Se foredragsrækken om LaRouches liv: Jordens sidste 50 år og Jordens næste 50 år

# 1: Oversigt: Den enkeltes rolle i historien. Klik her.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche. En person kan ændre historien, og den mest magtfulde kraft i historien er ikke våben, penge eller hære: det er ideer. Lyndon LaRouche udnyttede denne indsigt og brugte den til at ændre verden. I dag ses frugterne af hans årtier lange organisering, sammen med mange kolleger og hans kone Helga i potentialet for internationalt samarbejde, som eksemplificeret af det kinesiske Bælte- og Vejinitiativ. For at undgå den truende mørke tidsalder, som atomkonflikten mellem USA og Rusland udgør, er det vigtigt med en forståelse af den nødvendige renæssance.

# 2: LaRouches ufuldendte krig for en ny økonomisk verdensorden. Klik her.
Dennis Small. Historien om kampen for en retfærdig, ny økonomisk verdensorden (NWEO), baseret på nord-syd-samarbejde og udvikling, er et perfekt eksempel på hvordan ideer, og faktisk udelukkende ideer, skaber historien. De ideer, omkring hvilke de første kampe for en NWEO blev udkæmpet, især i perioden 1979-1983, og begrebet om hvordan man fører denne krig, blev udviklet af Lyndon LaRouche.

Han påviste, at denne politik ville være til gavn for både nord og syd. Hans metode var at fremlægge de underliggende filosofiske begreber og det videnskabelige fysisk-økonomiske grundlag for at bevise, at en sådan tilgang rent faktisk kan fungere. De politiske relationer mellem de store hovedpersoner i denne kamp, Mexicos José López Portillo og Indiens Indira Gandhi, blev også bevidst fremmet af LaRouche. Og da en flanke opstod, da Ronald Reagan overtog præsidentskabet i USA i januar 1981, kastede LaRouche sig over den for at bringe de kræfter, der rent faktisk kunne besejre fjenden og vinde den strategiske krig, ind i kampen. Dette er genstand for en lektion i uafsluttet krig.

#3: Lyndon LaRouches unikke bidrag til videnskaben om universel historie. Klik her.
Will Wertz. I et essay han skrev, som blev udgivet i foråret 1993 med titlen »Om Gud«, skrev han: »Hvis vi måler historien med standarden, at hver person er imago viva Dei, får vi en komplet anderledes opfattelse af historien, end det, som er beskrevet i vores tåbelige lærebøger fra universiteterne og lignende steder«. I et efterfølgende essay, udgivet i tidsskriftet Fidelio i efteråret 1993 med titlen »Historie som videnskab«, fortsatte Lyndon LaRouche: En rigoristisk definition af begrebet »historie« begynder med det faktum, at den fortsatte eksistens af den menneskelige art er styret af et princip, som ikke eksisterer for andre arter.«

#4 (18. maj): Italiensk Videnskab og Kultur. Klik her.
Liliana Gorini og John Sigerson. LaRouches ideer afspejler i Italien et fremskridt for den videnskabelige og kunstneriske revolution i det 15. århundredes florentinske renæssance. Dette fremskridt omfatter en tilbagevenden til en naturlig musikalsk stemning, hvilket Giuseppe Verdi krævede for mere end et århundrede siden; Italiens nylige skridt til at gennemføre LaRouches forslag om en Glass/Steagall-banklovgivning, en tilbagevenden til Hamiltons principper om økonomisk politik; og Italiens dristige beslutning om at tilslutte sig Kinas Bælte og Vejinitiativ for verdens udvikling.

Klassisk musik: Den tyske dirigent Furtwängler blev den ledende inspiration for LaRouches insisteren på at musik ikke udfoldes i lyd, men i det riemannske komplekse domæne.

5. Det amerikanske system, LaRouche-Riemannsk økonomi, og et Måne-Mars projekt. Klik her. Den findes nederste på siden.
Ben Deniston og Paul Gallagher. Den 23. marts 1983 traf præsident Reagan en beslutning – trods stærk modstand fra sine rådgivere – om at gøre LaRouches strategiske forsvarsinitiativ (SDI) til USA’s politik. Det var en del af LaRouches rumprojektforeslag for en ny æra af potentielt set ubegrænset fremskridt.

Alle kan også ses på LaRouchePAC’s hjemmeside. Klik her.




Trumps eneste valg for vort land er at
implementere LaRouches Fire Love
i Hamiltons tradition.
LaRouche PAC Internationale Webcast,
16. juni, 2017

Matthew Ogden: … Jeg vil gerne begynde i dag med direkte at referere tilbage til lederartiklen, der blev udgivet på larouchepac.com sidste lørdag, og som fortsat er meget relevant og har vist sig at haste mere og mere, som ugen er skredet frem. Jeg viser den på skærmen. Som I kan se, var artiklens overskrift, »Lyndon LaRouche: Stop FBI’s bedrageri; Stop kuppet mod præsidenten – Hvad de løgnagtige medier ikke fortæller«

Hr. LaRouche kom med en meget klar advarsel.

Lyndon LaRouche lancerede en appel til det amerikanske folk om at stoppe det igangværende kup imod præsident Trump, som torsdag fik yderligere næring gennem den fyrede FBI-direktør, James Comeys løgnagtige vidneforklaring for Senatets Efterretnings-Udvalgskomite. LaRouche sagde, at kuppet er en FBI-operation, der forsøger at ødelægge USA, og hvis det ikke standses, vil verden stå over for generel krig.

Som I husker, så forklarede artiklen yderligere:

»Den 7. juni afslørede tidligere direktør for Nationalt Efterretningsvæsen, James Clapper, den faktiske motivation for kuppet imod Trump, med bemærkninger i Australien. Han sagde, at Trumps åbenhed over for fred med Rusland – det valprogram, som Trump blev valgt på af det amerikanske folk – i sig selv var totalt imod USA’s sikkerhedsinteresser og i realiteten at sidestille med forræderi. Det var allerede før valget almindeligt kendt i det officielle Washington, at præsident Obama, i aftalt spil med briterne, kandidat Clinton, DNI-chef Clapper, CIA-chef Brennan og FBI-chef Comey, havde styret USA på en kurs for krig med Rusland og Kina, som efter planen skulle aktiveres fuldt ud med valget af Hillary Clinton. I stedet blev Trump valgt, hvilket udløste kuppet, der fulgte.« 

Hr. LaRouche kom med en meget afgørende pointe:

»Præsident Trump har holdt sit løfte og etableret bedre relationer med både Rusland og Kina, der begge søger samarbejde med USA omkring udvikling af verden, baseret på store infrastrukturprojekter. Det er det virkelige, og eneste, spørgsmål her.«

Jeg har gentaget vores reference til denne artikel, for det er en meget afgørende advarsel fra hr. LaRouche, Og som jeg sagde, er den kun blev mere relevant og mere presserende, som ugen er skredet frem. Som I måske har set, udlagde vi også en video på LaRouche PAC’s webside, med titlen, »Stop kuppet mod præsidenten«, som allerede cirkleres temmelig vidt omkring og bør fortsætte med det.

 

[https://larouchepac.com/20170614/stop-coup-against-President]

Men, præcis som hr. LaRouche advarede om i denne erklæring, jeg netop oplæste, så, hvis denne kampagne mod præsidenten ikke stoppes, kan det føre til meget alvorlige konsekvenser for USA, og for verden.

(her følger resten af udskriftet på engelsk):

Although the very disgusting
propaganda and even direct threats against the life of President
Trump began very early on in his administration — practically
immediately after his inauguration, as we saw with the article in
the German news magazine {Der Spiegel} — over the last week and
a half, we saw a very alarming escalation of such threats in
increasingly explicit form.  Such as comedienne Kathy Griffin
holding an image of President Trump’s severed head, or the
ongoing production of {Julius Caesar} in Central Park which
depicts a caricature of President Trump and his wife, First Lady
Melania Trump.  These threats are serious; they should be stopped
immediately.  They’re very dangerous.  They create the
environment, as is characterized correctly, “a climate of
violence” in which very deranged and disturbed individuals such
as the shooter in Alexandria act out this kind of propaganda and
act on those threats.  Thanks to the Capitol Police detail of
Rep. Steve Scalise, a massacre was thankfully averted at that
Republican baseball practice on Thursday. But responsible parties
in this country must recognize Lyndon LaRouche’s warning that
this coup attempt and this climate of violence must be stopped
immediately, or it will lead to chaos and even general war.
As Mr. LaRouche said later in that same statement, “[I]t is
time for the people to speak and end this disruptive and highly
dangerous attempted coup.”  We are seeing a shifting attitude
among certain sectors of the population around the United States,
due to the very vocal and direct intervention by LaRouche PAC and
the LaRouche movement; including in New York City and elsewhere.
A push-back against this propaganda campaign, including an
increasing recognition that the never-ending, round-the clock
Russia-gate hearings happening practically every day in the U.S.
House and Senate are, in fact, nothing more than a McCarthy-ite
witch-hunt —  President Trump correctly used that term; and have
been ongoing now for several months with unlimited resources
invested in them, and have turned up zero evidence so far.
What the American people {do} want to hear about is not this
fabricated media narrative, but rather how their duly elected
government — be it Republicans or Democrats — but the people
who they voted to represent them plan to solve the truly urgent
life or death issues that are facing the American people every
single day.  Collapsing infrastructure.  As we know, we have the
so-called “Summer of Hell” coming upon us in New York City;
collapsing living standards; collapsing wages; a failing health
care system; epidemic proportions of drug addiction and drug
overdose deaths.  A Wall Street bubble which is about to explode,
which would have consequences worse than 2008.  It’s exactly
those issues which the Trump administration was elected to
address; but the Trump administration must now begin to deliver.
It’s not a question of piecemeal form, a little fix here, a
little bit there, but it’s a national mission which we require
from the U.S. Presidency which will mobilize the American people
in the way that Franklin Roosevelt did; in the way that John F.
Kennedy did that.  Getting this infrastructure project moving in
a very big way and really delivering on this front is crucial for
the President, as we’ve made the point over recent days; not to
mention making good on his campaign promise to restore
Glass-Steagall.  Frankly, if there’s anybody who this President
should be firing right now, it should be this clown, Treasury
Secretary Steve Mnuchin; who is repeatedly going in front of
Senate committee hearings and lying through his teeth that the
Glass-Steagall that Trump was talking about, was not the
Glass-Steagall that was in the Republican platform, is not the
Glass-Steagall that is called the 21st-Century Glass-Steagall.
This has been called out correctly by a number of sitting U.S.
Senators; Senator Warren, Senator Sanders.  But these are
concrete steps which must be taken immediately, if President
Trump is to mobilize the American people and to effectively
counter this mass propaganda assault and recruit the citizens to
mobilize behind the duly elected Presidency of the United States.
One thing that I know we’re going to address in the course
of the discussion in this show today, is Mr. LaRouche’s
{emphatic} point that what we need now is directed, Federal
credit on a massive scale in a Hamiltonian form.  Helga
Zepp-LaRouche has reiterated that point several times in
discussions this week.  What keeps coming up in discussions
around so-called infrastructure, including a major event that
Diane Sare attended up in New York City a few days ago, is this
question of privatization of major infrastructure and funding new
infrastructure through so-called private investment.
As Helga LaRouche said, this is not only grossly inadequate
and will never work, but it is also criminal in fact. As we saw
in the very real criminal privatization after the collapse of the
Soviet Union, the mass privatization of state-owned utilities
there in Russia and the former Soviet countries and privatization
of infrastructure; which plunged the population there into a
demographic collapse and a real dark age while a few criminal
oligarchs looted the entire region. What we need is not that, but
what we need is the American System; as President Trump himself
referred directly earlier during his administration.  That is,
Alexander Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln; that is the American System
which built the United States.
What I want to shift to right now, before we get into a
deeper discussion on that, is what Mr. LaRouche also made a very
strong point about in that warning that I referred in the
beginning of the broadcast.  He said the fact that Trump was
elected, triggered this kind of coup from these factions which
had been trying to keep him out of office and escalate the war
confrontation between the United States and Russia and China.
Instead, you’ve seen President Trump reach out to China, continue
to reach out to Russia despite massive pressure not to.  And you
see these countries seeking cooperation with the United States on
developing a new paradigm, a new international system based on
great projects and development.  That is what the underlying
issue here is; and nothing else.  Do not get distracted.
What I want to do right now, before I get into the
discussion with Michael, is to share with you a little bit of
footage; some excerpts from a dialogue that President Putin of
Russia had with the people of his country and also with people
internationally on his annual direct webcast call-in show. This
lasted over four hours.  I’m going to put up on the screen for
you a couple of pictures from these and I’m going to read some
questions and then the answers that he had, because these
statements from President Putin are directly addressing this
question that Mr. LaRouche just raised.  What is the perspective
for a peaceful relationship between the United States and Russia?
So, as you’ll see, this is a picture of President Putin
[Fig. 2]; this was a call-in show where he received questions
live.  This was the first question from an American.  It said,
“Greetings, Mr. Putin!  My name is Jeremy Bowling.  I live in
Mesa, Arizona in America.  I’m a big supporter of you.  I am very
pro-Russian, and I wish you much health and success in your life.
My question to you is this.  As an American who sits here in
America and sees the racist Russian phobia running crazy in my
country, what advice would you give me to help set the record
straight, to help my fellow Americans understand that Russia is
not the enemy?”
President Putin replies: “To begin with, I am very grateful
to you for this call.  I can tell you as the current head of the
Russian state, that I know the attitudes of our people.  We do
not consider America our enemy.  Moreover, twice in history when
we were going through very rough times, we pooled our efforts; we
were allies in two world wars.  In the past, the Russian Empire
played a substantial role in helping America gain independence
and supported the United States.  We see that Russo-phobia is
running high in America, and think this is primarily a result of
the escalating political infighting.  I do not think I have the
right to give you any advice.  I simply want to thank you for
this stance.  We know that we have very many friends in the
United States.  My American colleagues tell me so, and public
opinion polls show the same results.  At any rate, those polls
taken a month ago, show that we have many friends there.  True,
regrettably, such hysteria is bound to affect the frame of mind,
but let me assure you that there are also very many people in
Russia who have deep respect for the achievements of the American
people and are hoping that eventually our relations will get back
on track, in which both we and the United States are extremely
interested.”
So, that was his answer to the first question, and then
coming up next, he had a question from an editor of a
Moscow-based Russian-language newspaper, who also asked about the
same question.  He said “One of the current trends is that
bilateral relations are deteriorating and there is Russo-phobia,
along with daily reports about new anti-Russian initiatives
including sanctions.  At the same time, there is a growing demand
not only for stabilizing, but also for improving Russian-American
relations.  At a Senate hearing the day before yesterday, U.S.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said something to the effect
that every time he meets with his foreign colleagues since his
appointment, they have asked him to stabilize relations with the
Russians.”  He went on to say, “In three weeks’ time, the G20
will convene in Hamburg, where you are to meet with U.S.
President Trump.  Is it possible that these talks will help prod
this negative trend towards a more positive one, and possibly
even towards a radical improvement in our relationships with the
United States?  In what areas and on what issues can Russian-U.S.
cooperation be productive and mutually beneficial?  I believe
these questions are of concern not only to people in Russia and
in the United States, but many other countries as well.”
President Putin answered as follows: “You know as well as I
do the areas in which we can work together with the United
States.  This includes above all control over non-proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction.  We are the biggest nuclear
powers and so our cooperation in this area is absolutely
natural…. Cursing and trading barbs and insults with the U.S.
administration would be the worst road to take…. We must work
together to fight poverty in the world…. There is a disastrous
situation in many parts of the world, and this is one of the
sources of radicalism and terrorism, this poverty around the
world; and we must decide together how to address this problem.”
Then President Putin continued by saying: “By the way, we worked
together with the United States to resolve the Iranian nuclear
issue, and we did reach an agreement, we did find a solution.
There are positive examples of cooperation, then.  The previous
U.S. administration directly recognized the substantial role that
we played in resolving this issue.  We can reach agreements and
work together then.  Of course we can.  On the Syrian problem and
Middle East in general, it is clear to all that no progress will
be made without joint constructive work.  We hope greatly too,
for the United States’ constructive role in settling the crisis
in southeast Ukraine.”  Then he said, “A constructive role as I
said.  You see then that there are many areas in which we must
work together.  But this depends not only on us.  We see what is
happening in the United States today.  I have said before and say
again now, that this is clearly a sign of an increasingly intense
domestic political struggle, and there is nothing that we can do
here.  We cannot influence this process, but we are ready for
constructive dialogue.”
So again, this was from a four-hour dialogue that President
Putin engaged in with the Russian people and people
internationally.  But it’s a very important point that he makes
there, that the Russians are ready for a constructive dialogue.
Obviously, President Trump has a very good opportunity now in
three weeks’ time with the G20 summit which is coming up, to sit
down directly with President Putin and engage in that dialogue
directly.
I also just want to point out that during the course of this
week, there was a real blockbuster feature presentation on
Showtime, of a four-part series of interviews that were produced
by the film director Oliver Stone.  This was based on interviews
with President Putin which occurred over the last two and a half
years before the election, and then a final one that occurred
after the election.  There’s far too much to go through, to
summarize these interviews in any detail.  But it really is a
chance that Americans rarely get, to hear President Putin in his
own words talk about how we reached this point; his view of
perspective points of collaboration with the United States; the
Russian view of what has been done to encircle and threaten
Russia over the recent 10-15 years; and his understanding of what
the strategic necessities and the strategic realities are, not
only of the present moment, but as he repeatedly said, there are
very few people who have the ability to think 25 or even 50 years
in the future.  And to see the present from what the challenges
are that the future generations will have to resolve together.
At one point, he even calls for a “new paradigm of international
relations”; very similar to what the LaRouche movement has been
calling for, for several years.

