What is sense-perception?  It's simply a reaction of the body as
 a whole, to certain things that impinge upon it from outside.
 The impinging is  detected by sense-perception organs, which are
 nothing but living, biochemical organisms, and these things are
 translated to the human brain, and they're interpreted by the
 brain.  So therefore, the existence of the human being and human
 knowledge seems to be determined by the completely internal, to
 the living organism, and it reacts to things which touch upon it
 from outside.  But how does it know, that that which touches it,
 which causes a sense-perception, how does it know that that
 represents anything true?
 	Now, in what's called Euclidean geometry, which is a
 complete hoax anyway, you're taught to look at everything from
 what?  From the standpoint of the assumption of a linear universe
 of sense-perception:  Straight line interception of the universe
 with the sense organs and mind of the individual. That's fine,
 okay.  That's called Euclidean geometry, which is a fraud.
 Because, these are sense organs, like any other instrument, even
 like an electromechanical instrument in electronics.  The
 instrument doesn't "know" the universe around it.  The instrument
 is a method of response to the universe around it.  And when you
 design instrumentality, you better not assume that the universe
 is what the instrument thinks it is.  Because, then you'll result
 in a disaster.  You have to know what the universe is {despite}
 the fault in communications given to you by any one kind of
 	Now, that gives you a hint:  How can the human mind actually
 know the universe?  Well, it can know the universe by changing
 its own circumstances of existence, by acting on the universe.
 Now, how do we know what the universe is?  Well, we start with
 sense-perception.  But what do we do?  We don't rely upon sight,
 or sound, or touch, or smell.  We rely on {none of these, as
 individual senses}; or even a simple combination of them.  We
 rely upon a practical understanding of the {falsity} of what any
 of these sense shows to be.
 	Now, the easiest way to do that, is to look at the
 relationship between sound, and sight.  You have to smell the
 universe, not just look at it.  And that's exactly what Kepler
 does!  [laughter]  Exactly what he does, especially when it comes
 to what we call--here, among us cognoscenti--"Kepler II." We do
 not rely upon sight, or sound, or smell, or touch:  We rely upon
 that which is true, which is none of those.  We rely upon the
 paradoxes, the contradictions between the view of world suggested
 to us by any one sense, and the primary experience is that of the
 relationship of sight to sound.
 	Now therefore, the reaction you get, and the first reaction
 you get, even from so-called trained scientist of the type we
 used to have around back in the in 1970s and early 1980s, those
 who were associated with the Fusion Energy Foundation, the fight
 we had was on this issue.  And the biggest explosion that ever
 occurred in the Fusion Energy Foundation on any issue, is when I
 raised the question of Kepler.  Because the question of Kepler's
 organization of the Solar System.  And that produced howling and
 squealing.  It was amazing:  Like a banshee convention suddenly
 broke out around the table.
 	What is the significance of this Kepler II?  What is the
 difference between what Kepler accomplished in the first
 instance, in determining the relationship of Mars, Earth and Sun,
 as opposed to determining the relationship of the {Solar System}
 to the Sun; and the relationship among the components and
 elements of the Solar System to the Sun.  As then, it's
 complicated by the introduction of this question of asteroids,
 which force you to go to another step of correcting assumptions.
 	What it demonstrates is, that harmonics, as we think of
 harmonics in terms of Bach's well-tempered system, and that kind
 of counterpoint, is actually determining in the relationship of
 the planetary orbits, their definition, and the relationship
 among these orbits with respect to the Sun.  So therefore, you
 have to combine sight and sound, in respect to their most
 contradictory aspects!  No longer can you take a Cartesian view,
 or quasi-Cartesian view, and measure the relationships, the
 observed relationship among Solar bodies!  You will never
 understand how the Solar System is organized! As our young
 geniuses of Kepler II discovered for themselves.  It's when you
 realize that harmonics, in the sense of the musical harmonics of
 Bach's well-tempered system, and the approximation of this, only
 when you see the Composer of the universe--not just the Creator,
 the Composer: the Super-Bach--[laughter] Who has ordered a
 universe such that it does not correspond in its behavior either
 to deduction from sight or form hearing:  But only from looking a
 the contradiction between the two, and finding a lawful meaning
 in that contradiction.  And then, being able to practice, in the
 universe, to introduce changes in the behavior within the
 universe, by applying that discovered principle, as a law, as a
 guiding law to act upon the universe.
 	So, you do not know truth by sense-certainty.  You know
 truth by sense-{uncertainty}!  What you feel, is never true.
 	Then, you have to find out, somewhere in the contradictions
 of one sense to the other, what the universe is and what the
 principles are.  {Then!} Prove, that those principles you have
 {thus} discovered, are actually the more efficient means, of
 controlling the behavior of the phenomena to which you are
 attaching the powers of sense-perception.
 	The same thing is true in instrumentation.  When we develop
 instruments, like electromagnetic instruments, to explore the
 atomic domain, we are developing instruments, which are designed
 as extensions of the concept of sense-perception.  So, mankind
 invents new sense-perception instruments and applies these to the
 atomic or sub-atomic domain.  And thus, by applying these
 instruments, we create {new} sensory experiences.  Derivative
 sense experiences.
 	In this area, we arrive, again, into contradictions!  For
 example, the greatest case in the 20th century was that of Max
 Planck.  Max Planck, in dealing with his paradox, which became
 the Planck quantum principle, was not quantum mechanics.  And the
 idiots try to reduce it to quantum mechanics, and they screamed
 and they howled about that.  But what he discovered, was a
 {contradiction} in the use of extended forms of sense-perception
 to explore the universe, and found in certain domains, there were
 characteristics for which he proposed new views of what universal
 physical laws are.
 	So therefore, what you saw, what we touched upon on
 Thursday, in dealing with this question of gravitation, was the
 fact, that you think you see the orbit of the Sun; you think you
 can measure it.  You try to eliminate the small differentiations,
 and say, "We can {generalize} this experience.  We can find a
 principle which generalizes it from the standpoint of vision."
 But then, when you look at the planet as a whole, and you look at
 the inferred history of the Solar System, of coming from a
 solitary fast-spinning Sun, into a system of planets, now
 suddenly you're faced with, this no longer corresponds to
 reality.  And that's why we divided the thing as Kepler did,
 between the Kepler I and Kepler II:  That you look at one
 [stand], you're looking at the relationship of the Earth, with
 respect to Mars and the Sun.  You have a substitute for
 sense-perception.  You discover there's an irony in that.  And
 you work on that.
 	Now you think you've become the world's greatest genius.
 Then you go into the question of the relationship of the ordering
 of the planetary system with respect to the Sun, the planetary
 system as a whole, including the relationship {among} the
 planets.  And suddenly, your sense-perceptual image breaks down.
 	Now, you have a new experience, a new way of looking at the
 universe.  And it is going on and on.  And this is true in all
 experience.  For example:  Let's take the most fundamental one.
 People say, "Well, there's the universe."  They think of it as an
 extended BLA-A-H-H.  Just out there.  We're all swimming in it.
 It's a swimming domain of sense-perception.  And then you
 discover that you can not derive the behavior of living
 processes, their characteristic behavior, from non-living ones!
 Can't be done.  And this was explored by a number of people, but
 most notably from Pasteur, who posed the problem as a
 question--not as an answer, but as a question--into what
 followed: the recognition that life is a principle in the
 universe, which is not contained within assumptions derived from
 non-living processes.  Life is not an evolutionary product of
 non-life.  Because the behavior of processes in the universe,
 including chemical processes, atomic processes, in living
 processes behave differently than in non-living processes.
 	So, now, it even gets more interesting.  Because, if you
 look at the history of the Earth, from what can be inferred as
 its origin as a Solar object, you find an Earth which is
 apparently completely inorganic, non-living.  But then, you have
 the emergence of living processes, fairly early in the game,
 which tends to suggest to you that the principle of life was
 there all along--you just didn't see it, you just didn't discover
 it.  But then, you look at the history of the planet from the
 standpoint of archeology and the standpoint of physics in
 general, and you find that the products of living processes,
 {and} living processes as such, are occupying a constantly larger
 ration of the total mass of the Earth! For example:  The
 atmosphere is a creation of living processes.  The atmosphere is
 not, shall we say, a natural non-living process.  Doesn't exist.
 The atmosphere is created by the action of life itself as a
 principle upon the Earth.  The oceans, similarly, are products of
 that:  Water, in its fossil form.
 	Now, we look at the planet as a whole, we take the average
 mass of the planet, planet Earth.  Ignore the fact that we're
 getting new material dumped on from the Sun all the time.  We're
 the great trashcan for the Sun in our vicinity.  Anything it
 finds in our vicinity, "there's a trash, dump it there."  And
 that's what sort of happens to us.  Now, you find that this
 principle of life, is not only something you can not adduce from
 non-living processes, but {life} is taking over a larger and
 larger percentile of the total mass of the Earth.
 	Then you come the matter of human behavior.  [stuffy] "Well,
 man is an animal."  Engels called himself an ape--and he probably
 was.  Or, at least he was working hard to turn himself into one.
 But you find out that human behavior, and you look at the
 standpoint of ecology, simple animal ecology, human behavior does
 not correspond to animal ecology.  Human populations do not
 conform lawfully, as lawful processes, to animal ecology: Because
 the animal ecology has a range of behavior, depending upon its
 environment and the interaction among different species.  {But!}
 The increase of the potential relative population density of the
 human species goes far beyond anything that any animal could ever
 accomplish--any animal or combination of animal species could
 	So, life itself, as defined by animal species and similar
 kinds of things, is not the determinant of Earth; not the
 determinant of the Biosphere.  That the great changes--look, if
 we were great apes, which some of our Baby-Boomers tend to be,
 when they monkey around with man's future, we would have a fixed
 potential relative population density, just like any animal, any
 species of animal; variable under conditions and so forth, but
 nonetheless, it's not within our control, it's in the control of
 the biology of the system.  And the relationship among species
 changes, the conditions of life change, and the species'
 population is controlled that way.
 	But with human beings, no.  With human beings, who have the
 physical capabilities generally, which we associate with the
 higher apes, of all the other qualities of a higher ape, somehow
 human beings are not limited, to aping one another.  (Unlike some
 Baby-Boomers who specialize in that, hmm?)  Human beings have a
 willfully increase potential population density.  Whereas the
 potential population of the gorilla, the mountain gorilla for
 example, or the forest gorilla, has a relatively fixed population
 density.  And the chimpanzees, too.  Humanity--this is in the
 order of millions potential population.  And the conditions for
 this population potential go back at least 2 million years, in
 terms of the conditions of this planet during the last 2 million
 year long series of ice ages, glaciations.  Therefore, mankind,
 reaching beyond a population of millions, or even tens of
 millions, or hundreds of millions, which by then far exceeds
 anything that a higher ape could do--suddenly, now today, we have
 6.5 billion people, or more than that, on this planet.
 	How'd we get there?  The principle of mentation, the
 principle of creative discovery, changed mankind's character and
 behavior.  But these changes in mankind's character or behavior,
 are not changes {upon} mankind:  They're changes {within}
 mankind.  And the process of change is what we would call
 "intellectual," the discovery of the equivalent of universal
 physical principles, or things that approximate universal
 physical principles.
 	And all of these things, that I've just described, the
