There Is A Choice--Return to Glass-Steagall! | LaRouchePAC

June 17, 2010 (LPAC)-- The British Empire would desperately like to rewrite the outcome of the historic 1971 debate between Lyndon LaRouche and their toady economist Abba Lerner. You will recall that LaRouche destroyed Lerner by forcing him to explode in public that, if the fascist policies of London's Nazi-banker Hjalmar Schacht had only been adopted willingly by Germany, "Hitler would not have been necessary."
Almost 40 years later, London has deployed one of its current toadies, EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, to threaten the nations of Europe — and implicitly the whole world — with the same message: If you don't implement fascist austerity yourselves, we will be forced to implement fascism. You have no choice.

Barroso delivered the threat at a June 11 meeting with trade union leaders from across Europe, as the entire Eurozone banking system is visibly imploding, exactly as Lyndon LaRouche has warned would be the case with a June-July global financial meltdown. According to John Monks, the head of the European Trade Union Confederation, Barroso told them that Spain, Portugal, Greece, and other nations had to go all the way: "Look, if they do not carry out these austerity packages, these countries could virtually disappear in the way that we know them as democracies. They've got no choice; this is it." Monks added that Barroso's "apocalyptic vision" meant that "we're heading back to the 1930s, with the Great Depression and we ended up with militarist dictatorship."

Lyndon LaRouche responded that people uttering this kind of nonsense are either stupid or lying, and in either case, should be excluded from all policy making.

"This is crap. There is a choice. All you have to do is get rid of the phony debt. Cancel it altogether! Then you go back to a standard, regulated banking system, as established under Franklin Roosevelt and his 1933 Glass-Steagall legislation. Just cancel the phony debt, or put it in a place where it can die peacefully. Get rid of financial derivatives. We don't have to pay the debts we don't owe."
And those who are preventing an immediate return to a Glass-Steagall standard today should simply be removed from office — starting with President Obama and Rep. Bailout Barney Frank.
Barney's political days are numbered, now that LPAC-TV will release the real story of how Glass-Steagall was finally revoked in 1999. The operation was first orchestrated by the British out of their JP Morgan financial house, which in 1984 issued an internal pamphlet calling for "Rethinking Glass-Steagall." None other than swindler Alan Greenspan was a JP Morgan director at the time. Greenspan later went on to head the Federal Reserve system from 1987 to 2006, where he oversaw the formal repeal of Glass-Steagall, as well as the general destruction of the U.S. economy.
Today, Bailout Barney has been assigned the task of riding shotgun for London, to try to make sure that Glass-Steagall is never reinstated. But there is a growing clamor across the country for the adoption of Lyndon LaRouche's Glass-Steagall resolution, as spearheaded by the Brown, Rogers, and Shields campaigns.
That increasingly educated mass strike ferment should all be pulled together around Lyndon LaRouche's international webcast 10 days from now, on Saturday, June 26.
There Is A Choice--Return to Glass-Steagall! LaRouchePAC

 
Check out my website. http://www.icelandcrash.com/

Push the Glass-Steagall Reform Through, Ruthlessly | LaRouchePAC

May 17, 2010 (LPAC)—LPAC-TV has posted a new 13-minute video on the website, "LaRouche on the Record: Glass-Steagall or Die," which succinctly reviews Lyndon LaRouche's unique, leading role in the decisive battle to reimpose the Glass-Steagall standard in the U.S. and internationally. In its concluding section, it presents Lyn's call, delivered at his May 8 webcast, for an all-out mobilization to ram the policy through:
"Go with this Glass-Steagall reform, now! Push it through, ruthlessly... If we do it, we can win. The potential is there. But we have to do it. We have to insist that everybody goes and supports this. As far as we're concerned, every patriotic American will support this Glass-Steagall reform. If they don't do it, if they're not full-bent on doing it, then they're not really patriots. Because we need this strategically, to save the United States! We need this to save the world. If we are saved by this action, we will save the world. As poor and miserable as we are, as a factor in world history, when the other side is much poorer than we are, in terms of resources and capability, we can win. So, let's go out there and win. And beat these bastards."

The bastards—Obama's British masters—have delivered an explicit threat to the United States, that they consider Glass-Steagall an act of "hostility" against them. And Obama is, lawfully, set to fight against Glass-Steagall to the death. But Obama, Lyn elaborated in discussions yesterday, is now being swamped by a problem which even he is probably smart enough to realize has him boxed in. Things that were meant to work, and in the past have worked, are not working now. As a result, there is real desperation in their camp. The whole situation can backfire on them, because the usual methods just don't work anymore. And they are running out of time to produce results, as the Cantwell- McCain Glass-Steagall amendment moves towards a vote on the Senate floor, in the early part of this coming week.