II        With that said by way of introduction, let me just invite
Michael to come in, add a few points here, and then I think we
can get a little bit more going in terms of the discussion.

MICHAEL STEGER:  OK, sure.  It’s probably worth to start
from where you left off, Matt; which is this interview between
Oliver Stone and Putin.  There are a number of layers to the
interview.  It’s 20 hours of recording, only 4 hours are
presented, edited down.  But what you see from the discussion —
and it’s useful because it’s not simply an interview with
Vladimir Putin; but what Putin does provide — as you referenced
— is a 25-50-year perspective.  He captures a sense of
leadership in a way that’s unseen in American culture for some
time, except for probably Lyn.  It recognizes that what governs
an individual’s value and life is a sense of immortality.  He
references the 25-50 years; he discounts the questions of money
and power and says the reason he continues to be President is not
that he’s gotten so accustomed to power that he couldn’t do
without it, but that he’s committed to a single objective of the
economic development of his country.  That really does capture on
that 25-50-100-year perspective, a sense of immortality of an
individual.  What are we contributing our lives to?  That’s
actually the basis of political leadership.  That’s why Putin has
become so successful on the world stage; why he’s been able to
handle the failures of leadership from Clinton — especially from
the end of his term — but more so obviously Bush and of course,
Obama.  And why he’s able to deal with the insanity inside the
United States today.  But the other layer which is important to
point out, is that Oliver Stone has clearly made a shift in terms
of his intervention.  He recognized at some point, that we were
converging again on another potential nuclear annihilation and
nuclear war.  There’s a courage and a vulnerability in Oliver
Stone himself in the intervention; because he’s there to have a
very open and vulnerable dialogue with Putin. And he’s intending
to make a political intervention into the United States.  I think
people have to realize this:  He’s taking on what’s become this
kind of perverse political culture in the United States; this
so-called Obama left wing, which is now calling for a coup by the
CIA and FBI, war with Russia, police state-like measures,
complete control of the media, assassination of the President.
This is the Obama left now; it’s just fascism, as Lyn had said in
the last couple of days.  But he’s intervening on that, but on
the entire culture; a certain kind of courage is expressed by
this interview and by what he’s presenting.  Clearly, people
should engage it, watch it, find ways to access it.  Hopefully,
it becomes more public.  There is footage on YouTube that people
can capture.
But there is an intervention, and I think it makes it clear
what kind of intervention is now necessary.  Lyn has set the
standard on this kind of political intervention in the United
States.
Let’s put it in context.  As you mentioned, there is an
ongoing coup against the United States Presidency.  This is
something that was stated clearly after President Trump was
elected.  That either he is going to have to resign, be
impeached, or assassinated.  And you have the {Weekly Standard},
a number of publications throughout Europe — especially Great
Britain — who are very focussed on Trump’s removal by any means
necessary.  I think what we’ve seen over the last seven months is
a very sad attempt at trying to link Trump’s campaign to Russian
collusion.  The enemies targetting Trump knew the entire time
there was no collusion with Russia; this entire thing is a
made-up fraud.  But what they did hope for was that, one, they
could either prevent him from taking the oath of office.
Remember, soon after he won, there was attempt to prevent him
from even taking the oath because of allegations and concerns
that maybe he was a Russian agent.  That didn’t prevent him from
taking the oath.  Since then, we’ve seen an escalation towards
this so-called Russian collusion question.  They attempted to
capture the Presidency with an attempted coup run through the
National Security Council, as we saw with the Syria attack; but
that also then failed.  So, you’re now beginning to see a
regurgitation of the same stories.  Jeff Sessions was called in
to testify in the Senate; it went nowhere.  He called out; you’re
calling me, who served this country for 35 years?  Regardless of
where Jeff Sessions stands on policies, he served the country for
35 years; he’s not a Russian agent, he’s not a traitor to the
country on behalf of Russia.  These allegations are just wild;
they’re almost inconceivable, if you didn’t understand the
broader context. And so, this Russia-gate story is dying.  The
independent counsel that was appointed when Trump fired Comey is
now not event investigating Russian collusion per se, it’s now
just investigating obstruction of justice.  And President Trump
has been sharp on this with his Twitter account, and pointed out
that since there’s no Russia story, so now it’s just obstruction
of justice on the Russia story. It doesn’t add up.
In that context, what do we see happen?  As they continue to
push this — and they will continue to push it; they’re now going
to bring in other former Obama people, Jay Johnson, Homeland
Security Secretary; they’ll continue to regurgitate or hold
hearings, to keep the media story going.  But clearly what we’ve
seen over the last couple of weeks, you see it in the New York
play of {Julius Caesar}, where a Donald Trump character, or
Julius Caesar dressed as Donald Trump, is ritually stabbed, night
after night after night on the stage in New York City.  This is
backed by CNN, this is backed by the {New York Times}; it’s
backed by other media companies [“Shakespeare in the Park”]; it’s
backed by the City of New York. You see the Kathy Griffin ISIS
pose with the beheaded Trump mask.
So you see there is an intention to escalate the violence.
And then you see a mass murder attempt against up to 15 people,
members of Congress, Senate and House, House leadership; all of
the Republican Party, targetting them because they {are}
Republican.  And this [the shooter] is a guy who apparently left
his wife and his home, to live in a van for two months in
Alexandria, Virginia, well-known for targetting the LaRouche
organization and falsely targetting us for prison sentences in
the so-called “rocket docket.”  So, of course, swarming with FBI,
CIA, swamp-like creatures. This guy sets up camp for two months,
targets Republicans for mass murder, and simply perhaps because
of just circumstances, that there were a couple of Capitol Police
members there because the gates were locked on one side of the
ball field, it didn’t end up in a full massacre.  And hopefully,
everyone recovers; two people are still in critical condition.
But that’s a clear message:  You are associated with Trump,
you’re associated with Trump’s Republican Party; a Republican
Party, by the way, that Trump took over, away from much of the
Republican establishment.  But yet, now you’re Republicans
associated with Trump, you’re now targetted for mass murder.
This is an assassination attempt directly targetting the
Presidency of the United States.  Not surprising, because they
stated this is where they were going to go.  I think the fact
that’s shown by all of this is the desperation and panic and
hysteria by our enemies, by a British Empire, is increasing.  The
panic is increasing, the desperation is increasing, for the very
reasons we’ve covered on this website and in these discussions.
Because the Belt and Road paradigm, a growth paradigm between
Russia and China, is now becoming consolidated throughout
Eurasia, in Africa.  There were attempts by the U.S. Senate, just
the last couple of days to increase sanctions on Russia,
targetting even their oil and natural gas exports.  Germany, the
foreign minister and the Austrian Chancellor Kern, who have been
opposed to Trump on everything, have now just come out and backed
Trump and Secretary of State Tillerson in opposition to these
sanctions, because, one, it hurts Germany; it also hurts the
United States and it hurts the world.
So there is a constantly changing situation, and yet the
people in the U.S. Congress are rabidly off.  They’ve gone rabid
on this Russia question.  They’re being pulled by the nose by the
media on this question.
The question is, what do the American people do?  What do
you do in the face of an attempted coup by the FBI, CIA, Wall
Street, British Empire factions, and now, an outright call for
murder and violence on anyone associated with Trump, including
the President himself, or the direct overthrow of our government.
This is why it’s so important to understand what Putin
presents in these interviews, and what he and China and Belt and
Road Forum present.  There is an option.  And the main reason
this coup is taking place is because there is a threat from the
Trump Presidency to go with the full LaRouche option: not just to
work with Russia and China, not just to take away the threat of
war — that was a critical factor, in the entire Obama
Presidency, especially in the second term.  But not just to end
the danger of war, but to create an all-out collaboration of
these nations around a paradigm of growth and development,
something Putin himself is committed to growing and developing
the Russian people, the Russian economy; the same thing China is
committed to, growing more people.  You see this in Africa:
Africa is burgeoning with new levels of growth because of Chinese
investments.  We could do a whole show, and maybe we should, on
just the developments in Africa alone: The Congo Basin is facing
huge potential developments to provide electricity to all of
Sub-Saharan Africa.  So there’s real growth potential.  There’s
an option in the United States to do the same thing.  That’s the
LaRouche program.
Now Donald Trump has raised much of these issues for the
U.S. economy, the space program, infrastructure, there’s been a
whole week on infrastructure; job training programs,
apprenticeship programs, an entire week this week, on
apprenticeships in jobs training programs.  He’s called for the
Glass-Steagall fight.  But what we don’t see, with all of this
talk of infrastructure, even from Democrats who have commended
Donald Trump for his commitment to infrastructure, but nobody’s
presenting the question of how do you finance these projects?
How do you develop the country?
We are, personally, as an organization; Elliot Greenspan
gave a very thorough briefing last night on the Thursday night
Activists’ Call on this website
[http://action.larouchepac.com/fireside_chat_june_15], on the
event that we attended in New York City:  There is a lot of
discussion and we can go through more of that, Matt, if you want
to in a second.  But the point is this:  There is a chance to go
with the full LaRouche program, to create the public credit, to
create the national banking system, to shut down this Wall Street
fraud, to shut down the bail-in orientation; and to go with the
program of unleashing trillions of dollars of U.S. credit,
immediately.  Staged over time, but trillions of dollars to begin
to rebuild and develop the country.
What this will accomplish, if Trump moves on this, the
LaRouche program, Glass-Steagall, the National Bank, it will
eliminate the artificial political divide of the country.  It
focusses the nation on the nation’s potential for development,
pulling people out of poverty, giving young people a sense of a
future, and it puts us directly in coherence with Russia and
China on a growth perspective.  That’s how Trump can outflank
this attempted coup, that’s how the American people can
participate in this kind of historical fight.
And it takes courage, but there’s a pathway by which we win
this fight, with an enemy that is increasingly panicked and
desperate by any means possible to shut down what is a very
viable LaRouche option.  And I think that really captures where
we are today, and why we have to be so aggressive, joyfully
aggressive, about the potential mankind has if we can win this
fight in the United States, because it’s certainly winnable
today.
So I’ll add that, and see what else we have to discuss.

OGDEN:  Great.  You mentioned this event up in New York
City, I think that also actually goes to the point, of, number
one, the LaRouche movement — Lyndon LaRouche, Helga LaRouche —
when it comes down to it are the leading authorities in the room,
and the representatives of the LaRouche movement are the leading
authorities in the room, on exactly this question: How would
Alexander Hamilton apply the American System in this present
situation?  But number two, it makes the point that the world is
a completely different place, following this Belt and Road Forum
that happened in Beijing.  One of the organizers of that event in
New York obviously had been at the Belt and Road Forum, changed
his attitude.  Helga LaRouche’s presence at the Belt and Road
Forum is a very key reference point; I think that this really
allows us to put two bookends on maybe the last 20 years of
history at least, from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the
proposal of the Eurasian Land-Bridge, this New Silk Road idea,
when it originally came out of the LaRouche movement in
1990-1991.  And then the adoption of that in 2013 by Xi Jinping,
and then this world-historic forum with Helga Zepp-LaRouche
herself, personally in attendance.
And so, she continues to make the point, the world has
completely changed.  The world is a different place, now that
this dynamic has begun to consolidate itself.  And this is the
reality which Americans continue to fail to recognize, and must
be presented with.  The opportunities are {so} strong for a
direct participation, by the United States in this initiative,
coming from China but also with strong support from Putin in
Russia, and it’s already changing the reality on the ground, as
you said, in places like Africa, has a strong potential to be the
key to peace in the Middle East and so forth.
But you made the point, there is nobody, even despite all
the best intentions to say “we need to build infrastructure, we
need to create jobs, we need to increase manufacturing,” there’s
nobody who understands the science of economics behind how you do
that, other than the leadership of the LaRouche movement right
now.  People should remember in the context, obviously, of what
we’ve been talking about with these threats against President
Trump — I mean, he did make these two speeches referencing the
American System, several months ago now, but they were a leading
feature of his economic initiative.  But who was the founder of
the American System?  It was Alexander Hamilton.  What fate did
Alexander Hamilton meet?  It was Aaron Burr, it was the duel
which killed Alexander Hamilton:  {This has been the fight in the
United States} since the founding of the United States, and
before.  Will the United States adopt a scientific approach to
economics as it was elaborated by Alexander Hamilton, which is
based on the recognition that the creative powers of the human
mind {are} what creates wealth?  This is what changes the
platform over time, as new technologies are introduced, step by
step; or, will the United States continue to be a satrapy of the
British Imperial system, as we’ve seen, increasingly over the
last 50 years.  This is the role that the United States has
played.
And now we have the opportunity from outside of the United
States, from elsewhere, from China and other countries who are
adopting exactly this kind of development perspective for the
United States to reclaim its birthright, and to become, again,
that Hamiltonian type of nation that we were founded to become.
So, as people continue to become disillusioned with the kind
of propaganda that they’re being fed, day in and day out, about
what this Russia-gate thing is all about, the proper perspective
is needed, and you need to be able to step back and say, “what’s
the real issue here? What is the conjunctural point in world
history that we find ourselves at? And what’s the decision-making
point, which we’re being confronted with?”
So that’s the kind of leadership I think, but it’s not just
a question of where does the United States go?  It’s a question
of do we recognize that the world has completely changed, and are
we at the point of saying, “Yes, that’s the change, that’s the
next 25 years, that’s the next 50 years, and we have to put
behind us the failed system which is now collapsing.”
I don’t know if you want to say a little bit more about the
change in the attitude of the American people, Michael. I mean, I
would like to see what the effect is if this Oliver Stone
interview receives more widespread circulation, what people’s
reaction to that will be, but even up to this point.

STEGER:  Yeah, we can say, we know for certain an increasing
number of the American people are getting fed up and frustrated
by the outright obstruction of the Trump Presidency.  I mean,
Trump does have a real base in the American people, and most
Americans don’t want to see their government overthrown by a
CIA/FBI/{New York Times}/Wall Street operation — they just
don’t.  They might be intimidated; there might be a {vox populi}
kind of French mob out there.  But most Americans are not of that
nature.
And they’re fighting back.  We see this in field squads in
New Jersey and throughout other parts of the country, that many
people are wanting to come over to the table and discuss it.  You
know, we have signs “Defend Trump, Stop the Coup, Support Trump.
Stop here.”  “End the British Empire, Arrest Obama.” So it’s very
clear that people are willing to fight if there’s a quality of
leadership.  But we have to make it very clear to the people
around President Trump and to him directly, you will not be able
to accomplish anything, if you don’t change the system.
Perhaps we put it in the form of an analogy:  You know,
Trump can change the building all he wants to — he can put in
new walls, he can expand it, he can build it taller, he can build
it bigger, he can change the electrical system, he can change the
plumbing system, he can do all those things if he wants to, to
the building.  The problem is, he’s not going to actually give
the building long-term survival if he doesn’t change the
foundation.
The foundation of a nation’s economy is the system which
allows it to grow and develop, it’s its credit system, and right
now our credit system is locked into Wall Street.  Just a couple
of numbers stand out:  $6 trillion was spent on the wars over the
alst 15 years, since we launched the war in Afghanistan.  There’s
$4 trillion apparently on the Federal Reserve books, largely from
buying junk speculative assets from Wall Street banks.  That’s
$10 trillion.  So the credit of our country has been locked up
for 15 years in these wars, in these bailouts,  — like you said,
20, 25 years, the American people have been living under a reign
of psychological and political terror for 20, 25 years.
Now, at the same time, China’s been creating this
development perspective.  So if Trump’s going to create a change
in the orientation, he’s really going to fulfill what he intends
to — and you see it, he references the Hoover Dam, the Erie
Canal, he talks about the big infrastructure projects that have
transformed the nation’s industry and its political direction,
like Roosevelt did, like Hamilton did.  But if he’s going to do
it, he’s going to have to change the fundamental foundations of
how that system is functioning.  He’s going to have to move the
nation’s credit back into the hands, of a focus of industry,
science, and agriculture of the country.  He’s going to have to
not just repair some infrastructure projects but set an entirely
new platform and let that platform, which will last for another
hundred years, it’ll be a century-long platform — much like our
infrastructure today is nearly a century old.  But upon that
platform will allow an understanding of how to make the immediate
repairs we need to.
This is what he’s got to do.  This is the LaRouche program,
the Four Laws. And I know from what Diane Sare and Elliot
Greenspan have described, we are clearly increasingly
collaborating with members and leadership from China; there were
leadership from China at this event in New York City just the
other day. We’ll be having further conferences with leading
figures from China on infrastructure.  We’re in discussion with
people throughout New York City.  There is a potential and Elliot
described it last night [on the Activitists’ Call]:  If we work
with the Chinese today, if we started today, within  just two
years we can resolve immediately the infrastructure and transit
crisis in New York City, as a first step move, setting a new
platform for every nation’s cities and the connection between
those cities on a regional and national basis.
There is an outlook we can take, but you have to change the
foundations of the system the way Hamilton established, the way
Lincoln and Roosevelt applied it.  And that’s critical.  The
American people see the coup.  They don’t like it.  They’re ready
if there’s leadership, but they also have to be given a direction
and they also have to be given a chance, to begin to build the
country.  And Trump’s really got to take on these big challenges.
And again, I think the question for Trump, as Putin himself
expressed, and as any real President — you maybe can say more on
this about John Kennedy, Matt, since his 100th birthday just
passed — but the question any true President faces is a question
of immortality.  Because what are you really there to do?  And
the tough questions challenge that sense, and I think the recent
political attack we saw in Virginia, the murder attempt, are
going to confront this Presidency, and the leadership around him,
to have to make a decision: Are they really going to fight for
the future of the American people?  Putin had to make the same
decision when he came into office in 1999-2000; every true
President, as Lincoln did, FDR did — he faced near assassination
before his inauguration; Kennedy certainly faced it, and knew it.
And that’s the question that Trump has to face, but the LaRouche
program provides the alternative link, not only to end this coup,
but to really launch a Renaissance for the United States.