 series of conditions, all correspond to two things:  First of
 all, they take the form, expressed as universal lawfulness, as
 infinitesimals, just like the orbit of the Sun: In each
 infinitesimal instant, what is happening to the infinitesimal is
 what is determining the orbit in the large.  And it's true in
 everything else.  So mankind, by willfully, by the power of will,
 which no animal has, is able to change the universe.  And it does
 it, in terms of the infinitesimal.  And it does it, by rejecting
 the idea of self-evident evidence.  You recognize that the
 evidence of the sense is false, misleading, and that you must
 find an experimental approach involving contradictions in
 behavior {among} the senses, with respect to some subject matter,
 to discover a principle, and then operate and test that principle
 in practice, which is the practice of competent modern science.
 {And this is exactly what is forbidden, viciously forbidden, in
 higher and other education in schools and universities today.}
 This approach is forbidden.
 	Now, some people escape and get beyond that prohibition, but
 in the recent generation, very few did.  I saw it.  I was there,
 I experienced it--one of my advantage is, and my disadvantage, is
 to see what's happened to the human race, during the course of my
 adult lifetime.  We've degenerated.  And we've degenerated on
 just this issue that I raised yesterday: the issue of the
 infinitesimal, as typified by the fact that the Sun's orbit can
 not be determined empirically just by looking the elliptical
 orbit.  You have to discover a paradox in that.  And you don't
 understand what you've discovered, with the respect to the Sun's
 orbit, until you look at the planetary system.  And you come into
 this question of harmonics, as in the sense of Bach, becomes the
 standard by which you must measure action within the Solar
 System.  And the typical giveaway, is the scientist who says:
 "This whole idea of harmonics, Bachian harmonics, as being a
 reflection of the {physical organization} of the Solar System, of
 the universe, is bunk.  We can't have that.  It's not scientific.
 It's not simply mechanistic, it's not Cartesian, it's not
 	Where, precisely, it is that contradiction between harmonics
 and vision and the experimental approach to that difference,
 which defines efficient human knowledge.
 	And therefore, you see a key to that, a key to every problem
 we face in society today:  We're operating in a society which
 says, "What experience teaches us..."  Experience has not taught
 people a goddamn thing!  They keep making worse mistakes all the
 time, and they prefer their mistakes to their successes!  Now,
 that's a lousy experimental method! If your experiment fails,
 that's what you love.  If it succeeds, you hate it.
 	So therefore, what you're dealing with from the inside, as
 when you get into what we're doing, as working at history from
 the foundations of truth--which are always found in The Basement;
 [laughs] they're not brought into The Basement, they're
 discovered in The Basement, by those who go there.  And they're
 not discovered by those who refuse to go there, or won't stay
 	So, this thing, which you find our young people were doing,
 in this series, as we were doing earlier in a certain looser way,
 with going at the Pythagoreans, and going at the question of the
 paradoxes posed by Gauss's attack on the reductionists of the
 18th century:  We started from there, to pose the general nature
 of science, by referencing the Pythagoreans and their outcome.
 Then we go into the actual work, by defining modern science from
 the standpoint of what Classical, ancient science, Platonic
 science, had given us.  And there's a big gap, between 200 B.C.,
 which is the time the Romans began to take over the Mediterranean
 region, where a degeneration started, a real degeneration, into
 the beginning of the Renaissance, the 15th century.  So, this
 period of 17th centuries approximately, in mankind's history--of
 European history, in particular--is a period of perpetual
 degeneration.  Oh, some good things were done, but the general
 course of history was one of degeneration.
 	Modern European science as begun with the Renaissance of the
 15th century, created modern science.  It was created on certain
 foundations which are defined by Nicholas of Cusa, principally.
 And from the followers of Cusa came modern science, and the kind
 of questions I've just put forward.  The increase in population,
 the increase in population density, the improvement in the
 quality of existence, the improvement in the condition of
 knowledge of mankind, since the Renaissance, as a result of the
 Renaissance, has been the greatest in all human existence, the
 highest rate.  And it is {this accomplishment} of mankind, of
 modern European civilization, which these bastards have tried to
 destroy.  And the place they went at it, was the question of
 ideas, and the issue of irrationalism of all forms, but
 empiricism most notably.  As I referred to that the day before
 yesterday:  That the empiricist view is the view which is the
 experimental view of statistics and so forth, as its taught in
 schools today and universities today, and practiced in society,
 today, is a form of insanity which is destroying the human race.
 And that was intentionally so.
 	Because, the issue is this.  The issue is the nature of
 mankind.  The difference between man and the beast.  The
 followers of the Delphi Cult of Apollo, and similar kinds of
 institutions, insisted that there is no lawful difference between
 man and a beast.  Now this was a pragmatic decision in part, made
 by those who wanted to turn the majority of human beings into
 mere human cattle, who are not allowed to invent things.  For
 example, the prohibition of man's knowledge of the use of fire,
 the Promethean issue, is the characteristic feature of European
 civilization's degeneracy, throughout its entire history.
 Reducing man to the likeness to the animal.  Denying mankind's
 ability to discover universal principles, or to change man's
 behavior, fundamentally, through the knowledge of and application
 of universal physical principles. Like the opposition to nuclear
 fission: which came out as a characteristic of the Baby-Boomer
 generation.  The Baby-Boomer generation are the people who came
 with this anti-nuclear idea.  It didn't come from the question of
 nuclear weapons, it came from the Baby-Boomers.  And you look at
 the Baby-Boomers today, there are no scientists among them!  Or,
 only with a few individual exceptions.  There're no scientists.
 They don't think scientifically.  They {hate} science.
 	You want to see this:  Go back to 1968, and look at the
 streets of the universities, especially the leading universities,
 and the streets of society in 1968, in Europe and in the United
 States.  Look at it!  What did you see?  Absolute mass insanity.
 {Dionysiac insanity.}  They called itself the left, but it was
 actually the far right--it was the fascists.  The Baby-Boomer
 generation is predominantly a fascist generation, which reacted
 like fascists, against the blue-collar population, against the
 farmers, and against the industrial workers, industrial
 operatives, against science.  They operated on the basis of
 "feeling," arbitrariness.  They were trained in existentialism,
 the existentialism of that famous Nazi, Martin Heidegger, or his
 Jewish friends, Hannah Arendt and so forth.  They taught a
 doctrine which was indoctrinated into the post-war population,
 the {educated} population, or the educated stratum of the
 population: Those born between 1945 and 1958 in particular.
 	So if you were born in that interval, and you come from the
 white-collar-oriented background, you are degenerated:  You are a
 degenerate expression, culturally, of the human species.  Because
 you have now rejected the principle upon which human existence
 depends.  You have acted in support of the Cult of Dionysius,
 which is a part of the Delphi Cult, which is expressed by the
 Olympian Zeus of {Prometheus Bound}: anti-Promethean.
 	So, what you had is division between the white-collar
 ideology of the university youth, from the white-collar
 generation, against the blue-collar generation, farmers, and
 industrial operatives, and scientists and so forth.
 	So, you had a {viciously fascist, anti-scientific mood}
 beginning to emerge and controlling the behavior of the United
 States. This destroyed the Democratic Party as a force, the
 division between white-collar and blue-collar destroyed the
 Democratic Party!  And it ceased to be a party of the people, and
 became an emerging conflict form, in which the so-called upper
 class, the idiots, the Baby-Boomers, dominated the party ranks as
 a whole.
 	So, now you have the lower 80% of the U.S. population from
 that generation, is completely different in its cultural outlook,
 from that of the upper 20%, especially the upper 3%.  The upper
 3% and upper 20% of family-income brackets, of that generation,
 the generation born between 1946 and 1958, is absolutely
 different, than the parts of the population, born even during the
 same period.
 	Now, the way the thing works, it doesn't work on the basis
 of each individual as a strict type:  It works on the question of
 group dynamics, in which the characteristics of behavior, that
 is, when you take an individual aside from the group, they will
 behave in one way; you put them in the context of the group, the
 same group on the same question, they will be behave differently.
 When they're under the influence of the group association, they
 behave differently than when they behave as individual human
 beings, where they're free to think on their own.  You see the
 guy you talk to, outside the classroom, you're just discussing
 something, and fine.  The minute your reference becomes the
 university classroom, then you find out, it's a completely
 different logic, and he will deny or reject everything he agreed
 to off campus.  Hmm?  [laughter]  This is group dynamics!
 	And the characteristic of the Baby-Boomer is he's a liar.
 He's not a liar because he thinks he's lying.  He thinks he's
 being true to his class.  He will say, "Well, what is true, after
 all?  One man's opinion and another man's opinion.  What's the
 difference?  We all have our opinions, don't we?  We differ in
 opinions--what do we do?  {We get along.}  And we accept the
 instruction given to us by those who have greater power than we
 do.  We kiss ass."  It's called dynamics.  [laughter]  Group
 dynamics.  Sometimes, it's called "grope dynamics."
 	So, this defines for you the kind of problem we face.  That
 your generation face, that you and I face:  We have a
 degeneration, an older degeneration--not mine, thank God!--but
 which was caused to degenerate by coming under the domination of
 a group within society, which in turn was dominated by this
 culture, this existentialist culture: which does not believe in a
 rigorously defined truth, but believes "you have to understand my
 feelings.  You have to understand the feelings of the people I
 associate with.  You have to respond to those feelings.  There is
 no truth.  Yes, there is truth, yeah of a certain type--but first
 of all you have to respond to these feelings!"  And you have the
 "feeling generation": it's called the Baby-Boomer generation,
 they feel everything... especially their neighbors.
 	So therefore, truth ceases to exist, and in a sense, smell
 tends to take over.  [laughter]
 	Now, therefore, you see the conflict.  Here you are, you're
 in a generation:  This whole society's falling apart.  The
 society's doomed, it's finished.  You see it decaying before your
 eyes, disintegrating.  It's ruled by a generation which has no
 commitment to an idea of truth, which is hostile to the idea of
 science, as you see with the spread of this Cult of Global
 Warming.  Exhibition of the fact that the whole culture that
 believes in this stuff, they're all degenerates!  They're all
 mental cases, and morals cases, too.  They want to kill the human
 race.  "We don't like this, we don't like carbon dioxide."  What
 d'ya mean you don't like it? You're expelling it all the time.
 And it's not a very significant factor in the environment,
 actually, by itself.  It's significant when plants eat it. Plants
 {love} it.  They grab it!  "Crunch!  Crunch!!"
 	You want to reduce the carbon dioxide?  Increase it.  That's
 how to reduce it.  [laughter]  Because, if you increase the
 carbon dioxide, and you have water and other things around, as
 well, then the plants will proliferate to get this stuff they
 like to eat!  Because it now comes in richer concentrations, and
 they plants are ecstatic about that!  "Awwrrwrw! Rwwrrr!!" And
 what do they do?  They make more plants.  And what do they do?
 They cause a transpiration of moisture in the system, otherwise
 which doesn't occur.  Moisture doesn't just "happen" to the
 Earth.  Moisture is transpired: It's consumed by plant life and
 it's spit out by plant life.  So, it spits out.
 	So, now you have nicer air, because you add a little more
 carbon dioxide, and you allowed things to grow.  You increased
 your water transport throughout the system, eliminated deserts
 and things of that sort, and you made it nicer, and that plants
 grew! And the world became greener, and greener, and greener!  I
 don't know why these guys call themselves "greenies."  They're
 against green!  Call them brownies! [laughter]  Half-baked ones,
 at that.
 	Therefore, we as human beings have the intrinsic ability to