Their problem is that the usual tactics of terrifying people into line, are now just getting people angry, and can produce a backfire effect—as (soon to be former) Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah can tell you all about. Normal things just don't work anymore. Just how successful that "not working" will be, Lyn said, remains to be seen. We will have to find out the hard way, by our focussed mobilization to ram through the Glass-Steagall bill.

The coming weeks will be critical—perhaps the most decisive that any of us have ever lived through. Last week's rapid-paced developments saw Lyn's May 8 webcast, at exactly the point that the Eurozone was melting down; the lunatic super-TARP attempted bailout with $1 trillion-plus in funny-money, accompanied by fascist austerity; and the placement of the Cantwell-McCain amendment on the Senate agenda, forced by a growing mass strike uproar that is reflected in 78% popular support for the measure.

Our mobilization this past week has now begun to create a national outpouring in support of the Glass-Steagall amendment. This week, we must ram it through, ruthlessly.



Check out my website. http://www.icelandcrash.com

Sen. Cantwell: Outcry by American People Needed to Pass Glass-Steagall | LaRouchePAC

Sen. Cantwell: Outcry by American People Needed to Pass Glass-Steagall LaRouchePAC


May 15, 2010 (LPAC)—PBS's "To The Contrary" program, hosted by Bonnie Erbe, began airing an interview with Glass Steagall co-sponsor Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a show taped on May 12 clearly designed to build support for passing Glass-Steagall. The syndicated show will air nationally this weekend at different times, on 260 PBS stations.
The American people understand intuitively why we have to return to Glass Steagall, Sen. Cantwell argued, and the law has bipartisan support, but to ensure passage, "it may take the American people having an outcry, over the fact, that after all that's happened, some people here in Congress still don't get it. That that's the kind of safety and safeguards that we deserve."

After Erbe's interview of Cantwell (see below), a heated debate followed among Erbe and her four panelists. D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton defended Glass-Steagall, strongly, blaming the "worst recession of all time" on its repeal, with backing by Erbe, against the angry rejection by Genevieve Wood of the British Fabian Society's Heritage Foundation, of any return to Glass-Steagall.

A transcript of the interview follows:

Host ERBE: "The Democratic Senator proposes re-instating the Glass-Steagall Act, the Depression-era law, repealed a decade ago. That law set up a strict division between regular commercial banking and investment banking, so banks could not buy risky investments with depositors' money. This week I interviewed Senator Cantwell on what she thinks needs to be done to prevent future market meltdown."

CANTWELL: "Well, its pretty scary. The American people obviously don't want to have a roller coaster on Wall Street. We already know what happened in 2008, and that was scary enough for us. So, we want to get back to stable banking, and we want to get back to an investment market that has the right amount of oversight and transparency so that we know that regulators can find anybody who is manipulating the market, or doing something untowards, to create some sort of device that is putting them at an advantage. And so, that kind of functionality, we did away with in 2000. And we need to put the rules back into Wall Street."
ERBE: "What are those rules? Are you talking about Glass-Steagall, or something else?"

CANTWELL: "Well, I certainly am a big supporter of Glass-Steagall, which would be to go back to what we had prior to 2000, which is the separation of commercial banking from investment banking.

"If you think about it, they are two different functions. Investment banking is about taking risks. But with commercial banking, you want your deposits to be secure. But when you let your deposits—yours and mine—be used by those investment houses, which are huge, risk-taking ventures, it really does put those savings and those deposits at risk.

"And we should go back to separating them. I think the American people know this. They get it intuitively. They know that there was a reason in the last Depression that we got to this point.

"So, what's taking you so long! Go back to separating it. So we'll have a vote on that.

"But we also need to regulate these derivatives, these new financial tools that came into the marketplace in the late '90s, and make sure that they have the oversight of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
"Right now, hamburger in America—beef futures—has more oversight than some of these derivatives!"
ERBE: "How much support do you have for re-instating Glass-Steagall?"

CANTWELL: "Well, we'll find out. I would hope that we'd have a lot of bi-partisan support on both sides of the aisle, but this isn't really about being Democrat or Republican. If you— you know, if you think about it, this is about whether you're going to have the right system in place to protect Americans going forward. And while this was a big blow-up about derivatives, you know, these investment houses will continue to be creative. They"ll continue to be creative about how they take risk. But, you know, we want to keep the rest of the commercial banking community separate from that."
ERBE: "I mean, seriously, do think this will go through? A re-instatement of Glass-Steagall? Because we know that it became law, right after the Great Depression, and then the banking industry spent 70 years lobbying against it, and got it thrown out, or not renewed in Congress. And now that its back, you must be facing a mountain of opposition from financial institutions."
CANTWELL: "My personal impression, my personal views, are: it will be re-instated. But, I'll bet you, we'll end up with a two-step process. It may take the American people having an outcry, over the fact that after all that's happened, some people here in Congress still don't get it. That that's the kind of safety and safeguards that we deserve."