OGDEN:  About John Kennedy, he made numerous speeches which
addressed that question of the immortality of the leadership of
the country, in directly the terms of infrastructure.  He went
down to the Tennessee Valley Authority, and he said,  — this was
1961 or 1962 — and he said, it was because of the decisions that
Franklin Roosevelt took 30 years before, that we are able to even
stand here today and look at these wonderful projects and it
transformed this entire region of the country.  But it makes us
ask the question:  Thirty years from now, once we are out of
office and once we are dead and gone, what will future
generations say about us?  What great projects will we have
built, just as FDR did for us at that time; and in 1991 or 1992,
what will people living at that time say that we did for the
future of the United States and for the human race?
Obviously, Kennedy’s greatest legacy was the space program.
But it’s that same kind of question, which now must be asked, and
always must be asked by any great leader of any country.  So I
concur: That’s the kind of question which President Putin very
eloquently put on the table and repeatedly.  And he said,
unfortunately, there are very few people within the United States
who think in these terms — although there are some.  And I think
those are the people who are responsible for taking the
leadership of the United States and consolidating this, making it
work.
Michael, I think you make the point very clearly:  If
President Trump is going to outflank this coup attempt, not only
must it be exposed in no uncertain terms, head on; but also, he
must deliver on the vision and the campaign promises which the
American people elected him around. And it cannot be in a
piecemeal way, it has to be from the standpoint of a Hamiltonian
national vision, funded by, as you say, trillions of dollars of
direct Federal credit.  It can’t be done in any other way.  But
if he begins to deliver on that, the American people will be on
his side and will give him the backup which he’s going to need.
So:  Thanks a lot Michael.  We’re going to be circulating
even more — there was an email that went out to all of the
subscribers to the LaRouche PAC email list, on some of the
background material that you need to understand the timeline
behind this attempted coup against the Trump Administration going
all the way back to the inauguration, if not before.  And I think
we covered a little bit of that in detail.
And I continue to emphasize the importance of this statement
that Lyndon LaRouche put out now a week ago, last Saturday,
titled:  “Stop the FBI Fraud: Stop the Coup against the President
— What the Lying Media Are Not Telling You!”  We already know
that this has received pretty wide circulation, but it’s
something which can continue to be circulated.
Thank you very much Michael.  I think we can probably have a
countdown to this G20 summit which is coming up in less than
three weeks; and look forward to some real changes in the same we
had the relationship between the United States and China; now
some changes in terms of the potential for cooperation between
the United States and Russia.
I’d like to thank people for tuning in tonight.  Please
subscribe to our YouTube channel if you haven’t yet; subscribe to
our daily email list.  You can get active at the Action Center at
larouchepac.com, and join in what we’re doing here with the
LaRouche movement across the United States.  So thanks a lot, and
good night.

 




Når USA først tilslutter sig Bælte & Vej
Initiativet, kan et Nyt Paradigme for
menneskeheden begynde
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Det vigtigste aspekt af ideen om USA’s tilslutning til Bælte & Vej-initiativet vil imidlertid være at inspirere hele befolkningen med håb for fremtiden, en bedre fremtid for de kommende generationer, noget, der er gået tabt i løbet af de seneste fem årtier. Det ville ligeledes demonstrere, at præsident Trumps løfte om atter at gøre Amerika stort ikke står i modsætning til andre landes interesser, men at et sådant win-win-samarbejde tværtimod kan bevæge hele verden ind i en ny æra af menneskelig civilisation. Hvis de to største økonomier i verden ville samarbejde på denne måde, vil der ikke være noget problem på planeten, der ikke kunne løses.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Hvordan amerikanere bør fejre Infrastruktur-uge:
Gå med i den Nye Silkevej!
Gennemfør Glass-Steagall!
LaRouche PAC Internationale Webcast,
9. juni, 2017

Matthew Ogden: Jeg vil kort gennemgå, hvad der sker i verden og de udviklinger, der har været i ugens løb. Der foregår virkelig meget i verden; se bare på det tempo, udviklinger finder sted i: fra Kinas Bælte & Vej Forum i midten af maj til Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum, der fandt sted i sidste uge i Skt. Petersborg, Rusland. Vi er nu midt Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationens (SCO) møde, der finder sted i Astana, Kasakhstan. Både Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin og Narendra Modi er til stede ved dette SCO-møde, der finder sted netop nu. Der finder bilaterale møder sted på sidelinjen af dette meget vigtige topmøde, mellem præsident Xi og Modi, Xi og præsident Putin, og Xi og præsident Nazarbajev fra Kasakhstan.

Det, vi er vidne til i hele denne række af verdenshistoriske topmøder, er i realiteten en konsolidering af det, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche, under sin deltagelse i Bælte & Vej Forum i Beijing, kaldte »dannelsen af en Ny Økonomisk Verdensorden«. Hun sagde:

»Med Bælte & Vej Forum etablerede vi dannelsen af en Ny Økonomisk Verdensorden. Det var et i sandhed historisk øjeblik; en ny æra for civilisationen. Dette er et faseskifte for menneskeheden.«

Det, vi ser, er en reel konsolidering af dette faseskifte for menneskeheden.

Præsident Xi Jinpings artikel, som han offentliggjorde aftenen før SCO-forummet i Astana, gav genlyd af denne karakteristik. Han erklærede, at den Nye Silkevej var blevet en succes i løbet af de fire år, der var gået, siden han oprindeligt annoncerede dette initiativ på præcis samme sted – Astana, Kasakhstan – i 2013. Han sagde, initiativet i løbet af disse fire år med held var gået fra idé til handling; og at dette initiativ nu fungerer som et »globalt offentligt gode«. Jeg mener, at denne karakteristik understreger det faktum, at denne nye, internationale orden ikke alene omfatter de økonomiske, diplomatiske og sikkerhedsmæssige relationer, der nu bliver konsolideret; men også, grundlæggende set, et fælles forpligtende engagement til fundamentalt fremskridt for den menneskelige art. Det, som Xi Jinping kalder for »menneskehedens fælles skæbne«.

Hvis vi ser på de spændende budskaber, der netop er kommet fra det kinesiske rumprogram, mener jeg, dette er en absolut korrekt karakteristik. Det bekræftes nu, at Kina, med deres Chang’e-mission, følger planen for at sende en mission til Månen for at returnere med prøver, få prøver af månejord og vende hjem til Jorden med dem; dette vil ske i november i år. Chang’e IV-missionen til Månens bagside, som man har store forventninger til, vil finde sted til næste år.

Lad os se på, hvad der finder sted her i USA. I denne uge så vi, at der virkelig blev lagt ved på bålet i kampen for Glass-Steagall. Marcy Kaptur og Walter Jones er begge i offensiven i denne uge i forbindelse med den såkaldte »Financial Choice Act«. De fremlagde begge en fremragende begrundelse for Rules Committee tidligere på ugen, for deres lovtillæg til Financial Choice Act, nemlig Prudent Banking Law (loven om ’klog of forsigtig’ bankpraksis), som ville genindføre Glass-Steagall. Selv om dette desværre blev nedstemt i Rules Committee (dvs. komiteen vil ikke lade dette alternative lovforslag komme til afstemning i salen, -red.), så har begge fået mulighed for at tale i Repræsentanternes Hus’ sal imod Henserling-lovforslaget. Walter Jones var den eneste Republikaner, der stemte imod Financial Choice Act og til støtte for Glass-Steagall, sammen med Tulsi Gabbard, der også er medsponsor af Glass/Steagall-loven.

Jeg vil afspille først Marcy Kapturs tale, efterfulgt af Tulsi Gabbards tale:

Her følger videoklippene og resten af webcastet på engelsk:     

MARCY KAPTUR:  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose the
Financial Choice Act, which abandons the American people, as well
as safety and soundness in favor of Wall Street. Six mega-banks
now control two-thirds of the financial sector in our country,
and reap record profits of over $170 billion in 2016.  That’s too
much power in too few hands.  Current law has made progress in
protecting consumers from predatory practices.  Repeal of these
consumer protections is not what the American want.  This week,
Congressman Jones and I proposed to table the current legislation
and replace it with our bipartisan bill, the Prudent Banking Act;
which reinstates Glass-Steagall protections by separating prudent
banking from risky Wall Street speculation that tanked our
economy in 2008.  The Rules Committee refused to allow our bill a
vote; nevertheless, we remain resolute.  Glass-Steagall is
something President Trump ran on, as did Bernie Sanders.  In
2016, both the Republican and Democratic platforms enshrined
policies to restore Glass-Steagall protections.  Americans should
know there is a growing bipartisan consensus fighting to protect
the progress we have made, rein in Wall Street, and keep the
wolves at bay and out of your pocketbook.  I will be voting “no”
on this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.  I yield back
my remaining time.

TULSI GABBARD:  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.  Rolling back
financial regulations that are in place to protect the American
people will put them and our country’s economic security at risk.
However, the Financial Choice Act that is being considered by
Congress today does just that.  It erodes protections against
dishonest, big bank practices that rob people of their
hard-earned salaries.  The bill repeals the Volcker Rule, it
dismantles the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, strips
regulations in place to protect the American people’s savings,
and actually lets the big banks maintain even less capital that
they need to absorb catastrophic losses; making it so that
they’re relying once again on the American taxpayer to bail them
out.  We don’t need to remind the families who have suffered so
much about the pain caused by the Great Recession.  In my own
home state of Hawaii, from 2008 to 2010, our unemployment rate
more than doubled; and 11 million people in America lost their
homes.  The big banks of 2008 are even bigger and more powerful
today.  I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous bill and
instead pass HR790, the Return to Prudent Banking Act, which
would reinstate a 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act.  I yield back.

OGDEN:  So, along with Glass-Steagall, the rest of the
debate around what constitutes the core of Mr. Lyndon LaRouche’s
Four Economic Laws, is also beginning to open up.  While you have
President Trump touring the country as part of his so-called
“National Infrastructure Week”, this has really been put on the
table in a very real way.  The credit for this infrastructure.
How do you increase the productivity of the American workforce?
How do you increase the productivity of the American territory,
and how do you apply the American System — the Hamiltonian
system — to make this happen?
Just to give you flavor of what Mr. Trump has been saying on
the subject over the past week — and we will get into this a lot
more — I’m going to play for you a clip of his speech that he
gave in Cincinnati.  I think you’ll find the setting very
appropriate; right against the backdrop of the Ohio River, with
barge traffic going back and forth behind him as he speaks.  So,
here’s President Trump:

DONALD TRUMP:  [as heard] Thank you all very much.  It is
great to be back in Ohio.  We love Ohio.  You remember Ohio, oh
boy.  It was supposed to be close; it wasn’t close.  So wonderful
to speak on the shores of the very magnificent Ohio River.  We’re
here today to talk about rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure.
Isn’t it about time?  Spending money all over the world, except
here.  We don’t spend our money here, we spend it all over.  And
we’ll do it using American labor, American energy, American iron,
aluminum, and steel.
The American people deserve the best infrastructure anywhere
in the world.  We are a nation that created the Panama Canal, the
Transcontinental Railroad, and if you think about this, the great
highway system — the Interstate highway system.  We don’t do
that anymore, we really don’t.  We don’t even fix the old
highways anymore.  We’ll take even fixing them, but we’re going
to get them going again like they’ve never been before.  These
projects not only open new lanes of commerce, but inspired the
immigration and the dreams of millions and millions of people.
We crafted monuments to the American spirit; it’s time to
recapture our legacy as a nation of builders and to create new
lanes of travel, commerce, and discovery.  We’re going to see all
the way into the future; and the future’s going to be beautiful.
And the future is going to be bright.
In my campaign for President, I travelled all across the
nation.  I saw the crumbling infrastructure.  I met with
communities that were desperate for new roads and new bridges.
The bridges were so dangerous, they couldn’t use them; they were
worried they would fall down.  You’ve seen that happen.  I heard
the pleas from the voters who wanted to know why we could rebuild
foreign countries?  My big thing.  We build in foreign countries,
we spend trillions and trillions of dollars outside of our
nation; but we can’t build a road, a highway, a tunnel, a bridge
in our own nation.  We watch everything falling into disrepair.
It’s time to rebuild {our} country, to bring back {our} jobs, to
restore {our} dreams.  And yes, it’s time — finally — to put
American first; and that’s what I’ve been doing, if you haven’t
noticed.
We’re going to restore America’s industrial might; creating
the jobs and tax base to put new infrastructure all over our
country.  That’s what’s happening.  I’m calling on all Democrats
and Republicans to join together — if that’s possible — in the
great rebuilding of America.  Countless American industries,
businesses, and jobs depend on rivers, runways, roads, and rails
that are in dire and even desperate condition.  Millions of
American families rely on their water and pipes and pumps that
are on the verge of total failure and collapse.
We are pleased to be joined today by representatives from
many, many industries that depend on a truly critical component
of our nation’s infrastructure.  These citizens know firsthand
that the rivers, like the beautiful Ohio River, carry the
lifeblood of our heartland.  Roughly 60% of United States grain
exports travel down these waterways to the Gulf.  More than half
of all the American steel is produced within 250 miles of where
we’re standing right now, and its production depends on the
inland waterway system.  Up to 25% of the nation’s energy cargo
relies on these channels, and the refineries along their shores.
But these critical guarders of commerce depend on a dilapidated
system of locks and dams that is more than half a century old.
And their condition, as you know better than anybody, is in very
bad shape.  It continues to decay.
Capital improvements of this system which is so important,
have been massively underfunded.  There is an $8.7 billion
maintenance backlog that is only getting bigger and getting
worse.  Last December, up the Ohio River near Pittsburgh, one
lock built more than 50 years ago had to be shut down for five
days due to hydraulic failure.  You know what that means.  Five
days means everything comes to a halt.  We simply cannot tolerate
a five-day shutdown on a major thoroughfare for American coal,
American oil, and American steel which is going to get more and
bigger.  America must have the best, fastest, and most reliable
infrastructure anywhere in the world.  We cannot accept these
conditions any longer.
A few years ago, a gate broke from its hinges at the
Markland Locks on the Ohio River in Kentucky.  It took nearly
five months to repair.  Any of you know about that?  Wasn’t a
pretty picture, was it?  I don’t think so.  In 2011, a massive
section of canal wall collapsed near Chicago, delaying
everything; and it seemed like forever.
America built the Golden Gate Bridge in just four years, and
the Hoover Dam in five years.  Think of that.  It shouldn’t take
ten years to get approvals for a very small little piece of
infrastructure; and it won’t.  Because under my administration,
it’s not going to happen like that anymore.
So, I want to thank all of the great workers for being here
today.  I want to thank all of the great business leaders; you
have some business leaders who are legendary people in the
audience.  Running massive, massive companies.  And being slowed
down, but now they’ll be able to speed it up.
Not only are we going to repair much of the depleted
infrastructure, but we’re going to create brand new projects that
excite and inspire.  Because that is what a great country does;
that is what a great country has to do.  America wants to build.
Across the nation, our amazing construction workers, steel
workers, iron workers, fitters, electricians, and so many others
are just waiting to get back to work.  With the talent and skill
they represent — which believe me, I grew up in the building
business.  I know the talent and the skill and the courage and
everything else that they have.  There is no limit to what we can
achieve.  All it takes is a bold and daring vision and the will
to make it happen.
Nearly two centuries ago, one American governor had just
such a vision and a will.  His name was Governor DeWitt Clinton.
As the governor of New York State, he dreamed of a canal
stretching nearly 400 miles to connect the Atlantic Ocean in the
east with the Great Lakes in the west.  He predicted that its
construction would place New York City at the very center of
worldwide commerce.  He took the idea to Washington, but
President Thomas Jefferson — great President — didn’t agree
with him; and he dismissed that concept as total madness.  I’d
like to thank all of the people that helped so much in that
incredible event, and I think that Jefferson simply understood
who he was and who he was dealing with.  If you want a New Yorker
to do something, just tell them — like our great past governor
— that it’s impossible to do.  The governor didn’t give up, and
New York State achieved what they thought was the impossible.
When the Erie Canal opened in 1825, he was on the first boat.  He
personally deposited a bucket of water from the Great Lakes into
the New York Harbor.  The new canal exceeded even the governor’s
bold vision.  It dramatically reduced the time and cost to
transport goods from the heartland.  As a result, new settlers
rushed into the Midwest, including to right smack here.  Probably
some of you indirectly, right?  Definitely some of you.
Just as the daring dreams of our ancestors opened new paths
across our land, today we will build the dreams that open new
paths to a better tomorrow.  We, too, will see jobs and wealth
flood into the heartland, and see new products and new produce
made and grown right here in the U.S.A.  You don’t hear that much
anymore.  We will buy American, and we will hire American.  We
will not — so importantly — be content to let our nation become
a museum of former glories.  We will construct incredible new
monuments to American grit that inspire wonder for generations
and generations to come.  We will build because our people want
to build, and because we need them to build.  We will build
because our prosperity demands it.  And above all, we will build
because that is how we make America great again.
Thank you.  God bless you.  Go out there and work.  You’re
going to see some amazing things happen over the next long period
of time.  Thank you, everyone.  It’s a great honor to be with
you.  Thank you.