 organize this planet, by understanding how the planet works;  how
 culture works, how the human anatomy works.  You want to organize
 the planet, not just have it in a wild state.  We have people in
 wild states all the time.  But by doing that, we actually
 transform the planet willfully.  And by transforming the planet,
 by growing more trees, by managing the water systems, by managing
 the atmosphere, and the things that we do, through science and
 technology, applying these things and producing more things,
 instead of "blahh"--then we increase the power of mankind to
 exist, and improve the conditions of life.
 	Now, that has been destroyed, more or less effectively, by
 the Baby-Boomer generation's influence.  Don't try to dissect a
 Baby-Boomer, you may not like what you find.  Take the
 Baby-Boomer as a phenomenon within a social process:  The
 Baby-Boomer, as you know the Baby-Boomer, is controlled by a
 social process.  It's what others think of them that controls
 them, especially what they think of powerful influences, which
 control them.  That's what controls them.  So therefore, you have
 group dynamics, which is determined by what the controlling
 belief is of the group.  And the individual in the group, who may
 have a contrary opinion as an individual, will submit to group
 behavior, group domination, group control.  And that's why you
 have this behavior of the Baby-Boomer.  And most of you know it.
 Most of you are acquainted with Baby-Boomers.  Matter of fact,
 you were raised in households where Baby-Boomers were allowed to
 exist.  Matter of fact, they ran these households.
 	And therefore you know, what the problem of the Baby-Boomer
 is, often by knowing your own parents' demoralization. And how
 you reacted to peer group responses in the neighborhoods in which
 you grew up, especially in the neighborhoods which were approved
 of my your parents.  So group behavior controls you, and you were
 trying to find your meaning in life, within the special domain of
 this group behavior.
 	Now, some of you represent those who realize there's
 something wrong with this whole racket. And that what your
 parents believed was insane.  You don't say it that way,
 sometimes you do, especially when you're angry at them: "Mother!
 You're insane!" "Mother, you're crazy!"  "Mother, you should
 marry a toad, you deserve it."  You know, things like--kindly.
 Kindly family reactions from daughter to mother!  [laughter]
 	So, you know it.  But you also know something else, those of
 you assembled here in particular:  You know that {this is
 insane.}  You know the world has to change, to get away from
 this.  Therefore, your concern, if you're not going to go insane,
 is to define what the change must be.  And you begin to find
 satisfaction, as I've seen you do this, when you get into the
 idea of discovering something outside Baby-Boomer ideology, which
 is called "truth."  It's otherwise known as "scientific
 principle."  It's otherwise known as the same issue, the
 existential issue, which I posed in assembly form, on Thursday,
 in the presentation there.
 	Because we've come to a time in the history of the world,
 the history of the United States in particular, that the
 existential question, the essential existential question, is the
 immediate question before humanity:  This society, in its present
 form--though people say, "I gotta save for my future, I gotta
 save for my retirement."  "You're not going to make it, buddy!
 {Don't worry about it!  Spend now!}  Retirement will never come.
 You won't get that far, not the way things are going now!"
 	They say, "No, no, no!  We're saving for our retirement."
 	"Hah! Retirement from what?  To what?"
 	So therefore, you have a sense that there is no future, in
 the society the way it's operating.  And all the evidence of
 experience proves that.  For example:  In Western and Central
 Europe, there's not a single nation that has a government.  There
 are things they call "governments."  But for example, take the
 case of Germany:  Germany is probably the most approximately
 governed nation of Western and Central Europe.  For example, it's
 an opposition in Germany, today, over the objection of the rest
 of Europe, its objection to this globalization, with hedge funds
 for example.  The only nation in Western and Central Europe which
 is resisting the hedge funds systematically, as a matter of law,
 of the national will of the government, is Germany.  No other
 government is actually seriously resisting it: that's a matter of
 fact, right now.  Every other government is not.
 	Most governments of that type are going along with a
 potential war with Russia, and other nations--China and India;
 especially Russia and China.  They're going in that direction.
 Most of Western Europe, there's not a competent government in any
 of them.  You see, in the case of Germany, you take the contrast
 between what Germany's position was under the recent Schröder
 government, and what it has become under the successor to the
 Schröder government--a government which has gone from potential
 to impotence; a government which has gone from an orientation
 toward bringing European nations together in cooperation around
 things like power, distribution of power, and generation of
 power, into the directly opposite things.  You have a government,
 which, although the Green Party is disintegrating, it's
 disintegrating because the principle of the Green Party has taken
 over most of Europe, in the form of the global warming hoax and
 similar kinds of things.  So you don't need Greens any more. You
 don't need degenerates, when the whole population is becoming
 degenerate, when the whole system is becoming degenerate.
 	You see in the United States, you see the {absolute
 impotence} of the Democratic Party!  The Democratic Party had a
 victory in the midterm election, a victory which {we} played a
 crucial part in making possible, and I personally was involved in
 doing that.  By our defense of Social Security:  I stimulated the
 organization of the defense of Social Security--I, personally.
 And the leadership of the Democratic Party accepted my leadership
 on that issue.  And mobilized.  They defended the Social Security
 system, and vigorously, in 2005, during which time I was treated
 as a hero.  Even though it was reluctantly, but nonetheless, was
 treated as a hero.  But then, at the same time, when I warned
 that we're going to lose the auto industry, and we're going to
 lose our national independence, they did {absolutely nothing!} to
 defend this capability--this capability, which is lodged within
 the auto industry, not just the auto industry itself.
 	They did {less} than nothing!  They accepted the hedge fund
 raid against the nation. They accepted the continuation of this
 illegal, immoral war in Southwest Asia, and its spread.  They
 allowed an inhuman ape, Cheney, to dominate the United States, to
 dominate its politics.  The Democratic Party, which once it got
 into power, proceeded to be {betray everyone who voted for it!}
 under the present leadership.
 	What're you looking at?  You're looking at a Baby-Boomer
 phenomenon, in Europe, and the United States, and elsewhere.  The
 Baby-Boomer ideology.
 	What is the Baby-Boomer ideology associated with?  It's
 associated with the group in society, which is the upper 3% of
 family-income brackets.  These are the multi-billionaires:  The
 guy who flunks the management, and gets out with a golden
 parachute with a billion dollars or something, that's paid for at
 the expense of the rest of humanity.  You find a decreasing level
 of income of the population, you find a decreasing level of
 productivity in every region of the United States, of physical
 productivity; a decadence which is impossible.  We find that more
 money is being printed than anyone can count, which means that
 the whole system is bankrupt: The entire world system, including
 the United States itself, is hopelessly bankrupt.  And somebody's
 saying, "what about my money?" Hah! Your money!  Toilet paper is
 more useful than your money.  And we know how to use it.  Save
 the cost of toilet paper.  (Except it's electronic in form, and
 that's a very unpleasant thing to use.)  [laughter]
 	So, it comes back to this existential question, which I
 posed on Thursday:  The existential question is, what is the
 nature of mankind?  What is human nature?  What is the function
 of the human being, the principal character of the function of
 the human being in the universe?  Well, that's what we're doing
 in The Basement:  Is applying the exploration of the discovery of
 physical principles, on which the universe's management depends
 by human beings.  And conjoining that together with music, in the
 sense of the Bach choral tradition.  And combining the two
 together, to bring the senses of sight, and senses of hearing,
 into conjunction, into paradoxical conjunction.  And it's as the
 person going through the music work, who's coming from the
 scientific work into the music work in the same period, coming
 and finding out that you can not sing effectively, in the way you
 would think, if you governed a musical performance by visual
 standards, mathematic standards.  Doesn't function.  And it is by
 seeing this contradiction, and experiencing this contradiction,
 that you are aided, in getting free of sense-certainty, the
 notion that what you see and what you hear, and above all what
 you smell, is the reality of your existence; and in seeing that
 there's something else outside this apparent reality, which is
 distinctively human: The human ability to rise above the limit of
 the senses, to recognize in the {contradictions} among the
 senses, and through experience, to recognize that the human mind
 has an engagement with the real running of the universe.
 	And thus, you get a human being, who is characteristically
 immortal.  Because the part of the human being that dies, which
 must die, is the biological part of the human being.  It passes
 on.  But the impact and the role of the human being does not
 vanish with the death of that individual.  The individual is the
 purveyor and conveyor and generator of discoveries of universal
 physical principles, and of {ideas related to those discoveries},
 which shape and reshape society, so the society is organized in a
 new way, as a result of the role of such individuals in society.
 And such individuals in society, who reorganize society!  To get
 it to abandon its insanities, to come to, not to sense-certainty,
 but to a certainty about the nature of the universe, and a
 certainty about the role of man in the universe, a sense of the
 Noosphere:  Such individuals are immortal, because the
 discoveries they contribute, whether fundamental discoveries or
 related things, become embedded in the culture, as the
 contribution of individuals.  Try to trace out any contribution
 in art, or science, and so forth--try to trace it out, and you
 find always, the {individual's role is unavoidable}, can not be
 	And thus, the individual is immortal in that respect.
 Because they may die, but what dies is the animal within the
 person.  The person, if they are valuable, if they are
 contributing, lives on.  We know this in the sense of great
 scientists and others, great artists and others, whose influence
 radiates across generations!  We know this most immediately in
 terms of three or four generations of experience, because we live
 in the middle of experiencing simultaneously, representatives of
 four successive generations.  That's the nature of our society.
 We can recognize the differences that occurred in the development
 of the society over the span of these successive generations.
 	We can go from that, to looking at history more broadly.  We
 can look at various branches of human culture, across the waters,
 across borders.  We can look back more, further, into earlier
 generations, centuries before.  We can trace the development of
 these ideas on which society develops, which exist within us as
 part of our accessible experience.  And we see that it is the
 selection of that which is precious, in that process of
 development, which must go forward and must live.  And it's in
 {that} part of our life, in our determination to express
 {that}--into a future which exists beyond our death: {That,} is
 the meaning of human life.
 	And what I raised Thursday, by using the example of the
 orbit of the discovery of gravitation by Kepler, as an example of
 the role of the infinitesimal, it is this conception of the
 infinitesimal, as applied more broadly, and the notion of
 principles of organization of society, as based on understanding
 of these infinitesimals, that is where the hopeful future of
 mankind lies.
 	And the problem that you have, in your generation: You are
 young adults, where an older adult generation has failed,
 existentially.  There may be individuals in the older generation
 who have not failed, but the generation as a whole, especially
 the white-collar generation has failed.  They've failed
 	Your job, because you are receptive to these ideas of
 principle, to the notion of the individual as immortal, an
 immortal personality, despite the death of the mortal body, is
 {your} destiny, and your responsibility to guide the changes
 which must occur in society, if society itself is to survive.
 And therefore, your generation has a unique historical role, in
 the existence of mankind as a whole.
 	And to understand this in yourself, and to see your identity
 as so situated, is my mission toward you.
 	Thank you.