Check out my website. http://www.icelandcrash.com

We May Have One More Precious Day To Ensure that the Senate Passes Glass-Steagall

March 15, 2010 (LPAC)—The U.S. Senate adjourned before noon yesterday, Friday, after some desultory discussion of more minor amendments to Dodd's Financial Reform Act. It will reconvene at 2:00 on Monday, and resume debate on Financial Reform at 3:00. No votes will be taken until after 5:30 Monday.


Although the Cantwell-McCain amendment to restore Franklin Roosevelt's Glass-Steagall protections is still on the list of amendments to be considered, it was not one of the four amendments which Sen Dodd announced might be voted on on Monday,— so that strategically critical vote may be deferred until Tuesday, or even Wednesday.
At a Senate Democratic Caucus lunch on Thursday, called by Majority Leader Harry Reid, a number of angry Senators, including Byron Dorgan and Sheldon Whitehouse, threatened that they could join Republicans in blocking a cloture vote, if their amendments were not allowed to be presented for debate and a vote.

IF NOT!
WE GET NEW DARK AGE.



Check out my website. http://www.icelandcrash.com

Vote for BueSo in N.R.W. Elections Is Only Spark of Hope | LaRouchePAC

Vote for BueSo in N.R.W. Elections Is Only Spark of Hope LaRouchePAC

May 11, 2010 (LPAC)—The result of the May 9 elections for new state parliament (Landtag) in North Rhine-Westphalia (N.R.W.), a smashing defeat for the "black-yellow" coalition government of Christian Democrats (CDU) and Free Democrats (FDP) (together 41.3%, after a net loss of 10.5% as compared to 2005), not only will hand the government to a "red-green" coalition of Social Democrats (SPD) and Greens (together 46.6%, after a net loss of 3% for the SPD, as compared to 2005) plus another partner, most likely the Linkspartei (5.6%). It will also have serious implications for the national CDU-FDP government coalition of Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU).

A direct implication is the loss of Merkel's majority in the Bundesrat—the upper chamber of Parliament, which represents states (Laender) directly—where N.R.W. holds six seats; and the Bundesrat has veto power over most legislation, which will add to the paralysis of the national government. An indirect implication is the effects which this vote of no-confidence against Merkel in N.R.W. will have during the coming days and weeks—especially in view of the deepening crisis of the euro system, related to the "Greek" banking crisis.

For the state of N.R.W., a government led by the SPD's Hannelore Kraft, who is said to have studied her economics at King's College in London in the 1980s, a government with the Greens in key positions, is a disaster for N.R.W. that will be felt very directly: the SPD and the Greens are against nuclear power development, against great projects in general, the Greens are even against coal mining, and the "red-green" fantasies about a highly costly "green industrial revolution" promoting solar and wind energy, is certain to scare off even more industries from this former, longtime industrial powerhouse, which fear they would be slapped with higher electricity bills they cannot afford. This means certain doom for many regions in N.R.W., which after 40 years of downsizing, outsourcing, and green political sabotage of pioneer technologies like the fast breeder reactor and the HTR, have already lost most of their steel production, machine-building and coal mining, and show unemployment rates visibly above 10-15%. With the Greens in whatever coalition scenario exists, this deindustrialization will intensify. Crucial traditional constituencies reacted with frustration in the May 9 elections, with high voter absenteeism, at almost 41%.

The only party that ran against the "greening" of the political establishment, the LaRouche Movement's BueSo (Buergerrechtsbewegung Solidaritaet), with a program for reindustrialization and the development of pioneer technologies like nuclear fusion and maglev transportation, got its best vote ever, with the average of its 34 district candidates receiving around 0.4 and 0.5%, and some even moving into the range of 0.7 and 0.8%. The BueSo reports a high recognition factor among voters and visibly increased interest in the party's program during the past two or three weeks, with particular interest also because the BueSo was the only party to address the reality of the global economic collapse and the urgency of having legislation for banking reorganization along the example of the U.S. Glass-Steagall Act. And voters welcomed that the BueSo called the Greek bailout what it is: a bailout of the banks at the expense of the taxpayers.

For the period after the election, this represents a spark of hope, especially as many voters were "pragmatic" and voted for the establishment parties, will soon be confronted with a brutal reality shock and realize that the politicians lied to them, the Greek bailout being one of the additional burdens to be piled onto taxpayers' backs.