OGDEN:  So, to address some of what President Trump covered
in that frankly inspiring speech, I want to hand it over to
Jason.  I know we have some other things to cover, but we’ll get
to those later in the show.  I think this is a good point to let
Jason tell us how we’re going to get to work.

JASON ROSS:  OK, this article that Matt referred to earlier,
that I wrote about New York City’s infrastructure — New York’s a
case-study, but it really says something about the nation as a
whole, namely, that if the biggest, greatest city in the United
States is an infrastructure disaster, what does that say about
our economic thinking, about the way we think about
infrastructure?  How did we let ourselves get into a situation
that’s this bad?
First, from a national perspective, just some of the
numbers, briefly.  The American Society of Civil Engineers every
few years does a report card on American infrastructure.  We got
a D+.  Now, they say that there’s $4.5 trillion of infrastructure
that’s needed and of that, only about half of it actually is
funded.  That over the next decade, there is a little over $2
trillion in infrastructure needs that currently are not provided
for, that won’t happen, that aren’t scheduled to take place:
Things like the locks and dams on our inland waterway system that
President Trump mentioned, which are in terrible shape!  Where
the failure — take one example — the failure of the Soo locks
on the Great Lakes, if that were to go, for the shipping season
during the warmer months, the estimates from the Department of
Homeland Security are that {11 million jobs} would be lost by the
failure of that one piece of infrastructure because it’s so
critical to so much of manufacturing:  Of bringing ore from one
place to another, bringing products from one place to another.
Without it, there’s no alternative way of moving these goods.
You’re not going to ship it by truck.  It won’t happen.  It’s
just going to dramatically collapse our productive abilities.
Now, these estimates are a little low.  The head of China
Investment Corp.  Ding Xuedong estimated U.S. infrastructure
needs at $8 trillion!  What  this really all comes down to,
though is what we consider our needs to be.  Do we think of what
we need to do in the future, in terms of repairing what we’ve
already got, which we certainly should repair locks and dams that
are threatening failure.  But is that what our needs are?
It isn’t.  You’ve got to say what is going to make us proud
a century from now.  What is going to be the groundwork that 100
years from now, we will say, “Oh, this was the basis for the
prosperity that we had over this century; this is what made it
possible.”  And if you look at the past, at things like the canal
that President Trump mentioned, if you look at what Eisenhower
did 51 years ago in setting up the Highway Trust Fund and the
ability to go out and build the Interstate Highway System, which
was a pretty phenomenal thing in its time: 40,000 miles of
expressway were built in a decade and a half.  That’s pretty
fast.  It was a large project.  Every year, 15,000 families were
relocated, 40,000 miles built altogether, at a cost in today’s
terms of about $500 billion —  a big project.  A big project.
Now, for what we need to do today, to make the groundwork
for what we’re going to need over the next century, we’ve got to
think about leapfrogging.  What’s the next level of technology?
Improving Amtrak trains?–ugh.  Instead, think about how are we
going to have a high-speed rail network?  Where will these
high-speed rail stations be?  There’s just no way, for example,
on the route that goes from New York to Boston, it can’t be
upgraded — forget it!  It won’t happen; we’re not going to build
a maglev line that runs along the current Northeast Corridor from
New York to Boston.  Not going to happen.  Too crooked, too
curved, goes through too many downtowns and narrow types of
passageways — not going to happen.  We’re going to build an
entirely new rail network in the United States, new high-speed
rail network.
We should build maglev rail, magnetic levitation is the
leapfrog.  That’s the next level of technology.  It’s more
efficient, it’s safer, it’s quieter, less vibration, less
disruption to people nearby.  Fast, safe, efficient — this is
what would be the next generation of technology, that would be a
basis for a higher potential of our country as a whole.
Think about the history of the United States; think about
the history of any country.  What makes it possible to achieve a
certain level of wealth of economic activity, of development?
Well, there’s a lot of aspects to it, but the primary one that
makes everything else possible, is your infrastructure platform.
Do you have a network of roads?  Do you have availability of
power?  How about water?  Think about where cities are located in
the country, or in other countries — where do cities locate
themselves?  They don’t wind up in the middle of the desert or on
the top of a mountain peak or someplace like that.  It’s based on
the, you might say “natural,” infrastructure.  Is it near a
river?  Why is New York where it is?  The Hudson River isn’t just
an inconvenience to traffic because you have to build bridges and
tunnels above it or below it.  It’s the Hudson River!  This is a
major aspect of shipping that goes into the country.  That’s why
New York is where it is.
Other cities, they are where they are due in large part to
rivers for our older cities; and then when you think about what
the potential is in building rail networks and building road
networks, you create a synthetic environment of infrastructure,
that says, OK, this is a place where we should build a new city;
this is a place where it makes sense to have production.  We can
get materials easily, we can work on them, we can ship them out;
we’ve got water, we’ve got power, we’ve got transportation, that
increases the potential of every bit of land that is developed in
that way.
So when you string electric lines out, as Roosevelt did with
the Rural Electrification Act, with the help from the Federal
government for rural residents to get electricity to their towns,
to their farms, this dramatically increased their productivity.
The building of the Transcontinental Railroad; it didn’t just
mean it as cheaper to ship some thing you ordered from a
manufacturer in New York to San Francisco.  Yes, it was cheaper
and quicker than going by boat, all the way around; but what did
it make possible in the entire rest of the country?  You build a
rail line, all the places along it are now increased in their
potential, increased in their value.
So what we need to do, is take advantage of the incredible
renaissance in infrastructure that’s occurring all around the
world — it’s led by China.  And I’ve got to say, the incredible
success that China’s having with its own domestic infrastructure,
with the building of 22,000 km of high-speed rail over the past
decade.  And let’s think about this:  China is a country, where a
decade ago there was zero high-speed rail in China.  What you see
here [{{Figure 1}}] is a map of a future 8 by 8 grid of
high-speed rail planned by China.  It’s double the length of
current high-speed rail, 45,000 km.  They’re going to have that
in place in 2035.
Where do these lines go?  Does it go to currently existing
cities?  Yes.  It would be silly not to link up currently
existing cities.  Where are the stations? Are they in the
downtowns?  Not necessarily.  Maybe it’s difficult to get there;
there’s already a lot of buildings there.  So new areas are
opening up for development in China, as a result of these
high-speed rail lines.  They’re tremendously successful.  Most of
the trips made along this network, are new trips, ones that would
not have been made if the network did not exist.  So it’s not
just people getting somewhere they were already going more
quickly, it’s actually increasing the transportation throughput
in the country.
That’s what it would be like in the United States as well,
as we develop a national network of high-speed rail [{{Figure
2}}]; this will change the productivity throughout the country.
And another aspect of this, I want to show one more thing we
can learn from China, which is the increase in energy, to take
another metric.  I had mentioned transportation.  Here’s a chart
[{{Figure 3}}]: In blue, you see total per-capita energy use in
China, from 1972-2012, so, 40 years.  Look at that difference:
Total energy use per capita in China is more than four times as
big, almost five times as big.  Now, look especially at the red
line:  That’s the amount of {electricity} used per person in
China.  Now, I know, in this chart the red line goes above the
blue line, because they’re different units, so don’t worry about
that.  The relative change is what’s important:  {Per-capital}
electricity use in China, has gone up {by 25 times}, in past four
decades — 25 times. Think about what that means.  Look at the
percentage of energy use in China, that comes from electricity,
that’s in the form of electricity:  It’s gone from 3% to
15%–that’s a {wonderful} accomplishment!  Because electricity is
a higher form of power than energy in general.  There’s things
that you can do with energy, such as burning fuels for cooking,
let’s say, or heat to power a diesel train engine, or steam
engine or something like this.  Electricity is the next level of
technology.  You can do much more with it:  You can power motors
that are controlled by computer equipment; you can have laser
manufacturing technologies, electric-discharge machining,
electron beam welding.  The next level of productivity is made
possible through the use of electricity as a higher platform.
I think we can definitely learn some lessons from China.
And the speed at which they have been doing this, I think
absolutely — I wouldn’t want to say “vindicates” but it’s a
successful experiment that shows that the method of Lyndon
LaRouche is right!
This proposal that China has made of the Belt and Road
Initiative, whereby China is engaged with multilateral financing
institutions and with its own domestic financial institutions,
like its state banks, its Export-Import Bank, etc., it’s been
involved in {major} infrastructure deals with its neighbors along
the Belt and Road, and even in more distant locations, such as
Africa, where the incredibly new rail opening in Kenya that
reduces travel time from Mombasa to Nairobi from 10 hours down to
4 hours, with the building of the Standard Gauge Railway there,
this is the type of project that is just going to dramatically
improve the productivity of Kenya.  A Chinese-financed project,
by the Chinese Export-Import Bank.
These kinds of deals are wonderful.  It’s a “win-win”
approach where China is able to export its technology, export its
know-how, the train sets that it builds, and the nations in which
the infrastructure is being built, of course, benefit from having
a great new set of infrastructure.  So everybody benefits from
this.  And the speed that this is being done with, the way that
it’s being financed, I think it says, “Hey, we could be doing
this here.”
This isn’t some sort of distant plan.  We should take the
outlook that President Trump expressed in that speech that we
just heard him make and say, we’re going to do this right now.
We can start building these things right now.  The whole
Interstate system was built in 15 years, that’s pretty fast, when
you think about the size of the thing.  What does it look like to
build a high-speed rail network in the United States?  Who’s
going to build the train sets?  Where’s the rail going to come
from? We can gear up to build the rail, but as far as high-speed
trains go, we don’t produce those!  We actually don’t have the
know-how among American domestic manufacturers.  We’re going to
be looking to China, as contractors, to build these kinds of
train sets, and also to assist with the financing.  China has
huge foreign reserves right now, and the head of China Investment
Corp. Ding Xuedong, the guy I had mentioned earlier, he said that
he’d be interested in investing some of the tens of billions of
dollars in U.S. Treasuries that China Investment Corp. holds,
happy to invest that in U.S. infrastructure.
I think from that standpoint, when we look at New York, for
example, and New York is a disaster — it’s on such a thin
thread, the ability for the over 1 million who come into
Manhattan every day for work, the ability for them to get to
work, it is incredibly precarious!  This summer, for two months,
two of the four tunnels heading east from Manhattan are going to
be closed for maintenance.  That’s going to really upset the Long
Island Railroad.  The two tunnels coming into Manhattan from the
west, the rail tunnels going into Penn Station, — which is
operating at over 100% capacity; as many trains as could possibly
fit through that tunnel are already making the trip.  New Jersey
transit commuters going into New York has tripled over the past
couple of decades.  It’s just  — you can’t fit any more people
through that tunnel!  It’s not possible.
These tunnels, the ones that I’d mentioned, these are 100
years old, or older!  {1910}, the Hudson tunnels were opened up!
These are in {desperate} need of repair — but it’s impossible to
close them to do any maintenance, because so many people are
riding on them all the time.
The only way that this can be fixed is to build an entirely
new set of tunnels, to build a new train station — here we go,
[{{Figure 4}}] this is the Gateway Project from Amtrak, where
additional lines would be built so you could have four tracks
going all the way from Penn Station, Newark; there’d be a new
loop built at Secaucus — my apologies if you’re not familiar
with the area, I know this is going fast. You’re going to have
more than double the flow of people and trains that could be
brought into New York.
This is a major and essential project.  Some work was
actually begun on it in 2009, before New Jersey Gov. Chris
Christie killed it in 2010.  But, it’s not enough.  Yes, this
should happen, but this isn’t the real outlook we ought to have.
We need to think, how is New York going to fit in a broader,
regional scheme of things?  What’s the high-speed rail going to
look like in the area?  How can we totally transform the region’s
rail stations so that instead of New Jersey Transit trains coming
into Penn Station and then turning around, they keep going to the
east? [{{Figure 5}}] To Sunnyside, Queens, to a new terminal at
Port Morris, the Bronx; this is a proposal by ReThink New York
City, a public advocacy group up there.  We need entirely new
subway lines, and a national high-speed rail network.
I just want to say one more thing about the Interstate
system here [{{Figure 6}}] which you see on the screen.  This is
the original 1955 plan.  And I’d like to talk a little bit about
how Eisenhower made this reality.  First off, in terms of where
the demand for roads came from: The real push for an improvement
in public roads came in 1880 and it was promoted by bicycle
riders, who  thought rail was great for trains, but people wanted
a smooth way to ride a bike without being quite so bumpy. By the
1930s, trucks only hauled about 10% of freight in the United
States; 75% of freight moved by rail in ’20s, with trucking doing
a small amount at that time, and then inland waterways, the
infrastructure that President Trump mentioned in that clip.
By 1958, when the highway system was starting to get built,
rail was 50% of freight, highways 20%, inland waterways 16%,
pipelines 16%; and the ability to build up a broader expressway
system was hampered by the fact of how are you going to pay for
it? So the Bureau of Public Roads had been getting
appropriations: Congress would vote up some appropriations to the
Bureau of Public Roads to give grants to help build up the U.S.
highway system. It was unreliable, you didn’t know how Congress
was going to vote every year; it made it very difficult to do
long-term planning.
What Eisenhower did was he set up the — and this is lessons
for today for national banking for how to finance these projects
— Eisenhower set up the Highway Trust Fund in 1956.  It was a
separate fund, it wasn’t part of the annual budget.  Congress
wasn’t going to vote on it every year, to say, “gee should we
build the highway system or not?” and re-debate it every single
year.  Forget it!  Eisenhower set up this special fund that had a
dedicated tax system where the money would go straight into it,
as a separate capital budget, not part of the annual operating
budget.  A tax on gasoline — by the way the current gas tax
right now, it’s too low.  It hasn’t been increased in a couple of
decades.  It should be higher.  That’s why the Highway Trust Fund
doesn’t have enough money; the gas tax hasn’t been increased to
keep pace.  What else? Tire taxes, for trucks.  Trucks have big
wear on the roads; a tax for the sale of large trucks, and also a
tax for the yearly registration of large trucks.  So these kind
of indirect taxes ended up sending the money into the Highway
Trust Fund, so that it was able to build out this whole road
system and not be repaid directly.  The emphasis was {not} toll
roads! That was actually a condition for some of the turnpikes to
get Interstate Highway System funding, was they had to get rid of
their tolls. So, along Interstate-95, I-95, a lot of these roads
used to be tollways; in Connecticut that used to be a tollway.
In ’80s, after paying off bonds for repair and upgrade of a
bridge, the tolls had to be taken down, that was in keeping with
the interstate system.
That’s the way we’ve got to think about it.  Not a
public-private partnership, where you say, “I’m going to directly
pay for this project and I’ll make the money back through tolls,”
forget it.  That’ll work for an airport upgrade or something like
that.  But for a national high-speed rail network, for these
other things, what we need is national banking, so that we can
have long-term, low-interest loans, and we can get it away from
the annual squabbles about appropriations; have the ability to
have separate capital budgeting to finance this long-term
outlook.  And of course, none of that is going to happen without
Glass-Steagall.

OGDEN:  I think that’s the vision that people are looking
for, and you even heard President Trump say, “this is the kind of
bold vision.” People are ready to work!  People are ready to
build and it is true, that if you look at the history of the
American System, what is it that conquered the West?  It was the
spirit of building; this is a nation of builders.  This is the
kind of spirit that Gov. DeWitt Clinton, a strong advocate of the
American System was a believer in.
This article that you wrote, Jason, it’s available in the
current issue of {Executive Intelligence Review}
[http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/private/2017/2017_20-29/2017-23/
pdf/12-28_4423.pdf]
and we’ll make a link available.  But I want to ask our viewers
at this point, what have you been reading in the press this week?
What have you been seeing on television?  Have you been seeing
coverage of National Infrastructure Week?  Did you see coverage
of this inspiring speech by President Trump in Cincinnati?  Did
you see coverage, unless you’re a C-Span wonk, [laughter] did you
see the speeches that Marcy Kaptur [D-OH] and Tulsi Gabbard
[D-HI] made on the floor of the House for Glass-Steagall?  This
is one of the most historic fights in present history:  Did you
see the coverage of this fight in the Rules Committee, which was
very dramatic, over their proposal to repeal the “Financial
CHOICE Act,” a Dodd-Frank, and replace it immediately with
Glass-Steagall?  That’s a {real} repeal and replace!
Did you hear coverage of this new international order that’s
being consolidated in Eurasia?  These three back-to-back summits
with world leaders: The Belt and Road Forum, the St. Petersburg
International Economic Forum, and the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization summit that’s happening now?  Have you see coverage
of these unprecedented missions that China is sending to the
Moon? The same return mission, lunar sample return? The mission
to the far side of the Moon?
Or even, did you see coverage of this absolutely historic
election, general election that happened just last night in Great
Britain, when Theresa May got completely trounced and Jeremy
Corbyn shocked everybody, and gained unprecedented seats for
Labour Party and consolidated his control over Labour, despite
all of the opposition from within his own party.  Did you see
coverage of that?  No!
What have you been seeing?  Twenty-four hours a day, around
the clock, you’ve been seeing Comey, Comey, Comey, Comey.  This
is the sideshow, — it really reminded me of an episode from the
“People’s Court” or something. [laughter]

ROSS:  Or, “Twilight Zone.”