                        - NEWS SUMMARY -
                         - *LAROUCHE* -
 	The Cadre School presentation by Lyn, with two hours of Q&A
 with the LYM who are in Washington for the week of action, is
 available on the web at  The transcript of Lyn's
 keynote is in this briefing, with the Q&A to appear asap.

 CAMPAIGN. (see slug)

                         - *ECONOMICS* -


 HEDGE FUND SHARKS. (see slug)






                   - *SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY* -


                       - *UNITED STATES* -


 (see slug)

 describes the Nazi as "a master of bureaucracy and detail"
 working mostly "out of public view," and generally details the
 way in which Dick runs the White House and rejects any efforts to
 challenge that fact. [WAPO 6/24]

 THE PERSIAN GULF. (see slug)

 (see slug)

                          - *EUROPE* -

 SCANDAL. (see slug)


                       - *IBERO AMERICA* -


                      - *SOUTHWEST ASIA* -

 Ismail Haniyeh called for unconditional negotiations with
 President Abu Mazen, who has not agree as of this point. (see

                       - *CENTRAL ASIA* -


                       LEADING DEVELOPMENTS

 Lord Goldsmith Runs For Cover

 June 23 (LPAC)) -- British Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith
 -- the "legal mind" who tried to cover up the BAE corruption
 scandal, justify the Iraq war, and whitewash the Tony Blair
 government "cash-for-honors" operation -- announced late last
 night that he is resigning next week, when Prime Minister Tony
 Blair leaves office on June 27. This resignation follows others
 by Blair's closest cronies, including Deputy Prime Minister John
 Prescott (the "old Labourite" who transmogrified to "New
 Labour"), Home Secretary John Reid, and Cabinet Office Minister
 Hilary Armstrong. Goldsmith is going while the going is still
 good, as every leading British paper commented today: he is
 getting out before incoming Prime Minister Gordon Brown kicks him
 out. He has been Attorney General for six years, the longest for
 any Labour Party Attorney General.
 	Blair of course praised Lord Goldsmith (whom Blair made a
 "life peer" in 1999). It was Goldsmith who overrode widespread
 opposition, in the British Parliament, military, and Foreign
 Office, to deliver an opinion which legally justified the
 invasion of Iraq, on the eve of the vote in Parliament in April
 2003. As was leaked later, in one of the biggest scandals over
 the Iraq invasion, Goldsmith's original views expressed doubt
 about the legality of invading Iraq, but he then issued a curt
 statement saying that the invasion could go ahead without a
 further UN resolution. Later, the deputy legal adviser to the
 Foreign Office resigned over Goldsmith's double-dealing.
 	Then, in 2006, Goldsmith insisted that he had the final say
 in whether senior Labour Party members should be prosecuted in
 the cash-for-honors scam, a case still to be decided. As with
 Iraq, Goldsmith got into direct conflict with the BBC and the
 {Guardian} newspaper, according to {Guardian} chief political
 correspondent Will Woodward today.
 	Now, it has emerged that he played a key role in stopping
 the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigation into the BAE
 Al-Yamamah scandal. (see
 breaking_news/2007/06/15/bae_doj_goldsmith.asp) The Attorney
 General is officially supervisor of the SFO.
 	{Guardian} commentator Jonathan Freedland wrote that any
 attempt to "bury" the scandals will not work: "Indeed, there's no
 shortage of people who would like to see the outgoing attorney
 general answer their questions on Iraq and BAE Systems -- if not
 in the House of Lords, then in a court of law."(mmc)

 EU members reach agreement on supranational government. Wanted: a
 balcony for Tony Blair  [a picture of Mussolini standing on the

 June 23 -- The synarchist faction in the financial oligarchy has
 moved one step ahead towards world dictatorship with the
 agreement, reached Friday night, June 22, on a reform of the EU
 treaties that abolishes veto power of member states, thus
 eliminating a basic protection of national sovreignty which has
 been an integral part of the European Community since its
 inception.  The new draft treaty reproduces "the substance" of
 the former EU constitutional treaty which voters in countries
 such as France and the Netherlands soundly rejected. The decision
 to reintroduce the same treaty and have it approved by
 governments or parliaments alone is therefore in itself an act of
 dictatorial power.
 	At the same time, sources report that a consensus has been
 reached to appoint outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair as
 next EU chairman. Fitting to the job, Blair has decided to
 announce his "conversion" to Catholicism in a visit to the
 Vatican today, maybe in the hope of being called "the man sent by
 	According to Italian and British media reports, German
 Chancellor Angela Merkel had to overcome opposition from Poland
 to include the elimination of the veto rights of EU members,
 which were integral to the original EU agreements, in favor of a
 "double majority" system: EU laws and regulations will be
 approved if they get a 55% majority of member states and a 65%
 majority of EU populations. This reform, which will be
 implemented in 2017, makes it impossible for single states to
 oppose legislation that goes against their national interests, if
 two or three large EU countries support that legislation.
 	In order to polish the image of the French and British
 governments, who face domestic unpopularity after yesterday's
 decision, the new draft treaty has included some cosmetic
 compensations, such as the modification of a free trade provision
 (Sarkozy), and the exclusion of justice issues from the majority
 vote (Britain).
 	But another dictatorial feature has been introduced, with
 the extension of a second mandate for the EU chairman, the
 non-elected official who, with the new voting system, will
 function as a Prime Minister of the EU Council of Ministers. This
 has been called the "permanent chairmanship."
 	And, a campaign to criminalize opponents of the European
 superstate is being prepared. Italian President Giorgio
 Napolitano declared, in a speech in Siena in the presence of
 German President Horst Koehler, that it is "psychological
 terrorism to suggest the specter of a European superstate,"
 according to the Daily Express of June 17. Koehler added that it
 is "populistic, demagogic campaigning." [ccc]

 Was Newton "The First Christian Zionist?"

 June 23 (EIRNS)--This is the question asked by Yaakov Lappin, in
 his review in yesterday's (the English website for
 the leading Israeli daily {Yedioth Ahronoth}) of a special
 exhibition of the secret esoteric writings of the 17th century's
 Isaac Newton, now taking place at Hebrew University's Jewish
 National and University Library. The exhibition is a confirmation
 that Newton, whose mechanistic scientific writings were a cultish
 distortion of the actual dynamics of the physical universe as
 discovered by Johannes Kepler, was indeed nothing less than the
 oligarchy's resident satanic nut case. Yetnetnews is .
 	The exhibition, "Newton's Secrets," Lappin writes, displays
 original documents that "reveal startling views held by Newton,
 which stray far from the scientifically pure image traditionally
 associated with him," showing that he could have been the "first
 Christian Zionist," fully 300 years before Jerry Falwell and Pat
 	He cites one letter by Newton on the Apocalypse and
 Resurrection, which is at the core of Chrisitan Zionist belief:
 "Tis said that they who sleep in the dust shall rise again, some
 to reward and some to punishment, and Daniel himself in person is
 named for one of those who shall then rise again. At that time is
 also predicted the end of the King of the North, the fall of the
 great apostasy, the return of the Jewish captivity and the great
 	Another document is a diagram of Solomon's Temple, the same
 temple that today's fanatics want to rebuild on the Al Haram Al
 Sharif/Temple Mount. The document reveals that Newton believed it
 would be rebuilt following the Jewish return to Israel.
 	"This is the secret side to Newton's life," said Prof.
 Steven Snobelen, of Kings College, Halifax, Canada and a curator
 of the exhibition. "The main reason why this story is so great is
 because no one could have imagined that Newton would be a
 believer in Biblical prophecy. Now, for the first time, the
 general public is finding out about what Newton scholars have
 known for a couple decades. He believed in prophecies in the Old
 Testament that talked about the Jews' return to Israel thinking
 the return would happen past the 17-18th centuries." Snobelen
 added that Newton "thought they would return physically." This is
 the core belief behind today's Christian Fundies' support for
 Israel, since the return of the Jews would bring on the
 	Newton thought the rebuilding of Jerusalem would take place
 in the late 19th century, and that the Temple would be rebuilt in
 the 20th or 21st century, said Snobelen, apparently an enthusiast
 about Newton's powers of prophecy. "History has kind of caught up
 with his predications."
 	Newton, he said, also believed that Islam was used by God to
 punish the corrupt Catholic Church, which he likened to "a
 	Newton even set a date for the Apocalypse -- 2060 -- through
 using a time chart which is on display at the exhibition. "He
 believed in the coming battle of Armageddon and identified the
 target of the number 666 from the Apocalypse," Snobelen said.
 "This is a radically different image of Newton than what people
 	Newton's secret writings had been hidden from the public for
 hundreds of years, until they were auctioned off and bought by
 John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s, who bequeathed them to another
 professor, who in turn bequeathed them to Hebrew University
 Library which acquired them in the early 1950s. [dea]

 House Bill To Tax Private Equity Funds at 35% Is Strongly Backed

 June 23, 2007 (LPAC)--Fourteen senior Democratic House members,
 including two key committee chairmen, submitted legislation on
 June 22 which would tax managing partners of private equity
 funds--many of whom have been earning hundreds of millions as
 fees--``just as any other American worker,'' rather than the tax
 privilege they now enjoy. This legislation is much stronger than
 the Senate Grassley-Baucus bill (see
 which applied only to private equity firms issuing public
 stock--i.e., to Blackstone Partners--with its effect delayed by
 five years. The House bill applies to any private equity fund;
 and, in fact, would apply to real estate investment funds (REITs)
 as well.
 	The sponsors include Ways and Means Committee Chairman
 Charles Rangel (a release is posted to the Ways and Means
 Committee website), Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney
 Frank, and Reps. Sander Levin, Pete Stark, Jim McDermott, John
 Lewis, Richard Neal, Earl Pomeroy, Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, John
 Larson, Earl Blumenauer, Ron Kind, and Bill Pascrell.
 	Private equity fund managers have realized often-huge annual
 income by taking both 2% of the total capital invested by all the
 partners in their fund, and 20% of the fund's profits, as their
 fees. But they have been paying only the capital gains tax rate,
 15%, on this income--if not using other methods to avoid taxation
 altogether--rather than the income tax rate which would be, in
 most cases, 35%. The House bill would end this tax avoidance, and
 could take effect immediately on passage. It's estimated to raise
 annual Federal tax revenues by $10 billion, but also immediately
 poses a challenge to the power of these private equity funds,
 which are borrowing huge amounts of ``leverage'' and taking over
 and reselling even the largest corporations. [pbg]


 Panic on Wall Street to Plug the CBO "Catastrophe"

 June 23 (LPAC) -- Peter Schiff, president of the
 Connecticut-based Euro Pacific Capital, warned about a potential
 "catastrophe" in the CDO (collatoralized debt obligations)
 markets, due to the Bear Stearns hedge funds collapse (see
 /breaking_news/2007/06/23/stearns_self-bailout.asp). "As long as
 these CDO bonds stay off the market, as they universally have,
 asset managers have the luxury of 'marking them to market,'"
 Schiff wrote in a research note, reported by Dow Jones. "Not
 surprisingly, using this method the vast majority of these bonds
 are valued at par or greater." But if the Bear Stearns bonds were
 auctioned in the open market, their real values would be exposed.
 "This would force other hedge funds to similarly mark down the
 value of their holdings. Is it any wonder that Wall street is
 pulling out the stops to avoid such a catastrophe?," Schiff
 wrote. Worse than the impact of hedge fund losses, would be the
 impact of an open market auction of subprime CDOs. "Their true
 weakness will finally reveal the abyss into which the housing
 market is about to plummet," Schiff wrote. [mmc]

 Financial Times: Private Equity Funds Stole Their Money Fair and

 June 23 (EIRNS) -- The City of London's {Financial Times} rushed
 to the defense of the private equity fund speculators in its lead
 editorial today. Showing the effects of political "maulings" that
 private equity executives are getting both in Britain and the
 United States, the FT wrote: "Populist attacks on successful
 financiers and entrepreneurs are dangerous and wrong…. Private
 equity plays fair. It plays an important economic role and its
 leading lights deserve to be very rich indeed." While admitting
 that there should be a review of the outrageous tax breaks which
 private equity directors are exploiting, the FT warns that
 "Fiddling tax systems against private equity would have
 unforeseen consequences. A political witchhunt could also have
 dangerous effects, not least encouraging the public to believe
 all business gains are ill-gotten." (mmc)

 Bankrupt Delphi, Broken UAW Reach Lose-Lose Agreement Over Wage

 June 23 (LPAC)--U.S. auto parts manufacturer Delphi, and the
 United Auto Workers union reached agreement June 22 on contract
 negotiations, including large wage and benefit cuts, although
 neither party is going public with the details until after it is
 voted on by the 17,000 UAW members next week. Vulture funds
 looking to buy Delphi out of bankruptcy had been pushing for
 beginning wages to be lowered to $12 per hour, but the final deal
 will probably have wages beginning at $14 per hour, just half of
 what the workers presently earn. GM, formerly the parent company
 of Delphi, says it will commit $300-$400 million annually to
 bridge the wage gap between what Delphi will pay and what the UAW
 wants. Workers would also be eligible to move to open jobs at GM,
 or take a retirement option.
 	Part of the deal allows Delphi to close seven plants, while
 keeping four open and selling the rest, according to (clc)

                           UNITED STATES

 Waxman: Dick Cheney May Have the Worst Record for Protecting
 Classified Information