OGDEN:  Right.  I actually want to point your attention to
an article which is available as the lead of the LaRouche PAC
website today, called “LaRouche: Stop the FBI Fraud, Stop the
Coup against the President — What the Lying Media Is Not Telling
You”
[https://larouchepac.com/20170609/larouche-stop-fbi-fraud-stop-
coup-against-president-what-lying-media-not-telling-you].
And that’s a screenshot there from the LaRouche PAC website; this
is the lead for today. And it begins as follows:  “Lyndon
LaRouche called upon the American people to shut down the coup
underway against President Trump which was fed Thursday by the
lying testimony of fired FBI Director James Comey before the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. LaRouche said that the
coup is an FBI-type operation attempting to destroy the United
States, and if it is not stopped, the world will face general
warfare.”
And then it goes on to say the following: “On June 7, former
Director of National Intelligence Clapper revealed the actual
motivation for the coup against Trump in remarks in Australia. He
said that Trump’s openness to peace with Russia–the platform
upon which Trump was elected by the American people–was itself
wholly against U.S. national security interests, in effect,
equivalent to treason.”  And then the article goes on to say: “It
was already known in official Washington well before the
election, that President Obama, in collusion with the British,
candidate Clinton, DNI head Clapper, CIA head Brennan, and FBI
head Comey, had steered the U.S. on a war course with Russia and
China, which was meant to be fully activated with Clinton’s
election. Trump was elected instead, triggering the coup which
has followed.”  And then it makes the very clear point:
“President Trump has kept his promise and established better
relations with both Russia and China, who are seeking cooperation
with the United States in developing the world based on great
infrastructure projects. That is the only issue here.”
Again, that’s the beginning of the article, “LaRouche: Stop
the FBI Fraud, Stop the Coup against the President — What the
Lying Media Is Not Telling You” which is available on the
LaRouche PAC website.  And then it goes on from there, and goes
through a very detailed examination of what this process really
has been ever since Inauguration Day; so we encourage you to read
that article. And let me put on the screen again, the link to the
petition: http://action.larouchepac.com/lets_rebuild_the_country.
It’s called “Congress, Suck It Up and Move On — It’s Time To
Rebuild the Country.”  And the url is http://lpac.co/rebuild ,
that’s where you can sign this petition online.  And we also have
a mobile phone app that you can text the word REBUILD to
2025248709.
And that petition continues to accumulate signatures, and
it’s your opportunity to get involved.
I just want to let Jason say a little more in terms of the
process that’s ongoing.  The opportunity that we have ahead of
us, — Helga LaRouche’s attendance at the Belt and Road Forum
that occurred in Beijing, the campaign which we’ve been running
for the United States to join this Silk Road — what better
opportunity do we have than now, when you actually have your
President, whatever you want to say about him, is strongly
advocating a modernization of U.S.  infrastructure and an
exciting program to give Americans the opportunity to build a new
era of U.S. infrastructure.

ROSS:  Well, Trump’s initiative is right.  His direction on
this is right.  He likes to build things;  you’ve heard that
speech, this is a good direction for this country.  What is
really not very present is how to finance it.  And that’s the big
weakness and that’s what we are responsible for correcting.
That’s what Lyndon LaRouche has been working on for decades, is a
real science of economics and doing that in opposition to what
has taken over United States policy: monetarism.
The Trump idea is that $200 billion in Federal financing is
going to be leveraged to create a total of $1 trillion over a
decade for U.S. infrastructure. That’s the Trump outlook. That’s
grossly insufficient.  The idea that you’re going to leverage
$200 billion into a total of $1 trillion is a difficult thing if
you don’t have the ability to capture the indirect value of
infrastructure.  Because, look, think about the value of building
up a platform.  The value of building up an infrastructure
platform, isn’t to make money by charging people to use it.  Now
you open up some business where you’re making cookies, well sure,
you sell your cookies; people pay to eat your cookies or
whatever, that’s fine, that’s how a business works.
That’s now how an infrastructure platform works:  The return
is indirect, the return isn’t local to the place where the
infrastructure is built.  It changes the nation as a whole.  And
when we think about linking in to the full World Land-Bridge
proposal, crossing the Bering Straits, not only will we be able
to ship things from the Americas over to Asia more quickly than
you can by ship, but you’re opening up the Arctic.  There’s tons
of resources in the Arctic!  There’s petroleum, we know about
that; but mineral resources, all sorts of potential up there.
It’s not worth anything if you can’t get to it.  So building up
that whole network, as Dr. Hal Cooper has put forward in his
engineering proposals on this, tremendous change.  To the south,
bridging the Darién Gap, connecting North, Central and South
America as one: These are tremendous potentials.
The value of infrastructure, it’s indirect, it’s not local;
{and}, it’s not commensurable.  A dollar into infrastructure,
maybe has, you might calculate $2.5  of benefit or something like
this.  It’s not the same dollars.  That chart I had showed
earlier about China’s use of electricity as a percentage of its
total power, this represents a transformation of the economy.
The fact that total power went up five times, but electrical
power went up 25 times, China’s not doing five times more of what
it used to do, or leaving the lights on longer, or something like
this.  This represents {a change in the structure of the economy
as a whole.}  And it’s made possible by building out a network of
power. China needs {much} more power into the future; China is
building nuclear power plants into the future, and this is really
the next level of platform of energy, just as high-speed and
maglev rail is the future of transportation, nuclear power,
developing fusion power, that’s the next level of electricity.
So we’ve got to think of those leapfrogging type steps.  And
our message to Trump is:  Good direction, we’ve got some very
serious proposals for you about how to make it all possible;
Glass-Steagall is absolutely essential, as you, Mr. President,
promised in your campaign.  And then, we need national banking,
as a way of indirectly financing these projects that just won’t
give money back to a private investor, it’s not how they work.
{And} finance fusion, so we get that next level, the next
platform will be possible

OGDEN:  Yeah, absolutely.  OK.  I think that’s an exciting
and very direct message.  We’ve got a lot going on, clearly.
This has been a very, very eventful week! And I think we can just
expect the pace of the things to continue to increase.
So thank you very much for watching today, and please
encourage other people to watch this broadcast; there is a lot of
material, and it’s a lot to absorb and a lot to teach others
about.
Thank you very much, Jason.  I know you’re going to be up in
New York City next week, and presenting some of this, for our
friends who are up there, I encourage you to directly participate
in that discussion with Jason. And please read Jason’s article,
“Case Study New York City: A Future Platform of U.S.
Infrastructure.”  We’re making that available in the description
for today’s broadcast.
Thank you Jason, and thank you for watching.  Please stay
tuned to larouchepac.com.  Good night.




’VERDEN SER MEGET ANDERLEDES UD FRA KINA’
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
»Tænk ud over kassen!«

Torsdag, 1. juni, 2017 – Under en telefonkonference med medarbejdere diskuterer Helga Zepp-LaRouche, stifter af det internationale Schiller Institut, sin seneste rejse til Kina, hvor hun var inviteret til at deltage i det historiske Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, 14.-15. maj, 2017. Zepp-LaRouche fortæller, hvor dramatisk anderledes, verden ser på Trumps præsidentskab, i modsætning til de hysteriske, vestlige mainstream-medier. »Tænk ud over kassen; resten af verden er allerede trådt frem og går fremad.«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Jeg vil gerne sikre mig, at I får et førstehåndsindtryk af min rejse fra mig, for jeg mener, den absolut værste fejltagelse, vi kunne begå, ville være at respondere til den absolut utrolige psykologiske krigsførelse, der kommer fra de amerikanske mainstream-medier og de neoliberale medier i Europa, såsom Spiegel Online, med dets chefredaktør-indlæg, som virkelig var helt ved siden af alting! Det står helt klart, at folk, der primært baserer sig på disse medier, har en komplet, 100 % ’s forkert idé om, hvad kendsgerninger er i det, der foregår. Det bør vi virkelig få ud af hovedet og ikke forsøge at svømme inden i fiske-glasbowlen med et kunstigt skabt miljø. For ud fra mit synspunkt, så ser verden meget anderledes ud.

For det første, som jeg allerede har sagt, og nu gentager: Med Bælt & Vej Forum har verden på dramatisk vis konsolideret begyndelsen af en ny æra, og jeg tror slet ikke på, at dette vil forsvinde, med mindre Tredje Verdenskrig skulle indtræffe; for størstedelen af verden bevæger sig på en fuldstændig frigjort måde. Først og fremmest var dette den konference på det højeste niveau, jeg nogensinde har deltaget i. Der var 28 statsoverhoveder, der talte efter tur, og Xi Jinpings tale var selvfølgelig fuldstændig fremragende, og I bør absolut lytte til den, hvis I har tid, for det var en meget, meget konfuciansk tale, der på en meget klar måde satte tonen for denne todages konference. Så lyt til den, når I har tid.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx_mE951GzI]

(Engelsk udskrift af talen her: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-05/14/c_136282982.htm)

Måden at forstå, hvad det er, der finder sted, er virkelig at tænke på, hvad denne organisation, og Lyn[don LaRouche] i særdeleshed, har gjort i de seneste næsten 50 år. Første gang, da Lyn i 1971 erkendte betydningen af nedtagningen af Bretton Woods-systemet, og dernæst alle de mange, mange ting, vi har gjort i de seneste mere end 40 år; da Lyn kom hjem fra det irakiske Ba’ath Partis jubilæum i 1975, og han foreslog den Internationale Udviklingsbank (IUB)[i], der skulle formidle en ny, økonomisk verdensorden; den kendsgerning, at vi, i et helt år, førte kampagne for denne IUB-idé, som dernæst blev en del af Den Alliancefri Bevægelses Colombo-resolution i Sri Lanka i 1976; dernæst, da vi i slutningen af ’70’erne arbejdede sammen med Indira Gandhi om en udviklingsplan over 40 år for Indien.[ii] Allerede i ’76’ udgav vi en hel bog om Afrikas industrialisering.[iii] Vi arbejdede sammen med den mexicanske præsident, José López Portillo om »Operation Juárez«.[iv] Vi udgav en 50-års Basal Udviklingsplan for Stillehavsområdet.[v] Lyn havde allerede i ’75’ foreslået Oasis-planen.[vi] Og så, selvfølgelig, da [Berlin]Muren faldt, og Sovjetunionen gik i opløsning, foreslog vi den Produktive Trekant[vii] og den Eurasiske Landbro.[viii]

Alle disse forslag![ix] Tænk blot på de mange, mange aktiviteter, vi lavede, konferencer på alle fem kontinenter, alt dette var på idé-planet, på program-planet – men først efter, at Xi Jinping satte den Nye Silkevej på dagsordenen i 2013, og med de åndeløse udviklinger i de fire år, der er gået, med Ét Bælt, én Vej (OBOR), er disse ideer nu ved at blive til virkelighed! Lampens ånd er sluppet ud!

Når vi nu ser diskussionen om den Bi-oceaniske Jernbane [Sydamerika] og tunneller og broer, der skal forbinde Atlanterhavet og Stillehavet omkring Sydamerika, og vi ser alle disse jernbanestrækninger, der nu åbnes i Afrika – dette er uden fortilfælde! Det var ikke IMF (Den internationale Valutafond) eller Verdensbanken, der gjorde det! De undertrykkede det med deres ’betingelsespolitik’. Men, med Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), den Nye Udviklingsbank (’BRIKS-banken’), den Nye Silkevejsfond, den Maritime Silkevejsfond, de direkte investeringer fra Kinas Exim Bank, Kinas statsbank, skrider alle disse projekter nu fremad, og de har fuldstændig ændret alle de deltagende landes holdning og selvtillid.

Måden, hvorpå man i Kina ser på præsident Trump, er absolut anderledes end det, medierne forsøger at sige. Kineserne er meget positive mht. Trump, på samme måde, som man i Rusland mener, at Trump er en person, man absolut kan have et anstændigt forhold til, og dét er virkeligheden.

Glem medierne! Glem disse presse-horer, der faktisk ikke er andet et Det britiske Imperiums prostituerede. Lad være at lytte til, hvad de siger, og giv heller ikke de mennesker, I taler med, lov til det.

Da Trump lovede $1 billion i infrastrukturinvesteringer, gjorde han det rette, og vi fremlagde det rette program, da vi sagde, at USA må tilslutte sig Silkevejen, og dét, og intet andet, bør være vores fokus. Alt andet bør være et underordnet aspekt af dette. Dette er, hvad der er strategisk vigtigt, og det faktum, at chefen for China Investment Corp. Ding Xuedong sagde, det er ikke $1 billion, men $8 billion, som USA har brug for, rammer absolut plet; og I ved det selv fra den forfatning, som vejene og infrastrukturen i hele USA befinder sig i.

Så det faktum, at samme organisation nu har åbnet et kontor i New York, hvor de rådgiver kinesiske investorer om, hvordan de skal investere i USA, og vice versa, hvordan amerikanske investorer kan investere i Kina; det faktum, at kineserne er inviteret til at deltage i denne infrastruktur-konference i juni; alt dette går absolut i den rigtige retning.

Det, der fandt sted i Bælt & Vej Forum og de mange møder, jeg havde bagefter – jeg tilbragte trods alt to fulde uger i Beijing, i Nanjing, i Shanghai – mange af disse ting rapporterer jeg ikke om, for det er blot ting, der er i gang, men det er det faktum, at, i de mange interviews, de mange citater og det generelle synspunkt – I kan spørge Kasia og Stefan Tolksdorf, eller Bill Jones, for den sags skyld – vi blev behandlet med den største respekt. Jeg mener, folk er fuldt ud bevidste om Lyns betydning som en teoretiker inden for fysisk økonomi; hans ideer er højt respekterede, og folk behandlede os, som vi burde blive behandlet, nemlig som mennesker, der har helliget hele deres liv til menneskehedens almene vel. Dette står i absolut stærk kontrast til den dårlige behandling, vi normalt får fra de neoliberale i det transatlantiske område.

Man bør forstå, hvad disse angreb på Trump går ud på, hvad de skal gøre; det er for – det er så vanskeligt for ham at fokusere på det positive aspekt, og dem er der en hel del af, inklusive hans arbejdsrelation med Rusland og Kina, som rent strategisk er det vigtigste; så han grundlæggende set i stedet må forsvare sig, og alle mener, de må bruge al deres tid på at forsvare sig. Tænk blot tilbage, for de af jer, der var her dengang, hvordan vores liv som organisation ændrede sig efter angrebet i 1986. Frem til dette tidspunkt var vi alle positive, vi vandt primærvalg i Illinois, vi overvejede at skabe tre, private universiteter, for vi havde et netværk af henved 100 professorer, der ønskede at gennemføre Lyns ideer i form af et pensum i universiteter.

Og efter angrebet i 1986[x], udført af det samme apparat, der nu går efter Trump, måtte vi bruge alle disse penge på advokater, og vi måtte forsvare os, og det ændrede fuldstændig organisationens liv, og det er, hvad de nu forsøgerat gøre imod Trump!

Så lad være med at falde for det. Den idé, at vi er ved at tabe, er helt forkert! Menneskeheden er på vej fremad, og vi må få den amerikanske befolkning til at skabe den form for grobund, så gennemførelsen af infrastrukturprogrammet som første skridt kommer på dagsordenen, og på alles tanker, og intet andet.

Jeg ville blot sige dette, for ud fra indledende diskussioner, jeg havde i dag, fik jeg indtryk af, at folk ligger for meget under for det, og selv om Europa stadig er i EU-kommissionens greb, jeg mener, hvis Merkel ønsker at være leder af det frie Vesten – glem det. Macron har netop haft et meget fremragende møde med Putin, der satte betingelser for en hjertelig relation med Rusland! Dette er ikke, hvad Merkel og Obama havde lagt op til, da Obama talte på den protestantiske kirkes kirkedag, men Merkel er temmelig isoleret.

Se jer omkring i Europa: Macron sendte Raffarin, den tidligere premierminister, til Bælt & Vej Forum, og som holdt en fremragende tale om, hvorfor Kina og Frankrig må samarbejde. Gentiloni fra Italien sagde, at Kina og Italien vil samarbejde om Afrikas udvikling. Alle østeuropæerne; Tsipras [Grækenland], Serbien, Ungarn, Tjekkiets Zeman, Orban [Ungarn] – alle disse personer var absolut entusiastiske over Bælt & Vej-initiativet. Og nu, selv Tyskland; det viser, at tysk industri faktisk er ved at fatte det, at det er i deres interesse at samarbejde om joint ventures i tredjelande, sammen med Kina. Så jeg tror, selv Tyskland vil skifte mening.

Det er min faste overbevisning, at, ved dette års afslutning, vil det hele se helt anderledes ud, for perspektivet for udvikling er så smittende, at jeg tror, at alle Det britiske Imperiums bestræbelser på at smide en svensknøgle [i maskineriet], ikke vil virke!