 June 23 (LPAC)--As we reported by LPAC yesterday (see
 Vice President Dick Cheney is refusing to comply with an
 executive order governing the handling of classified material. In
 a June 21 letter to Cheney protesting his office's refusal to
 accept oversight, House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman
 (D-Calif.) pointed out that Cheney's office "may have the worst
 record in the Executive branch for safeguarding classified
 information." Waxman cites three examples to make his case: the
 conviction of Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter"
 Libby for perjury, obstruction of justice and false statements in
 disclosing the identity of a covert CIA agent; the leaking of the
 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's supposed efforts to
 acquire weapons of mass destruction, reportedly at Cheney's
 instruction; and the passing of classified information from
 Cheney's office, by a former official there, to plotters trying
 to overthrow Philippines President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
 "Given this record," Waxman writes, "serious questions can be
 raised about both the legality and the advisability of exempting
 your office from the rules that apply to all other Executive
 branch officials." [cjo]

 Cheney's Tortured Logic

 June 23 (LPAC)--Not surprisingly, the White House has defended
 Dick Cheney exempting himself from oversight of his office's
 handling of classified information (see
 White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told reporters on June 22
 that both the President, as the author of the Executive Order,
 and the Vice President, are exempt from oversight, and that it
 only applies to all other agencies of the government. "This is a
 bit of a non-issue," said Perino, because George Bush, as the
 enforcer of the Executive Order, "gets to decide whether or not
 he (Cheney) should be treated separately, and he's decided that
 he should."
 	Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), the second ranking Democratic
 member of the Senate, charged that Cheney is distorting the plain
 meaning of the Executive Order. "Vice President Cheney is
 expanding the administration's policy on torture to include
 tortured logic," Durbin told the Washington Post. "In the end,
 neither Mr. Cheney or his staff is above the law or the
 Constitution." [cjo]

 Senate Passes Biofools Energy Bill

 June 23 (LPAC)--On June 21, the U.S. Senate passed H.R. 6, the
 energy bill which had originated in the House of Representatives.
 Some of the major, mostly insane features of the bill are:
 	* Fleet-wide automobile fuel efficiency increases up to 35
 mpg by 2020, up from today's 27.5 mpg.
 	* Half of new cars manufactured by 2015 must be capable of
 running on 85% (!) biofuels mixes.
 	* Ethanol production would increase sevenfold over 2006
 levels, to 36 billion gallons per year by 2022.
 	* Institution of new appliance and lighting efficiency
 standards, including a requirement for accelerated use of such
 new lighting in public buildings.
 	* Award of grants, loan guarantees, and other assistance to
 promote research into fuel-efficient vehicle technologies such as
 hybrids, advanced diesel, and battery technologies.
 	* Support for demonstration projects on carbon dioxide
 sequestration from coal-fired plants.
 	Two sections of the bill were struck down: the requirement
 that electric utilities produce 15% of power from renewables, and
 the tax package requiring oil and gas companies to subsidize
 alternative energy development.
 	The San Francisco Chronicle (June 23) quoted biofool Sen.
 John Kerry (D-Mass.), as saying, "It's the beginning of a
 revolution in American energy policy."
 	The word "nuclear" does not appear in the bill.
 	The bill might better be called the biofools energy bill,
 according to Lyndon LaRouche, who commented that the bill could
 actually have the unintended effect of making nuclear power, and
 associated hydrogen production, the only viable energy options
 left on the table to end the disaster, once this new biofoolery
 gets underway.(clc)

 WHO Launches Effort To Counter Drug-Resistant TB Crisis

 June 23, 2007 (LPAC)--The World Health Organization (WHO) rolled
 out the new "Global MDR-TB (multi-drug resistant TB) and XDR-TB
 (extensively drug resistant TB) Response Plan 2007-2008 on June
 22. The plan will be funded with $2.15 billion, and will be
 carried out in conjunction with the Stop TB Partnership and
 relevant countries.
 	The plan is a response to the recent strong surge of
 drug-resistant tuberculosis in many countries throughout the
 world, which poses the significant danger of derailing the Stop
 TB program goals, by rendering TB largely untreatable. (see
 "Resurgent Tuberculosis -- Deadlier Than Ever" EIR, Feb. 23,
 	The plan in effect pinpoints weaknesses in the TB program to
 date, and attempts to remedy the situation in affected countries,
 by increased surveillance, greater attention to infection control
 measures, better and more laboratory diagnostic services, and
 most importantly, strengthening basic activities to control TB
 and HIV/AIDS to avoid additional emergence of MDR- and XDR-TB.

 Base Closure Costs Skyrocketing, Investigations Underway

 June 23 (LPAC)--New Jersey's Congressional delegation is in an
 uproar after an investigation by the Asbury Park Press (APP)
 revealed that the costs to close Fort Monmouth, a center of
 electronics and communications engineering for the U.S. Army,
 have nearly doubled in two years, from $780 million to almost
 $1.5 billion. The APP investigation also found that the Pentagon
 withheld information on the shortage of engineers that would
 result from the closing, information that the Pentagon was
 required by law to supply to the Base Realignment and Closure
 Commission (BRAC), in 2005 when it recommended that Fort Monmouth
 be closed and its functions be moved to Aberdeen Proving Ground
 in Maryland. The data showed that normal attrition would result
 in a shortfall of 4,000 scientists and engineers in the
 military's research labs, but the 2005 BRAC recommendations will
 eliminate 3,000 more jobs, for a total shortfall of 7,000. Those
 data were excluded from the documentation given to the
 	The APP's revelations have resulted in demands in Congress
 for investigations. Representatives Rush Holt (D-N.J.) and Frank
 Pallone (D-N.J.) have asked the Government Accountability Office
 to look into whether Pentagon officials broke the law in
 preparing the recommendations for base closures, and New Jersey's
 two senators, Frank Lautenberg (D) and Robert Menendez (D), have
 asked Pentagon Inspector General Claude Kicklighter to look into
 the process. In their letter to Kicklighter, Lautenberg and
 Menendez wrote that "it now appears that the real closure costs
 were known by the Defense Deaprtment in 2005, yet hidden from the
 public" and the BRAC commission.
 	The APP found that the overall costs of the 2005 BRAC round
 have risen from the Pentagon's original estimate of $22.3 billion
 to $30.7 billion. The APP quoted at least two former members of
 the 2005 commission, Philip Coyle and James Bilbray, saying that
 had they known about the higher cost estimates, the panel might
 have voted differently from the way it did. [cjo]


 Ecuador's President Enlists His Army Corps of Engineers To Build

 June 23 (LPAC)--Showing once again that he is acting upon his
 commitment to use Franklin D. Roosevelt-style policies to revive
 his nation, President Rafael Correa announced June 21 that
 Ecuador's government and the Army Corps of Engineers will work
 together to rebuild Ecuador's national highway infrastructure.
 After serving as a "witness of honor" for the signing of 12
 contracts between the Army Corps of Engineers and Ministry of
 Transportation and Public Works, Correa underscored that his
 government is committed to completing projects that have been
 delayed for a decade or more, which when completed will greatly
 improve communication, transportation and trade among several
 regions of the country.
 	These projects, he emphasized, will be built "using our own
 capabilities, in which we have confidence." He urged the Army
 Engineers to live up to the trust which people have placed in
 them, and produce "well-made projects" which demonstrate the
 abilities of the public sector.
 	Among the projects that demonstrate "a change in mentality"
 which prioritizes Ecuadorean abilities, Correa said that the
 Navy's Dredging Unit would be rehabilitated, and available for
 deployment wherever needed. He also announced that Ecuador's Oil
 Fleet (FLOPEC) will be forming a strategic alliance with the
 state oil firm Petroecuador to transport fuel and build storage
 facilities for imported gas. This is in addition to plans to
 build several hydroelectric plants and oil refineries. [crr]


 Malcom Rifkind Signs Duggan Latter Day Motion.

 June 23 (EIRNS)--Malcom Rifkind, British Conservative Party MP
 has signed the Parliamentarian "Latter day motion" on the
 Jeremiah Duggan case, which is part of the anti-LaRouche campaign
 masterminded by Baroness Liz Symons and Tony Blair. Rifkind, who
 had been defense minister under Tory Prime Minister John Major in
 1992, is now chairman of ArmorGroup. This was the "private
 military company" that until recently was a subsidiary of Armor
 Holdings in the U.S., the company which is in the process of
 being bought out by BAE Systems.
 	The split between Armor Holding and ArmorGroup was in fact a
 coming back to Britain of the military mercenary side of Armor
 Holdings. ArmorGroup has its roots in a company called Defence
 Systems Limited (DSL) which was at the center of the 1997 EIR
 Special Report: "The True Story Behind the Fall of The House of
 Windsor." ArmorGroup has its address at the same office as the
 old DSL, 25 Buckingham Gate, a stone's throw from Her Majesty's
 Buckingham Palace.
 	Rifkind fancies himself as a "moderate" Tory who opposed the
 2003 decision to go to war against Iraq. This has not prevented
 him from profiting from that war, since the ArmorGroup gets 60%
 of its profits from its contracts in Iraq. In fact, Rifkind has
 an op-ed in today's International Herald Tribune entitled "Enter
 Brown, Iraq Still Needs Us." He calls for Britian to stay the
 course, train the Iraqi army and protect military supply convoys.