Så sats på vinderperspektivet, sats på det bedste perspektiv, tænk strategisk: Og indse, at det, der finder sted, i mange, mange udviklingsprojekter i hele verden, i realiteten er det, som denne organisation har kæmpet for i næsten et halvt århundrede. Det ville jeg blot fortælle jer, for det værste, vi kunne gøre, er at se på det inde fra USA, inde fra kassen, når hele verden på afgørende vis er trådt ud af kassen, med Bælt & Vej Forum, der ikke lader sig standse af noget som helst. Og det er mit synspunkt, som jeg ønskede at videreformidle.

(Herefter følger Spørgsmål og Svar, i uddrag, med den efterfølgende diskussion på engelsk)

Diane Sare: Jeg ved, du skal skåne din stemme, men vil du have en diskussion?

Zepp-LaRouche: Hvis folk har uafklarede spørgsmål, hold jer ikke tilbage.

Spørgsmål: Hej, Helga, her er Mindy. Dette er ganske klart og det er godt at høre det fra dig, på en måde, for vi ser på, hvad vi gjorde på Beijing-topmødet, kineserne her kender CIC, og dernæst det forestående juni-topmøde og G20-topmødet i juli, hvor Putin og Xi og Trump vil være til stede; og vores rolle, og Lyns og din rolle har været – vi har opnået meget, og nu skal vi bare gå fremad for virkelig at bringe USA ind i et optimistisk syn og knuse denne fjende og satse på det, på meget kort tid.

Zepp-LaRouche: Præcis. jeg mener, potentialet absolut er til stede, diskussionerne mellem Xi Jinping og Trump er meget gode; udnævnelsen af den nye ambassadør [til Kina] Branstad udgør nu en yderligere kanal. Der er den igangværende kommission, der blev oprettet på Mar-a-Lago, med fokus på økonomien, og vi bør forstærke dette. Jeg mener, det er vigtigt, at vi får hele landet ind i en fornemmelse af en kampagnemobilisering, for vi vil ikke overlade denne kamp til de britiske agenter, der forsøger at ødelægge denne chance for at få USA ind sammen med denne udvikling.

Det fordrer virkelig, at vores organisation er fuldstændig klarhjernet og simpelt hen viser folk vejen. Og vejen er, at USA går med i Silkevejen. Vi må få veje bygget, ved I nok. Vi må få havne og nye byer. USA befinder sig i en forfalden tilstand, det ved I alle, og kineserne har absolut indikeret, at de har til hensigt og er villige til at investere. Tag blot det faktum, at Detroits Symfoniorkester nu turnerer i Kina, jeg tror, det er i fem byer, de giver koncert – Detroit, af alle steder! Så den rette hensigt er der, og vi bør blot forstærke den.

Giv ikke folk lov at være pessimistiske i blot ét enkelt sekund! Fortæl dem, at pessimisme er en sygdom. Det bør ikke tolereres.

Foto: Helga Zepp-LaRouche sammen med værten og den anden gæst på Tv-showet Dialog med Yang Rui under sin deltagelse i Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, 14.-15. maj, 2017.

Q:  It’s Margaret Scialdone, I have a question about —
right after the Beijing conference we had initiated a petition
that went along with a marvelous little video by Jason, and the
petition was called “Suck It Up and Move On” — a petition to
Congress. I found it very refreshing.  I thought it had the right
kind of bite to it.  So I think it sort of dwindled, it hasn’t
been pushed or anything like that; but I’m wondering if we should
have a renewed initiative to really use this attitude to mobilize
people.  Or, if you think that we ought to come out with a new
wording, or new title or something like that?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I have not seen the video, or if it’s the
one I saw, my memory is overshadowed by many, many impressions,
so  — maybe it would be good to make a short new one, because I
think this video was made before the Belt and Road conference?
Am I correct?
Q:  It was done, I think two days after it.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  If it kept to what I just expressed before,
then we should use it, and if not, it should probably be updated.
But if you say it’s already in there, then use it, and maybe make
another one in the next days, but go with it now.
SARE:  I think it definitely could be updated.  This dynamic
is completely new, and it is foreign to Americans, the sense that
you’re conveying.  I think that Americans would have a very hard
time imagining anyplace where Trump is viewed with respect and
optimism.  And if there’s billions of people in China, Russia,
and otherwise, who think that, Americans don’t know it.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  What people say is that they’re very, very
happy that it’s not Obama or Hillary, because they knew perfectly
where this would have led to.  So people — and the fact that Xi
Jinping and Trump got along well is really important.  It’s not
only important for Trump to say to his supporters in Harrisburg,
that Xi is “great guy” and he gets along well with him, it’s also
the other way around.  When Xi Jinping gets along well with
Trump, then this is very important for all the Chinese.
Q:  Hi, this is Susan Director.  I think that what you’re
saying today, Helga, could be made into a very powerful audio to
post on the website, today.  Because, the intensity of your
presentation is the kind of thing that will lift people up and
pull them into action.
ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Then put it on!  Tiramisu! Tiramisu! Pull
me up!

Q: This is Evelyn in Houston, and it struck me, when Robert
Mueller was appointed as a Special Prosecutor, who also headed
the Get LaRouche task force, that the best flank on the attack on
Trump and also on the economic question, would be for us to call
again for the exoneration of Lyn.  Because it was the same
network, that attacked him, and for the same reasons, because they
don’t want Trump to go with Lyn’s policies.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes, I agree.  That is one of the moral
stains on the history of the United States, and it absolutely
should be done.  I fully agree.  Remember that Ramsey Clark said
that Lyn’s case was the worst violation of justice in U.S.
history.  I think people can find the exact formulation of what
he said and use it.  And I think it’s very useful, because it
{is} the same network.
But while we should say it, I still think we should focus on
the positive thing, because it is the same network, and we should
do it, but more importantly, or not more importantly, but the
angle with which to go about it is to say, the world has moved in
a completely different direction, and what the mainstream media
are doing is sort of the last battles of a war which they have
been lost already by them. Maybe you could find some
appropriate battle from the Civil War — aren’t there some
battles where the British were still making some noises but they
were defeated, I mean, the Confederates —

SARE: In the War of 1812, they had surrendered but people
were still fighting in different places long after, not knowing
somehow.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah, why don’t you use that as an image?

SARE:  That’s a nice image!
If there’s nothing else, I think this is excellent.  I think
we can put this to good use.  We should get this up on the
website, and then we’ll have a lot to talk about on Sunday, after
our success.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: OK, very good!

[i] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1998/eirv25n32-19980814/eirv25n32-19980814_020-1975_larouche_calls_for_intl_dev.pdf

[ii] http://wlym.com/archive/fusion/fusion/19800505-fusion.pdf

[iii] http://wlym.com/archive/fusion/book/1980IndustrializeAfrica.pdf

[iv] http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/31620 og http://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1986/eirv13n35-19860905/eirv13n35-19860905_018-ibero_americas_strategy_to_defea-lar.pdf

[v] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1983/eirv10n35-19830913/eirv10n35-19830913_018-a_50_year_development_policy_for-lar.pdf

[vi] http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/maps/maps.html#Oasis plan

[vii] http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1990/eirv17n31-19900803/eirv17n31-19900803_031-the_economic_geography_of_europe.pdf og

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/maps/maps.html#Triangle

[viii] http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/14728

[ix] En omfattende online oversigt, ’LaRouche’s 40-Year Record’; A New International Economic Order, kan studeres her:

https://larouchepac.com/new-economic-order

[x] Helga henviser her til de falske anklager om bedrageri imod Lyndon LaRouche, som var politisk motiverede. LaRouche blev idømt 15 års fængsel, men løsladt i 1994. Tretten af hans medarbejdere blev ligeledes idømt fængselsstraffe på falske anklager.




Den dybereliggende proces bag
Alma Deutschers musikalske geni:
En 12-årig komponist af klassisk musik

Vores politiske bevægelse [LaRouche-bevægelsen og Schiller Instituttet] er dedikeret til ideen om, at alle børn kan blive genier, hvis deres kreative potentiale udvikles. Dette er Alma et bevis på.

Vi er overbevist om, at menneskehedens vigtigste udfordring består i at udvikle en strategi for udløsning af kreativiteten hos alle mænd, kvinder og børn, og at en afgørende metode til at opnå dette er gennem at genopleve fortidens kreative opdagelser. Også dette er Alma et bevis på.

Og vi er fast besluttet på at skabe en ny, global renæssance, for hvilken renæssance nye musikkompositioner, baseret på principperne for den mest storslåede, klassiske musik, vil være med til at vise vejen. Og igen, Almas unge, musikalske intellekt og sjæl beviser allerede, at dette er muligt.

Den efterfølgende artikel er på engelsk. (Se også den danske version her.)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

Syngende spørgsmål og svar med Alexander Gent Gillesberg (7 år) og Michelle

Singing question and answer with Alexander Gent Gillesberg (7 years old) and Michelle

Marts 2017, March 2017::

 

Den 3. marts 2017, March 3, 2017

 

Den 3. marts 2017, 2. sang, March 3, 2017, second song

 

Der kommer flere om nogle dage.

More are coming in a few days.

Indslag om Alma Deutscher på “60 Minutes” CBS tv-program den 5. november 2017.




Schiller Instituttet interviewer
dr. Wang Yiwei i København om
Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing

København, 18. maj, 2017 – Efter seminaret »Kinas Ét Bælt, én Vej-initiativ og mulighederne for Norden«, der var arrangeret i fællesskab af Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier (DIIS) og den Kinesiske Ambassade i Danmark, gennemførte Schiller Instituttets Michelle Rasmussen et interview med Wang Yiwei, professor ved School og International Studies; direktør for Institute of International Affairs, samt direktør for Center for European Studies ved Renmin Universitet i Beijing. Han er forfatter af bogen, »The Belt and Road: What will China offer the World in its Rise?«, fra 2016 (Bælt og Vej: Hvad vil Kina tilbyde den fremvoksende verden?)

Wang Yiwei deltog ved præsentationen af den kinesiske udgave af EIR’s specialrapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«, som blev præsenteret af Schiller Instituttets stifter og præsident, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, ved et symposium, sponsoreret af Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, der også er medsponsor af den kinesiske udgivelse, den 29. september, 2015, på Renmin Universitet.




Schiller Instituttets strategiske Bælt & Vej-interventioner i København

København, 18. maj, 2017 – Schiller Instituttet havde to strategiske Bælt & Vej-interventioner i København den 17. og 18. maj.

Første intervention fandt sted under en konference for repræsentanter for 33 Konfucius-institutter i Europa, med titlen »Kina i Europa«, med to kinesiske og to europæiske eksperter, hvor vi uddelte Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale på Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, og kontakter blev skabt.

En otte mand stor delegation fra Schiller Instituttet deltog ligeledes i et heldagsseminar med titlen, »Kinas Initiativ for Ét Bælt, én Vej og mulighederne for Norden«, der var sponsoreret i fællesskab af den Kinesiske Ambassade i Danmark og det Danske Institut for Internationale Studier (DIIS), med mange både kinesiske og europæiske eksperter som talere. Dette inkluderede professor Xinning Song fra Renmin Universitet i Beijing, der havde været med under pressekonferencen i Kina, hvor Helga Zepp-LaRouche, sammen med eksperter fra hans universitet, præsenterede den kinesiske oversættelse af EIR’s rapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«. Bagefter gav han et kort interview til Schiller Instituttet og EIR.

Helga Zepp-LaRouches evaluering, at Bælt & Vej Forum var et historisk skift til en ny, økonomisk verdensorden, samt uddrag af fremtidsvisionen i Helgas tale, blev rejst under spørgeperioden.

Delegationen fra Schiller Instituttet uddelte materiale, inklusive Helgas tale i Beijing samt hendes to, nylige taler i New York City, og kontaktinformation udveksledes med nogle af deltagerne.

En rapport om spørgsmålene og indholdet af møderne vil følge.

Foto: Kinas ambassadør til Danmark, H.E. Liu Biwei, holdt åbningsningtalen til DIIS’ heldagsseminar den 18. maj.  




LPAC’s Matthew Ogden præsenterer
Helga Zepp-LaRouches smukke tale
på Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing; engelsk

Redaktør for LPAC TV Matthew Ogden præsenterer her Helga Zepp-LaRouches smukke tale på Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, 14. maj. Fr. Zepp-LaRouche taler om implikationerne af at udvide rækkevidden af Bælt & Vej-initiativet til hele verden, hvor de amerikanske kontinenter inkorporeres i en win-win-relation med Eurasiens nationer, som nu har fordel af Kinas Bælt & Vej-initiativ.

Helgas fulde tale kan læses i dagens leder. 




Seneste mediedækning i USA af Bælt & Vej Forum.
Uddrag af LPAC webcast, 12. maj.

Vært Matthew Ogden: Som vore seere vil vide, er der nu mindre end 24 timer til det verdenshistoriske Bælt & Vej Forum, der afholdes i Beijing, Kina, med start søndag morgen. Som det vil være vore seere bekendt, har LaRouche PAC og den internationale LaRouche-bevægelse krævet, at medlemmer af Trump-administrationen deltager personligt i dette topmøde. Seneste nyt er, at det i går aftes blev meddelt, at der faktisk vil blive en delegation, der deltager Bælt & Vej Forum. Trump-administrationen har besluttet at sende en officiel delegation til denne verdenshistoriske begivenhed.

Jeg vil gerne vise en artikel på skærmen fra Xinhua News, der bærer overskriften, »USA sender delegerede til at deltage i Bælt & Vej Forum«. Den lyder:

»USA vil sende delegerede til at deltage i Bælt & Vej Forum for Internationalt Samarbejde i Beijing den 14.-15. maj, sagde den amerikanske regering torsdag aften. USA ’anerkender betydningen af det af Kina foreslåede Bælt & Vej-initiativ og vil sende delegerede til at deltage i Forummet’, iflg. en udtalelse fra USA’s Handelsministerium.«

Ved det forestående forum vil alle parter fastlægge store samarbejdsprojekter, etablere arbejdsgrupper og etablere et center for investeringssamarbejde. De vil også underskrive finansieringsaftaler til støtte for deres samarbejdsprojekter.

Under et møde på Mar-a-Lago-ejendommen i Florida i sidste måned sagde den kinesiske præsident til sin amerikanske modpart, Donald Trump, at Kina byder USA’s deltagelse i Bælt & Vej-initiativet velkommen. I løbet af den månedstid, der fulgte efter dette møde mellem de to ledere, har USA og Kina opnået tilsagn til indledende forpligtende engagementer inden for områder som handel med landbrugsvarer, finansielle ydelser og energi for at styrke det økonomiske samarbejde under en 100 dages plan, iflg. Handelsministeriet.«

Dette er selvsagt en betydningsfuld udvikling på vejen, hvor USA tager imod tilbuddet fra Xi Jinping til officielt at tilslutte sig dette verdenshistoriske initiativ. Delegationen vil blive ledet af hr. Matt pottinger, der er særlig assistent til Donald Trump og seniordirektør for Østasien i det Nationale Sikkerhedsråd. Han vil, sammen med den amerikanske delegation, slutte sig til de p.t. 29 statsoverhoveder, der vil deltage i dette topmøde; disse omfatter bl.a. Ruslands præsident Putin og en minister fra Nordkorea – og netop meddelt – den nyvalgte præsident fra Sydkorea. Så meget står på spil på dette topmøde. Hr. LaRouche indskærpede, at dette må lykkes for den menneskelige civilisations fremtids skyld.

Den første, større dækning af dette Bælt & Vej-topmøde, der er fremkommet i USA, er netop kommet her til morgen fra, af alle medier, NBC News. Dette er meget signifikant, og jeg tror, I vil finde det meget interessant og ikke tilfældigt, at denne dækning af det forestående Bælt & Vej-topmøde omfatter ekstensive citater fra hr. Chas Freeman; som vore seere vil huske, var en fremtrædende hovedtaler under en Schiller Institut-konference sidste år i Tyskland, med Silkevejen og Bælt & Vej-initiativet som emne, og hvor hr. Freeman sad på et panel sammen med fr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Jeg vil gerne vise lidt af denne dækning fra NBC News. Som I ser, er titlen, »Bælt & Vej-initiativet: Kina planlægger ’Ny Silkevej til $1 billion’«, med et vidunderligt kort over de forskellige Silkevejsruter. Det lyder:

»Kina tilsigter at genskabe Marco Polos gamle »Silkevej«, der forbandt Europa med Asien. Men, i stedet for de kameler og karavaner, der transporterede krydderier og silke for hundreder af år siden, vil et for $1 billion moderne netværk af handelsruter blive bygget.

Søndag vil den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping være vært for 28 statsoverhoveder ved åbningen af et todages topmøde med fokus på det såkaldte ’Bælt & Vej-initiativ’.

Analytikere fremfører, at projektet kunne ændre centrum for den globale økonomi og udfordre den amerikanskledede verdensorden …

Xis kolossale program er 11 gange større end USA’s Marshallplan, der genopbyggede Europa efter Anden Verdenskrig. Det omfatter nye veje, højhastighedsjernbaner, kraftværker, pipelines, havne og lufthavne og telekommunikationsforbindelser, der ville styrke handel mellem Kina og 60 lande i Asien, Europa, Mellemøsten og Nordafrika …

Tidligere amerikansk viceforsvarsminister Chas Freeman beskrev Bælt & Vej-projektet som ’den potentielt mest transformerende ingeniørindsats i menneskets historie’. Han pointerede, at de involverede lande udgør omkring 55 % af det globale, økonomiske resultat, 70 % af verdens befolkning og skønsmæssigt 75 % a kendte energireserver.

’Amerikanere tænker i øjeblikket på magt i næsten udelukkende militær sammenhæng, hvilket er ironisk, for vi hævder at tro på markedernes magt til at danne begivenheder, og Bælt & Vej-initiativet beror på markeder’, sagde Freeman til NBC News.

’Amerikansk fjernhed’ er ikke et svar på den strategiske udfordring, som initiativet udgør, fremførte han. ’Hvis vi ikke griber eksportmulighederne dér, hvor de findes, vil beskæftigelsen gå til andre, ikke amerikanere’, tilføjede Freeman. Bælt & Vej er stadig en vision, men, hvis en virkeliggøres på signifikant vis, vil alle veje i Eurasien ’føre til Beijing’ … Kina vil blive det økonomiske tyngdecenter i takt med, at landet bliver verdens største nationaløkonomi’, tilføjede han. ’»Bælt & Vej«-programmet indeholder intet militært element, men det har tydeligvis potentialet til fuldstændig at ændre verdens geopolitik, så vel som verdens økonomi’. …

Med 12.500 miles kan Kina allerede prale med verdens længste højhastigheds-jernbanenet – med planer om en nær-fordobling frem til 2025. Under Bælt & Vej er i alt 50.000 miles projekteret. Det er planen at gøre det muligt at rejse fra London til Beijing ’på blot to dage’, iflg. Freeman.«

Som I ser, så er dette en meget betydningsfuld artikel, med disse lange citater af Chas Freeman. Som jeg sagde, så var Chas Freeman (indsat foto) en af hovedtalerne på en konference i Tyskland for nylig, som var sponsoreret af Schiller Instituttet. Dette er altså den første betydningsfulde, amerikanske mediedækning af dette ekstraordinært signifikante projekt og ditto topmøde i kommende weekend.

(Afsnittet med den kinesiske video med Xi Jinping findes særskilt oversat til dansk, her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=19502

(Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet.)

So, as you can see, this is a very major article, with these
extensive quotes from Chas Freeman.  As I said, Chas Freeman was
one of the keynote speakers at a recent conference sponsored by
the Schiller Institute in Germany.  So, this happens to be the
first major U.S. media coverage of this extraordinarily
significant project and extraordinarily significant summit this
weekend.
Now, I also just want to give you a selection of a number of
different quotes from other world leaders around the world, who
are recognizing the extraordinary significance of the Belt and
Road Initiative.  While Americans are distracted by domestic
politics here at home and the narratives of the mainstream U.S.
media, the rest of the world has become very attuned to the fact
that China, with this Belt and Road Initiative summit this
weekend, is inaugurating a new era in global politics and in
world history.  So, let me give you a taste of some of these
quotes.
You’re going to see quotations from the chief of the United
Nations; this is Secretary-General António Guterres, and he was
interviewed by Xinhua. Look at what he says:  “China plays a very
central role” in uniting the world and tackling development
challenges.  He said, “When we look at the Belt and Road
Initiative, we see a very important contribution to this
solidarity in addressing global problems with international
cooperation, where China plays a very central role.  So,” he
said, “I am very happy that I have the chance to participate in
the Belt and Road summit.”  He will be attending in person.
“[The initiative] is exactly doing the projects that are uniting
countries, benefitting countries; namely infrastructure that
links different regions in the world.  We are creating exactly
that kind of shared prosperity that your President [Xi Jinping]
was offering,” he said.  He went on to say, “This reveals a very
important strategic breakthrough, and I think the Belt and Road
Initiative is demonstrating that new vision that China has
brought to global development.  We are in the beginning of its
implementation, but I think that there is now an enormous amount
of enthusiasm, and I must say that I have high expectations.”
The next article is an interview with the Consul-General to
Düsseldorf, Germany from China, whose name is Feng Haiyang.  He
says, “Chinese Jobs-Motor for Rhineland”; you can see in the
German-language coverage there in {Rheinische Post}
[http://www.rp-online.de/nrw/staedte/duisburg/chinesischer-
job-motor-fuer-das-rheinland-aid-1.6811298].
He said, “We should take the idea of a new Silk Road as a win-win
situation for all countries that participate in it.  We are
experiencing an era of crises: terrorism, wars, and refugee
streams, plus a shrinking world economy.  Hardly a country in the
world still has the will, nor the courage, to think for the
future and act accordingly.  The Chinese idea of a new Silk Road
can, therefore, also be seen as a hope-promoting answer for this
new era.  That is exactly why this initiative is welcomed by more
and more countries in the world.”
Then the next quote I want to read to you is from the
delegate from France who will be attending, Jean-Pierre Raffarin.
He said, “I expect, with this great summit, the entire world will
learn about this project, which involves not only Central Asia,
but also West and East Asia as well as Europe and even Africa.
What I would like is a world mobilization.”
Then he went on to say, “The world is very dangerous….  In
that dangerous world, China has projects and strategies, it seeks
multilateralism, defends the UN and UNESCO and thereby
contributes to peace in a dangerous world….
“Thus, we have the vision of a world which in the process of
erecting a new framework and a new organization.  The Belt and
Road Initiative is the framework of a new world; a world that is
a grand alliance between Europe and Asia, with a grand opening
towards Africa….”  China is contributing to the connectivity of
most of the world, and is “creating links, creating relations,
and creating development.
“France and China have the same peaceful vision of the
world.  We are countries that want peace in the world in order to
have development.”
Then he made an important historical point: “Since General
de Gaulle, we have always insured that the Franco-China relation
should prevail above political parties, and the ongoing
Presidential election would not play any role in the
deterioration of those relations.  We want a good relationship;
there is consensus on that question.”
This is very significant in the aftermath of the French
Presidential elections, that it’s Jean-Pierre Raffarin who will
be attending this summit, representing France.  And the
extraordinarily positive statements that he had in terms of the
importance of the Belt and Road framework.  As he called it, “the
framework for a new world”; very much along the lines of what
Helga Zepp-LaRouche has been saying about how this is
inaugurating a New Paradigm for mankind.  Speaking on behalf of
France, but also speaking on behalf of the better impulses inside
Europe, his point about how Europe should have a very close
relationship with China in bridging Eurasia and in inaugurating
this new era of global development as the means towards peace and
stability in a very dangerous and unstable world, is exactly the
point.  It’s those kinds of statements that we would hope that
President Trump takes a page from.
What you have coming out of China, as you could see from the
statement by the Consulate General to Düsseldorf, and we had also
seen from the Consulate General to New York City at the recent
Schiller Institute conference in Manhattan about a month ago, are
repeated statements that it’s in the best interests of all
countries to join in this “win-win” cooperation with China.  That
this really is the future; and as the Consulate General to
Dusseldorf made the point, there are very few countries on the
planet right now which have the courage to think in terms of a
future vision.  Most countries are now stuck in crisis-management
mode, just trying to resolve crises as they occur; wars,
terrorism, economic collapse, famine, starvation.  When you have
a nation like China, which is able to actually think 50 years
into the future, and to inaugurate this kind of future vision,
and to invite other countries to become a part of that; that’s
something that countries should take up the opportunity to be
participants in.
There’s a very inspiring press conference that was just held
on May 8 by the head of the Chinese Rolling Stock Rail
Corporation [CRRC], and they’ve announced some exciting
initiatives in terms of new trains and new rail capabilities that
are coming out of China.  I have a little animation about that.
This is the clip from the Chinese Rolling Stock Company press
conference May 8, and the chairman, Liu Hualong, had some
exciting announcements.  He said that the CRRC is developing new
high-speed trains, capable of speeds reaching 400 kilometers per
hour [kph].  They will have the ability to change track width to
utilize different gauges found along the Belt and Road; and it’s
these different track gauges that remain the greatest bottleneck
in rapid transit along the routes of the Silk Road.  And, they
have announced that CRRC is working on a maglev capable of
achieving speeds of 600 kph; which would make the 1100-km trip
between Shanghai and Beijing something that you can achieve in
less than two hours.  So, this is a very exciting new initiative
from China; and it’s this kind of thing that the Silk Road and
the World Land-Bridge would bring to the entire world.  If you
think about what China has been able to accomplish in just the
last ten years in terms of high-speed rail connectivity inside
China — which has lifted 500 million people out of poverty, as
Secretary Rex Tillerson very aptly made the point during his
speech to the State Department just last week that we covered
extensively on our webcast here last Friday.
This is the opportunity that the United States has to
participate in.  When Donald Trump talks about $1 trillion for
infrastructure, we should compare the state of infrastructure in
the United States to the state of infrastructure in China.  It’s
these kinds of high-speed rail projects and so forth, that we
would be very well advised to initiate in the United States with
direct collaboration in investment and know-how from China.
A colleague of mine found a very inspiring and entertaining
video that was just issued by China, with quotes from President
Xi Jinping where he discusses why he initiated the New Silk Road,
or the Belt and Road Initiative in the first place.  It goes
through some wonderful examples of how different areas of the
world are being lifted up by these great projects that are
spin-offs and initiatives from the New Silk Road.  So, I just
want to play this five-minute video for you right now, and allow
you to be inspired by it.

[BEGIN VIDEO, subtitles are transcribed]
President Xi Jinping:  Why I proposed the Belt and Road

The world is watching China as it gets ready to host the
Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in mid-May
2017.
PRESIDENT XI JINPING: While visiting Kazakhstan and
Indonesia in 2013, I proposed jointly building the Silk Road
Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk road, respectively.
Shaanxi, my home province, is situated at the starting point of
the ancient Silk Road.  Standing here and looking back on
history, I feel I can hear the sound of camel bells ringing in
the mountains and see plumes of smoke rising over the desert.
This all feels so familiar.  Since ancient times, peaceful
development has been a shared goal of mankind.

[Captions:]
War
Famine
Wealth Gap
Economic Recession

XI: Today’s world is filled with uncertainties.  People have
hopes for the future, but at the same time, feel perplexed.

[Caption:] Some lands once prosperous and bustling are now
synonymous with difficulty, conflict and crisis.

XI: What has become of the world? What should we do?  The
whole world is pondering over these questions and I am thinking
of them all the time.

[Captions:]
Policy Connectivity
Trade Connectivity
Infrastructure Connectivity

XI: I proposed the Belt and Road Initiative in the hope that
with a focus on connectivity, the free and convenient flow of all
elements of production will be encouraged, multidimensional
cooperation platforms developed, and mutual gains and shared
development achieved.
The Belt and Road Initiative draws inspirations from the
ancient Silk Road, and aims to help realize the shared dream of
people worldwide for peace and development.
Shining with the wisdom from the East, it is a plan that
China offers the world for seeking common prosperity and
development.
The Belt and Road Initiative is based on the principles of
extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits.

[Caption:]
Uzbekistan: Qamchiq Tunnel, Part of the Angren-Pap Railway
Line

XI: It is not exclusive, but open and inclusive.  The
initiative will not be a solo for China, but a chorus of all
countries along the routes.

[Captions:]
Belarus: China-Belarus Great Stone Industrial Park
China-Russia Cooperation Projects
Maldives: China-Maldives Friendship Bridge
Malaysia: Sea Freight
Greece: Piraeus Port
Sri Lanka: Puttalam Coal Power Plant
Britain: China-Europe Freight Trains
Ethiopia-Djibouti: Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway
Kazakhstan: Light Railway Transportation System in Astana

XI: For more than three years, over 100 countries and
international organizations have responded positively and offered
support for the initiative.
The “friend circle” of the initiative has kept widening.

[Captions:]
Fiji: Nabouwalu-Dreketi Highway
Pakistan: Karakoram Highway

XI: A great cause should be pursued for common good.  Let us
more closely join hands in forging new partnerships characterized
by win-win cooperation and build a community of shared future for
mankind.
History is made by the brave.  Let us show confidence, take
action and forge ahead, hand in hand.
[Caption:]
“Belt and Road”
[END VIDEO]

OGDEN: …Now obviously, this is a wonderful and inspiring
vision of a new era for mankind, and that era means the end of
the British Empire world, the era of divide-and-conquer, of
colonialism, of enforced poverty, backwardness, lack of
development.  It’s an entirely new concept of what the world can
share in terms of progress, prosperity, development and peace.
And, as we know, and as we reported extensively, there is an
unrelenting assault against not only those countries that have
initiated this vision of a new world, China, others who are
participating in this, but there is an unrelenting assault
against President Donald Trump in the United States, for even his
willingness to consider, that this would be something that the
United States could participate in, and to usher in a new
relationship between the United States and China, and especially
the United States and Russia.  That would be his willingness to
overturn this geopolitical world that has reigned since the
conclusion of World War II, with the United States-U.K. “special
relationship” in a war against these developed and developing
countries.
Now, a very significant development has occurred just in the
last two days along those lines, and it has definitely occurred
among a tumultuous political situation in Washington, D.C.  But
perhaps the most significant development, aside from all of the
media hysteria around the firing of James Comey, and Trump’s
decision to remove the Acting Director of the FBI, was the fact
that on that very day, Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Lavrov
made a visit to the White House, where initially he was scheduled
to only meet with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on his way to
the Arctic Council ministerial in Alaska, but at the very last
minute, it was announced that President Trump would be in on that
meeting with Sergey Lavrov.
And we don’t have the direct transcript yet, but we do have
some paraphrases of the reports of that discussion, and I’m going
to read you a few of the very significant statements that were
made by Sergey Lavrov.  And you can see, that despite the
concerted efforts to drive a wedge between the United States and
Russia, and to try to disrupt this thawing of relations and the
potential for a collaborative relationship, this is moving
forward steadily.
What Sergey Lavrov said is that the United States and Russia
can and should contribute to a settlement in Syria and that this
is moving along well.  He said: All government and opposition
parties will be constructive in the next Geneva meeting.  Now, he
was questioned as to why U.S. and Russia relations had sunk to
such a low level, and this is a quote from Sergey Lavrov [as
interpreted]: “The previous Administration bent over backwards to
undermine the solid foundation of our relations. Now we have to
start from a very low level between Russia and America.”
He went on: It is clear “the Obama Administration in its
last days in power resorted to petty actions against both our
property and our diplomats. … The President of the Russian
Federation Vladimir Putin [is] … not going to follow those who
are trying to destroy our relations. I hope we will be able to
resolve the situation without our relations deteriorating.”
And he went on to say: “The dialogue between Russia and the
U.S. is now free from the ideology that characterized it under
the Barack Obama Administration. … U.S. President Donald Trump,
his Administration, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson are the
kind of people who want to maintain a dialogue not as a means of
demonstrating what they can achieve in the area of ideological
preferences, but rather as a means of solving particular
issues….”  [https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6082]
And then he said, that “The presidents reaffirmed during
their recent telephone conversation that they would meet on the
sidelines of the G20 meeting in Germany in the first 10 days of
July” and that meanwhile discussions will be continuing at a very
high level with Secretary Rex Tillerson.
And as I reported, just today now, following that meeting,
Secretary Tillerson and Minister Lavrov are meeting on the
sidelines of the Arctic Council Ministerial in Alaska, and
they’re discussing what has been characterized as the “Arctic
Silk Road.”  So this is yet one more aspect of the connectivity
of the world, as we’ve repeatedly made the point, and that should
absolutely include the extension of the Eurasian Land-Bridge
across the Bering Strait to become the World Silk Road, with rail
connectivity between the Americas and Eurasia.
But look, this kind of very high-level and very friendly
dialogue that occurred at the White House on Wednesday, during
the whole hoopla around Comey and so forth, is exactly what this
British coup attempt has been trying to derail, against Trump, to
try to derail this potential for a warm and collaborative
relationship between the United States and Russia.  And it really
is an all-out battle for the future of the U.S. Presidency, and
for the future of what will come of these great potentials, in
terms of this cooperative relationship between the United States
and these other countries around the world, and an abandonment of
this Obama-era regime change ideology.
So, finally, what we have for you tonight is two clips from
a very timely and I think important interview between {EIR}
Contributing Editor Will Wertz and Virginia State Senator Dick
Black.  And Senator Black, as you’ll see from these two short
clips had had a very unique, ground-floor view of this fight,
particularly some of the leading parties involves and in
particular Andrew McCabe  who is now Acting Director of the FBI,
who succeeding James Comey after he was fired by President Donald
Trump.
[https://larouchepac.com/20170511/fbi-s-mccabe-attacks-anti-
isis-senator]
So I’m just going to play two very short clips from that
interview, back to back.  And then we’ll come back and I’ll let
you know what you can expect from LaRouche PAC in the coming
days.

[BEGIN VIDEO]
WILLIAM WERTZ:  So, if you look at this, you opposed Obama’s
policy of regime change, which was also backed by the British,
the French, the former colonial powers in Syria, let alone,
Libya, Egypt, and so forth.  So the point here is, what we’re
talking about here is your letter to Assad was posted on his
website — this was back on May 28, 2014.  Soon after that you
get visitations from the FBI, in a very fishy operation, and at
least two of those agents are coming from the Washington, D.C.
field office which is run by Andrew McCabe.  This is ten months
before his wife is recruited, in a meeting that he attends, with
[then Virginia Gov. Terry] McAuliffe, to run against you.
So the point here that I would like to raise is, whereas
some has looked at this from the standpoint merely of, there was
sort of an agreement here that she was backed to run involving a
conflict of interest in which then Andrew McCabe ends up involved
in various cases involving Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party
and eventually against Donald Trump; but the point that I would
make is, that you had identified yourself as an opponent to the
policy which was being carried out by the Obama administration
and by the FBI, the CIA and the State Department in terms of
regime change and the promotion of terrorists.