 Belgium To Reconsider Anti-Nuclear Policy

 June 23 (LPAC) -- The "Commission 2030," which Belgian Energy
 Minister  Marc Verwilghen had requested to study Belgium's energy
 sources, has advised the government to reconsider the planned
 exit from nuclear energy. Otherwise, the report says, the energy
 bill will be too great, and too hard on the economy. Without
 nuclear plants, the mandated decreases in carbon emissions could
 mean a increasing energy prices of 150% for industry and 170% for
 households, the report argues, while with nuclear power, the
 increase would be "only" 50%. [rss]

                          SOUTHWEST ASIA

 Top Saudi Cleric Calls For Palestinian Unity

 June 23 (LPAC) -- Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais, the imam of the
 Grand Mosque in Mecca, yesterday called on the Palestinian
 factions Fatah and Hamas to stop their conflict and renew their
 commitment to the Mecca Accord, the agreement forged by Saudi
 King Abdullah in February, for a unity government.
 	"We call upon our Palestinian brothers with our full voice
 to lay down their weapons and abide by the terms and conditions
 of the Mecca Agreement immediately," the imam said during his
 Friday sermon. Sheikh Sudais urged the Palestinian groups to
 stand united against their real enemies, "And hold fast together
 the rope of God and be not divided among yourselves. And remember
 with gratitude God's favor upon you as He joined your hearts in
 love after you had become enemies and by His grace you became
 brethren," the imam said, quoting a verse from the Holy Qur'an.
 	He called on the Palestinian leaders not to waste the
 achievements of their resistance, and criticized them for giving
 precedence to their personal ambitions and vested interests at
 the cost of their higher national interests. He also quoted a
 Hadith (a saying) from the Prophet Muhammad, which warned Muslims
 against fighting each other, as it would make them infidels,
 reported Arab News.
 	In Gaza, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, the Palestinian Prime
 Minister dismissed by Palestinian President Abu Mazen, has called
 for a dialogue with Fatah, something which the latter still
 refuses to do. These talks, Haniyeh said, should be held "on the
 basis of no loser and no winner, and on the basis of no harm to
 anyone, and on the basis of a national unity government." Hamas
 has denounced Abu Mazen's dismissal of the national unity
 government as illegal and refuses to recognize the new emergency
 government. [dea]

 Third U.S. Carrier Headed to Persian Gulf?

 June 23 (LPAC)--Debkafile, an Israeli-based intelligence website,
 reports today, that a third U.S. aircraft carrier, the {USS
 Enterprise}, and its supporting task force has been ordered to
 the Persian Gulf to join the {USS Stennis} and {USS Nimitz}
 strike groups already there. "This goes towards making good on
 the assurances of four carriers U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney
 offered the Gulf and Middle East nations during his May tour of
 the region," Debkafile says. The fourth carrier would reportedly
 be deployed in the Red Sea. [cjo]

                           CENTRAL ASIA

 NATO Continues Killing Civilians in Afghanistan

 June 23 (LPAC)--A NATO airstrike in Afghanistan's Helmand
 Province killed 25 civilians, including 9 women and 3 children on
 June 22. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer responded
 with the same mantra NATO has been using for months: "It's always
 a mistake" when civilians are killed, he told reporters in Quebec
 City, Canada reports AFP. "Each civilian victim is one too many.
 Unfortunately, it happens." As EIR reports in an article in its
 June 22 issue on the failing war in Afghanistan, NATO said back
 in January that its biggest mistake in 2006 was the deaths of
 innocent civilians. De Hoop Scheffer promised an investigation
 into this latest incident, but that is unlikely to mollify people
 in Afghanistan where President Hamid Karzai is already under
 tremendous pressure because of the civilian casualties regularly
 inflicted by NATO military action. [cjo]

 |                                                               |
 |               NORTH AMERICAN OPERATIONS BULLETIN              |
 |                                                               |
 |                     SUNDAY, June 24, 2007                     |
 |                                                               |

               - REPORT ON JUNE 23 LAROUCHE SHOW -

 	LYM--Linda Vu (Seattle), Ben Denniston (Oakland); and Tony
 Papert on the Strategic Implications of the LaRouche Webcast


 	The discussion among Tony Papert (EIR), Pacific Coast LYM
 leaders, Linda Vu (Seattle) and Ben Denniston (Oakland, Calif.),
 and host Marcia Baker, included both updates and essential
 background from Papert on the BAE affair; and also key aspects of
 organizing in the current crisis period. Various lines of
 discussion followed off the June 21 webcast points made by
 LaRouche, e.g. creating an environment for people to gain the
 freedom to seek truth, find courage, and start acting on it.
 Papert's sketch of the nature of BAE, began with an account of
 Lynne Cheney's Master's thesis on William Butler Yates, and her
 interest in his failed attempt at fascism.
 	Discussing the mood of the population, Denniston
 stressed at one point, that, "there is general recognition of a
 certain breaking point" today, concerning the economic collapse,
 war, and the overall crisis. We are organizing to engage people
 to understand history, and reflect on their own thinking, and
 uplift them to be able to think and get a sense of real policies.
 There is "increasing openness" in California, where the LYM has
 been active for years, and there is respect for how Lyn has "been
 so right." This is intersecting with the "physical reality"
 affecting people, so there is more openness for collaboration.
 The FDR Legacy Club is a real institution in all this. It is
 	Linda Vu described several recent events in Seattle, making
 a similar point. Rep. Jim McDermott's office is getting fierce
 constituent pressure to back impeaching Cheney. At the Fremont
 Festival last week in Seattle--where Boomers ride bikes
 naked!--condom packets were circulated, labelled, "Al Gore Is
 Protecting Dick," and saying where to call to get Cheney
 impeached. She described the McDermott town hall meeting a month
 ago, where there was a near riot among the 150-200 constituents,
 to impeach Cheney. When the Congressman still refused in the
 face of this, Vu said, "it was like a Shakespearean play coming
 out." In such a situation, the "missing necessity is leadership,"
 and that's what the LYM is providing.
 	Denniston spoke of the Congressmen in the Bay area--Pete
 Stark, Lynne Woolsey and others. We are "unleashing the
 population." Vu said that putting forward the maglev idea, and
 the Bering Strait Eurasian development plan and other programs
 provide the missing solution on where we need to be going. They
 are the potential to move ahead, away from the Cheney
 	There were several accounts of effective ways to "provoke"
 people to think. Vu said that one "light" method, is asking them:
 "Did you know Dick Cheney's Been Involved With Yer Mama?" We're
 poking at people, and dispelling their cynicism and pessimism.
 	Vu raised a special point of pedagogy to use, from
 LaRouche's webcast, namely, the perspective of 3,000 years of
 science. She spoke of the escalation for recruitment in Seattle,
 where we have an "open door" policy for people to come into the
 office, and there is inspiration with the cultural work.
 	The Show concluded with an exchange on what to expect with
 still more organizing on the BAE scandal. Seattle has distributed
 abut 5,000 copies of the article. Papert summarized the prospects

                    THE LAROUCHE SHOW, JUNE 30

 	Guest, LYM Panel, Host:_______TBA
 	Time:______________________3-4 p.m. Eastern Time
 	Message Line (post-Show)___ 918 222-7201, Box 595
 	Message #1: _______________June 21 LaRouche Webcast Keynote
 	Message #2: ______________ June 21 LaRouche Webcast, Q&A.

                           JULY, 2007

 July 7 LIVE EARTH CONCERT, Giants Stadium, N.J.; part of Gore's
     "Save Our Selves--The Campaign for a Climate in Crisis,"
     events over 24 hrs, in London, Sydney, Shanghai, etc.

     INCONVENIENCE, invited by Coahuila state Secretary of
     Environment to speak to businessmen and researchers.
     Gore has also been invited on this tour, to Mexico City,
     by Mayor Marcelo Ebrard.


 Nov. 19 GORE TO RECEIVE INT'L EMMY AWARD for founding the
      interactive "Current TV" in 2005 aimed at youth; and
      for An Inconvenient Truth. New York City.

                     GENERAL EVENTS CALENDAR

 June 22-26  The National Conference of Mayors holds its 75th
      annual meeting in Los Angeles, CA

 June 28 PBS sponsored Democratic Party Presidential Forum
      9pm, Howard University, Washington, DC.

 Jun 29-30 Wisconsin Democratic Party State Convention, Milwaukee

 Jun 30  The National Association of Latino Elected and
      Appointed Officials (NALEO) FORUM of the
      Democratic Presidential candidates in Orlando, FL

                            JULY 2007

 Jul. 2   The Assoc of Comm Organizations for Reform Now
         Dem Presidential Candidate Forum, Phila, PA

 Jul. 2-5, 2007: The National Education Association holds its
 	annual meeting in Philadelphia, featuring Dem Party
 	Presidential Candidates.

 July 7-12 NAAACP Annual Convention, at Detroit's COBO Hall

 July 14-18 CSG/Southern Legislative Conf at Williamsburg, VA
       Contact Nai Hallman at (404) 633-1866 or visit for information.

 July 16-17 CWA 69th Annual Convention (U.S. and Canada),
       Toronto, Canada

 July 18-21 Young Democrats of America, National Convention,
       Dallas, Texas.

 Jul. 23   CNN, Google, YouTube and the DNC host a
       Democratic presidential debate in Charleston, SC

 July 25-28 National Urban League Conference, St Louis

 July 26-29 College Democrats of America, National
       Convention. Columbia, South Carolina.

 July 27-Aug AFSCME 2008 International Convention,
       San Francisco, Ca.

 July 28-29 DLC 2007 National Convention, Nashville, Tn.

                           AUGUST 2007

 Aug 11-15  CSG/Eastern Regional Conference-47th Annual Meeting
       & Regional Policy Forum Quebec City, Quebec-Hilton
       Hotel. Contact Pamela Stanley at (646) 383-5711
       or or visit

 Aug 23-25  DNC "Unity Summit" in Las Vegas, NV

 Aug. 26-29 CSG/Midwestern Legislative Conf 62nd Annual Mtg
       Traverse City, MI; Grand Traverse Resort and Spa.
       Contact Cindy Andrews at (630) 925-1922 or, or for more info

                         SEPTEMBER 2007

 Sept 6-8   New Jersey Democratic Party State Convention

 Sept 7-8   North Carolina Democratic Party State Convention,

 Sept. 16-19 CSG/CSG-WEST-Annual Meeting-Jackson Lake Lodge, WV
        Contact Lolita Urrutia at (916) 553-4423 or

 Sept 27   PBS Sponsored Republican Party Presidential Forum.
       9pm, Morgan State University, Baltimore, Md.


            - LPAC, 1; FEAR-AND-IGNORANCE FORCES, 0 -

 [This is a blow-by-blow report from Carl of the PLYM on the
 dramatic intervention reported in the 6/23 morning briefing]

 20 June, 2007

 6/15 (Friday): Philippine LaRouche Society (PLS) Chairman Antonio
 "Butch" Valdes corresponds by phone with organizing agency
 Philippine Nuclear Research Association's director Dr. Alumanda
 Dela Rosa, introducing our organization and obtaining from Dela
 Rosa an invitation to the Seminar-Workshop on Nuclear Power
 scheduled for June 20 at the Manila Hotel, Manila. Four LYM
 members' names are supposed to be included in the official list
 of invitees.

 6/18, afternoon: Dr. Dela Rosa informs Mr. Valdes in
 an email "that the organizers would not be able to invite La
 Rouche Society to the workshop on June 20..." citing the event's
 "technical" nature, adding that the PLS may be invited in "future
 fora". We also learn that the venue has been very strangely
 changed from the very famous Manila Hotel to non-landmark Traders

 6/19 11:00am: The PLS receives by phone what amounts to
 confirmation, from the co-organizer National Academy of Science
 and Technology (NAST), that all slots for the June 20 seminar
 have been "fully booked". Realizing we've been delisted, we
 nonetheless stick to our plan of attending (LYM and PLS -
 Philippine LaRouche Society), even if this means our intervention
 might take a form of protest and distributing our material
 outside the conference.

 6/20 9:30am
 - 'Radioactive' Envelopes Deployed - Articles from EIR and 21st
 Century, with cover: "Philippine LaRouche Society: Towards a
 Nuclear Renaissance"
 	We are 8 members strong: 5 LYMs, with PLS members Rod P.,
 Henry G., and Nestor D. completing the cast.
     The first LYM pair go up {Ver A. and Marlou M.}, one
 approaches the registration table and presents himself as EIR
 correpondent. Registration person: "This seminar is by invitation
 only." While one is hustling the registration people, the other
 sneaks in unnoticed.
     A crew of 3 LYMs {Kristoff B., Carl L., Jehan C.} and a
 boomer {Henry G.} are waiting by the parking lot outside the
 hotel. Jehan and Henry go in first.
     On Carl and Kristoff's turn to enter the lobby, Energy
 Secretary {Raphael Lotilla}, done with his early keynote address,
 is about to exit the hotel with his aides for another engagement.
 Carl hurries to give the official the envelope of LaRouche
 material prepared by the LYM, just before he boards his vehicle.
 "Read it, if you don't have time, have your assistant read it.
 It's very important."
     Jehan tries to get in past the registration by presenting
 herself as a DZXL radio announcer. Reg istration probes and blows
 her cover - retreat.

     A while later, Dept.of Energy Undersecretary Mar Salazar
 descends, heading out. Recognizing him from a government TV press
 conf, Carl quickly approaches the UnderSec with the envelope. The
 guy is instantly curious, opens it, browses a few pieces, and,
 ignorant as yet of our predicament:
 	U.Sec: Are you participating
 [in the conference]... You should participate.
 	LYM: Actually, we
 were invited... but it was taken back.
 	U.Sec: Why? You should
 participate. Who is leading this organization?
 	LYM: ...Butch
 	U.Sec: He should come here.
 	LYM: Can I have your
 	U.Sec: I'll be back [after lunch].

     The LYM relay the U.Sec's remarks to Butch Valdes by SMS.
     Our lone LYM insider {Marlou} sends us text messages asking
 us to help him out with questions. An open forum, apparently.
 Downstairs, a LYM {Jehan} constructs a question on a piece of
 tissue paper and hands it to our insider though our media friend
 {Wally V.}.
     With one man still on the inside, Butch Valdes calls and says
 we, deployed out there, should show the U.Sec the email conveying
 the now legendary 'revocation of invitation' by Dr. Dela Rosa.

 6/20 11:00am
     At around this time our insider's cover is blown, resulting
 in his eviction. The initial suspicion is that hostile conference
 organizers (to our knowledge, they were in the majority) had
 spotted the PLS logo on the envelope our man was carrying.
 Information later obtained points to the security factor, which
 even inside the conference room was strict.
     Two LYMs {Ver, Carl} conduct mosquito raids to give members
 of the press our material, both through our media friend and
      An LYM is carrying an issue of EIR :
 	Reg.person: Oh, EIR.
 	Proud and paranoid LYM: Yeah, EIR. What's the deal with EIR?
     We have to deal with that kind of paranoia circulating all
 morning, just not knowing what would happen to us next.

 After a tense morning, we break for lunch.

 	6/20 ~12:45pm
 	- Tide turns -
     After regrouping and chilling at lunch, we return to find
 UnderSec. Salazar once again in the hotel lobby. We show him the
 letter, which Carl and Kristoff had printed out from the email.
     U.Sec, to his aide: "Tell them [PNRI reg. people] that these
 fellows are my guests."
     So in we march, escorted by the ministry aide. And with
 brilliant scientific material in our backpacks! The pudgy chief
 registration guy looks sheepish and makes excuses. Nestor with
 indignant look.
     The strange feeling, doubly strange for the unbaptized in
 'politics', that after the higher-up on the food chain says
 "They're my guests", all the underlings suddenly start acting
 friendly towards us.

 	6/20 ~1:00pm
 - Group workshops -
     The plenary was divided into sessions, one on nuclear safety,
 the other supposedly on the environment. These talking points
 were not strictly followed, however. The reason being that the
 "issue" or factor of popular acceptance kept propping up, which
 prompted PNRI scientist Teofilo Leonin to comment that a separate
 session should be opened for "popular acceptance". Yet this was
 discussed, and at length, as it seemed necessary.
     In the session attended by Ver, Nestor and Henry, Professor
 Arcilla of U.P. had the first question: What is the best way to
 deal with the radioactive waste?  Our man Nestor D. had the first
 answer: There is no nuclear waste, if you reprocess it, and you
 should reprocess. Nobody outside of the LaRouche representatives
 spoke of reprocessing.
     Ver went into the Hamiltonian credit system as a means to
 build the needed infrastructure to produce power from nuclear.
 When our guys mentioned the floating nuclear barges (of which
 Russia is producing a specific model), some were incredulous as
 though their first time to hear about it. Questions were fielded
 on the nuclear barges.
     In their session, Carl and Kristoff introduced the Philippine
 LaRouche Society's advocacy of nuclear power as the way of
 generating the amount of energy needed to support a growing
 Philippine population, and drastically lessen our dependence on
 imported oil. Speaking in turn, workers from the PNRI and other
 branches of the DOST shared some frustrations encountered in the
 course of educating the population, elementary and high school
 students, for example, on nuclear power. Eulinia Valdezco of the
 PNRI's Nuclear Regulations, Licensing and Safeguards Division,
 who moderated the discussion, said that we needed a champion for
 nuclear power in the congress and/or senate, as it were, to raise
 public acceptance. The guys at the back, PCIERD executive Engr.
 Sabularse and a Napocor (National Power Corporation) official
 named Danilo Sedilla, echoed Valdezco's opinion. The guest from
 the IAEA, Mr. Sengoku, emphasized the need for the responsible
 government agencies in the Philippines to get their act together,
 to set measurable time-frames in which to achieve set goals for
 nuclear power development. He said that, in Japan, the agencies
 responsible had educated housewives, the managers of the
 household, who then became the catalyst for a wider public
 acceptance. As anywhere else, he said, even in Japan there is an
 anti-nuclear chunk of the population. Between the moderator and
 others who spoke, there was a lot of waffling, and even pessimism
 was felt. Carl made the session aware of this, and raised the
 need to educate everybody on nuclear, to which a lady from the
 PNRI said that education was not the problem: many people in U.P.
 have Ph.D's but are anti-nuclear. Later, in a private exchange,
 Engr. Sabularse told the LYM that the education those many Ph.D's
 in U.P. have was the "wrong [kind of] education". Mr. Leonin said
 that most kids entering college today see no future in taking up
 courses of, say, nuclear engineering or nuclear physics.
     The LYM, speaking for the youth (we were the only young
 people there!), hammered the idea that if we did not invest in
 our education and hard infrastructure for nuclear today, the
 youth would have no future to speak of. "The future determines
 the present."
     The sessions adjourned and regrouped into plenary.
     After the close of proceedings, we talked to the Japanese
 visitors representing the IAEA, Forum for Nuclear Cooperation in
 Asia (FNCA), and Nuclear Safety Research Association (NSRA).
 - The final score -
     It was a moral, intellectual and strategic victory for the
 Larouche Movement. At the end of the day, the score was, LaRouche
 PAC, 1: Fear-and-ignorance forces, 0.      [Carl]
 [END Operations Report]

                     *** END OF BRIEFING ***
Retrieved from
Page last modified on November 21, 2008, at 08:27 AM