SEN. RICHARD BLACK:  Well and worldwide, I was the first one
to break the wall of silence.  Since then, we have Rep. Tulsi
Gabbard, we have Sen. Rand Paul, we have several who have come
out and who have taken a stand; our own Virginia Rep. Tom
Garrett.  But up until this time there was total censorship.  It
was wartime censorship, it was censorship that was the equivalent
of what we saw in the Second World War, when we were at war.
We’re not at war, and yet, we have this same type of censorship
going on.  And I think there was a feeling that this individual,
this Senator from Virginia has to be just beaten into dust as an
example to the world that if you dare to stand up and to tell the
truth about what we’re doing in Syria, and in other countries,
then you’re going to be crushed, your life is going to be
destroyed. …

WERTZ:  Now in that same time period when you endorsed, now
President Trump, there were two interventions into the U.S.
political scene, by British intelligence.  The first was a
dossier that was compiled by an MI6 British intelligence officer,
Christopher Steele.  And the indications are that he actually
worked on this dossier, after being paid by the Clinton campaign,
Hillary Clinton’s campaign, to present this dossier.  One of the
issues that Senator Grassley has raised is — this was reported
in the {Washington Post} — the FBI was prepared to pay
Christopher Steele to continue his research to try to prove that
Trump was somehow working with the Russians.

SENATOR BLACK:  Amazing that the FBI was involved in paying
for opposition research.  Now, I’ve done a little opposition
research:  You know, we paid companies and of course it’s been
done on us, endlessly.  But, I’ve read a little bit about the
dossier and if I paid someone and he gave me that, I would be so
furious, because it is so transparently fallacious.  It’s just
ridiculous!  You know, unbelievable the things that he says. It
has no air of credibility in my view, from my experience, and
I’ve seen a lot of this stuff before.  I think it was a total
creation….
[END VIDEO]

OGDEN:  So as you can see that is a very explosive story and
it’s one that will continue to develop, especially now that
McCabe is right in the spotlight.  He was, in fact, one of the
testifying witnesses at a Senate committee hearing just
yesterday, which originally Jim Comey was supposed to be involved
in.
So you can watch for more developments on that, and I think
that’s a unique view from on the ground of what, really, this
grouping has been willing to engage in in terms of activities, to
try to enforce the fact that there can be no breaking, there can
be nobody calling this for what it is.
So to conclude, I would just like to announce that we will
have a new petition, available for you to sign on LaRouche PAC.
The title is “We Agree with Senator Grassley: Suck It Up, Move
On, Let’s Rebuild the Country!” And this goes through the fact
that Donald Trump was elected, not because of Russian
interference but because in fact, the American people have been
beaten down and have become desperate in terms of the economic
collapse that they’ve been subjected to, over not just the last
eight years, but over the last fifteen years and even more; that
he spoke to that; and that they were also against the insane
regime change agenda, to try to drive a wedge between these great
powers that should be collaborating for the mutual benefit and
stability of world peace, not at each other’s throats in terms of
thermonuclear war, and potential for setting off World War III.
That this was rejected, and in fact, the logical consequence
of that overturning the geopolitical applecart would be for the
United States to reciprocate President Xi Jinping’s offer and use
the opportunity for this Belt and Road Forum this May 14-15,
which we can announce the happy news, there will be an official
U.S. delegation attending that Forum in person, to use the
opportunity of that to inaugurate an entirely new era, a new
framework for international relations, a new paradigm of peace,
economic development, stability and mutually beneficial relations
among nations.
So please stay tuned to larouchepac.com over the coming 24,
48, 72 hours:  A lot is going to change between now and the
beginning of next week.  And we, I think as we’ve demonstrated,
uniquely, are your unique source for the real news about what’s
happening around the world and in fact, you can participate in
helping us change the course of world history.
Please sign up for http://www.larouchepac.com.  If you have
not, already, go to the LaRouche PAC Action Center; also sign up
for the daily email updates.  You will receive this updates in
your in-box, and please subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Thank you very much for tuning in today, and we look forward
to seeing you again, soon.  Good night.




USA annoncerer delegation til
Verdenshistorisk topmøde i Beijing.
LaRouche PAC Internationale
Webcast, 12. maj, 2017.
(dansk uddrag følger senere)

Med lidt over 24 timer tilbage til åbningen af Bælt & Vej Forum i Beijing, har USA officielt annonceret, at en delegation vil deltage som repræsentant for USA og Trump-administrationen. Aftenens webcast fremlægger flere spændende og hurtige udviklinger, med vores verden, der er i færd med at blive transformeret af en vision om win-win-samarbejde og fred gennem udvikling, som de britiske imperialister så desperat har forsøgt at køre af sporet, inklusive med et igangværende politisk kupforsøg imod Trump-administrationen.

Se afsnittet med kinesiske video med Xi Jinping, dansk udskrift, engelske undertekster, her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=19502

Se uddrag af webcast i oversættelse, her:

 

 

 




Latinamerikas fremtid ligger
på den Nye Silkevej.
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Zepp-LaRouches videopræsentation til en konference, »Latinamerikas fremtid ligger på Silkevejen«, 4. maj, 2017. Fr. Zepp-LaRouche udvikler her en dramatisk vision om økonomisk »win-win-samarbejde«, der kan løfte hvert eneste menneske ud af fattigdom; og om den Ny Silkevejspolitiks potentiale for at udløse menneskelig kreativitet på hele planeten, der kan skabe en ny, kulturel renæssance.

Helgas tale blev vist ved møder, der var samlet i Mexico City, Hermosillo og Querétaro (i Mexico); i Lima og Pucallpa (i Peru); og i Guatemala City, og blev ligeledes udsendt live over Internettet.

Engelsk udskrift:

Dear Friends of the Schiller Institute,

I will speak to you about the “Future of Ibero-America Lies in the New Silk Road,” and I want to send you my most heartfelt greetings, watching the video in Peru, Guatemala, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, the United States, and maybe elsewhere.

We are only eight days away from an event which will make clear to the whole world that the world is changing, that we are already in the process of developing a completely new paradigm, that of the New Silk Road, otherwise called the Belt and Road Initiative. In Beijing, between the 14th and 15th of May a summit will take place. Already 28 heads of state, or 28 nations have agreed to attend, and those heads of state include those of Argentina and Chile, but also there will be high-level representatives and delegates from 110 nations, altogether 1,200 delegates; there will be 60 international organizations represented. And they will sign in the context of this summit, 20 cooperation agreements between China and 20 countries into a document which then will define the goals and principles, and specify cooperation; it will develop an international new platform on science, technology, exchanges and training of talent among the participating countries.

This Belt and Road Forum will be an historic event. It will be the consolidation of a process which started three years and eight months ago, when President Xi Jinping in Kazakhstan announced the New Silk Road. And in this period, the true conception of “win-win cooperation” among altogether almost 70 nations, has become a reality, where it is clear that no longer is this a zero-sum game where one has advantage and the other one suffers, but this is a true “win-win cooperation,” where each country is having equal benefits from such cooperations.

Now the significance in this conception of the Belt and Road Initiative which is open to all nations of the world, including the United States and the European nations, even though they are still not so clearly in favor of it, or at least it’s a mixed situation, the significance of this concept lies in the fact that for the first time in human history, it overcomes geopolitics — geopolitics which was the cause of two world wars in the 20th century — because it establishes a higher level of reason, and since it’s open to every country, it can reach into the farthest corner of the world.

Since this program has been put on the agenda by Xi Jinping it has led to an unbelievable explosion of development, absolutely unprecedented in history. China has signed more than 130 bilateral and regional transport agreements. It opened 356 international road routes, for both passengers and freight; there are now 4,200 direct flights connecting China with 43 Belt and Road countries; there are presently already 39 China-Europe freight train routes; currently, there is daily leaving such a cargo train from Chongqing to a European destination.

There are in the meantime, six major industrial development corridors, and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. These corridors not only are, one, a corridor from China to Central and Western Asia which is intended to be extended through Iraq, Syria, Turkey, into Europe and into Africa; there is a second corridor from China to Western Europe which goes from such cities as Chengdu, Chongqing, Yiwu, Lianyungang, going to Duisburg, Hamburg, Rotterdam, Lyon, and Madrid. There is thirdly the Mongolia- China-Russia corridor which involves 32 large projects. There is fourthly, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), where China has invested $46 billion and this project is creating 700,000 new jobs in Pakistan. There is the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) corridor, which bridging the whole region of Southeast Asia. Then you have the China-Indochina Peninsular corridor, and you have in the meantime the development of an entire railway network in Eastern and Central Africa.

This is unprecedented in human history, because after literally centuries of suffering colonialism and poverty and underdevelopment, for the very first time, through this Chinese initiative is the perspective for the developing countries to overcome poverty, hunger, underdevelopment and realize the true potential of all these countries.

Well, it is most astounding, but then, not so astounding if you think about it, that about this greatest infrastructure project in all of history, there is almost nothing being reported in the mainstream media, at least in the United States and in Western Europe. The mainstream media, with very few exceptions such as for example Forbes magazine, they had a six-part series about the potential of the New Silk Road, all the other mainstream media pretend it doesn’t exist. So the populations of Europe and the United States know very little about it, and once they realize it, mainly through our efforts, the efforts of the Schiller Institute, they realize that this is a tremendous potential also for their future. And mostly people get extremely angry that they have been deprived of this knowledge.

Now, it is very clear that the old forces of the old paradigm, the paradigm of geopolitics, a system based on so-called globalization which emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and which was and is based on the “special relationship” between the British and the United States, this system which was based on profit for the rich, making the gap between the rich and poor ever wider, a system which is now specifically now aiming to overcome poverty in the whole world and have a “win-win” relationship among equal nations with equal rights, equal respect for their sovereignty, these old geopoliticians regard this new system as a complete threat to their existence. So they try to maintain the illusion that it does not exist.

Just today appeared a very interesting article by Robert Parry, who is an investigative journalist in the United States, who became rather famous because of his coverage of the Iran/Contra affair; he wrote an article with the title, “The Existential Question of Whom To Trust.” And he says, “The looming threat of World War III, a potential extermination event for the human species, is made more likely because the world’s public can’t count on supposedly objective experts to ascertain and evaluate facts. Instead, careerism is the order of the day among journalists, intelligence analysts and international monitors — meaning that almost no one who might normally be relied on to tell the truth can be trusted.” He says, and I fully agree with that, what replaces objective reporting is “groupthink,” where experts “have sold themselves to … powerful interests in order to keep high-paying jobs and … don’t even seem to recognize how far they’ve drifted from principled professionalism.”

Well, that will not help them, because the positive alternative of the Belt and Road Initiative does exist and it is also the remedy to the two existential crises facing human civilization at this point: First, the danger of a global nuclear war, which is now most obvious in the crisis around the two Koreas, and naturally, still to a certain extent the situation in Syria; and secondly, the danger of an uncontrolled crash possibly to occur this year, which if it would occur would lead to uncontrollable chaos out of which the danger of a nuclear war would arise as well.

Let’s briefly look at the second danger. On July 25th, 2007, my husband, Lyndon LaRouche made truly history forecast: He said, this present global financial system is hopelessly finished and all which you will see now is that the different elements will come to the surface. And it will not be resolved until you have complete, total reorganization of this bankrupt system through a number of measures, Glass-Steagall, a return to a credit system and the American System of economy.

Exactly one week later, the secondary mortgage crisis in the United States erupted, which then, since it was not dealt with by the measures which LaRouche proposed, escalated into the big financial crash of Lehman Brothers and AIG in September 2008.

At that point, for a very short period of time, actually some days and weeks, the leaders of trans-Atlantic world were absolutely convinced this was a systemic crisis, and some of them, like Sarkozy of France, even called for a New Bretton Woods, because they were so scared that this whole system may disintegrate. Unfortunately, this shock lasted not very long, and already at the next G20 meeting in Washington on Nov. 15, of the same year, they basically decided to paper it over, go for quantitative easing and use other so-called “tools” of the instruments of the central banks in the United States rather than going for the Glass-Steagall separation law of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which my husband has prescribed, they went into Dodd-Frank, which basically was just a cover-story to keep the high-risk speculation of the big banks going.

In the meantime, the central banks of Europe, the ECB, of Great Britain, Japan, and the Federal Reserve decided to go into quantitative easing, and they created $15 trillion in lending facilities to the too-big-to-fail banks, and that added a de facto zero-interest rate since about 10 years. They spent part of this money for so-called bail-out packages, which supposedly went to countries like Greece, but in reality 97% of these bail-out packages went back to the to the big European banks and the American banks.

In the United States this liquidity pumping increased for example, so that corporate debt rose from 2008 to today, from $8 to $14 trillion; that is, an increase of 75%, of which almost $9 are in commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS). Since 2013, 80% of the corporate borrowing has been used for, not productive investment, but so-called “financial engineering.” Now, that is, corporate firms buy up their own stocks to drive up the price, or they’re buying other firms in so-called mergers & acquisitions (M&As) for the same effect. They are using $500 billion per year into driving up those stock indexes, while at the same time, betting on the derivatives of these manipulations.

Despite all of this, the total non-financial corporation profits have not increased since 2011 and started to fall since 2013. Morgan Stanley just put out a report in April that the ratio of non-financial corporate debt to cash from operations is at an all-time high, at a ratio of 3.2 to 1.

Now, with this situation, where the debt is going through the roof relative to the operating cash, and profits are declining, normally, what firms used to do, is to go to the banks and borrow more, but this is now no longer happening, because the banks stopped giving credit because they know this whole system is coming to an end and it’s not maintainable.

Just at the recent meeting of the IMF in Washington, they put out a 2017 Global Financial Stability Report, where they basically wrote that the U.S. debt service to income ratio of the non-financial corporations has gone up 37% in 2014, to 41% in 2016; and those corporations have $7 trillion more debt than in 2008, but $3 trillion less equity invested in them. As a result, a wave of defaults has already started. The default rate for the non-financial corporations jumped from 3% at the beginning of 2016, to 5% at the end, and it is expected to be 5.6% in June. The IMF warns that if the interest rates go up, as they did in the period from November to January, then 20% of all U.S. corporations could default. Now, that is higher than the highest mortgage default rate in the crash of 2008.

Now, this gigantic bubble of corporate debt is made more unpayable because of the complete lack of growth in the real economy. The miserable 0.7% growth which was published about the GDP in the United States — and remember that the GDP statistics are always manipulated, and every knowledgeable person in Europe, for example, makes jokes about it — it went up only 0.7% in the first quarter of this year, and that does not pay for this huge bubble.

But the problem is not only in the United States, it’s also in Europe. Just recently, the Italian Banking Association put out the figures of the Level3 derivatives in the European countries, where the highest ratio is in Germany, it was 25.5%; British banks, 25.4%; French banks, 20.5%. And Italy, which is always scolded for having the biggest commercial losses, has only 15%. Now, Level3 derivatives are derivatives which don’t have a market price because nobody wants to buy them, because people know they are completely toxic. So they are assets collateralized with debt and therefore pretty worthless, but the ECB has allowed the banks to price them according to their own bank model and count them as assets. In the recent stress tests of the European central banks, they left out Level3 assets, so this is a complete illusion which is being maintained because an admission would basically reveal the complete bankruptcy of the system.

Now, there is only one way to prevent a chaotic blowout, and that is the implementation of the Glass-Steagall law which Franklin D. Roosevelt implemented in 1933. And the good thing is that there are presently two legislations in both Houses of the U.S. Congress, and also the head of the National Economic Council Gary Cohn, recently told a group of senators that the Trump administration is absolutely committed to realize Glass-Steagall soon, and that President Trump will fulfill his election promise to go for Glass-Steagall. As a result, there is presently a flood of articles in the last three weeks attacking Glass-Steagall, saying it would not have solved the problem of 2008 — which is a complete lie — and obviously, this expresses the complete nervousness of Wall Street and the City of London because it would bankrupt them and curb their power down to size.

Now, contrary to the asset-based economy of the United States, and partially of Europe, where you have a huge diversity between the different EU members and therefore the whole Eurozone does not function, where basically the situation is completely unsustainable as well, China on the other side, in the first quarter of 2017 had a surprisingly high GDP of 6.9%. All the agencies, like Bloomberg, PricewaterhouseCoopers and others all agree that the primary driver of this Chinese economic growth is the extraordinary investment in infrastructure, both in China domestically, as well as in the Belt and Road countries. For example, Chinese factory output in the same period has been 7.6% in the first quarter also. Household disposable income went up by 7.5%; retail spending up 10.4%. There was a study of PricewaterhouseCoopers in February which said that the great projects of infrastructure grew in the last year already by 50% in value, and there is a new study by the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research that, based on physical economic factors such as the illumination seen by night from space, that the Chinese economy is actually growing faster than even the Chinese government reports.

Xinhua reported that the goods trade between China and the Belt and Road countries went up by 26.2% in the first quarter. Chinese exports to Belt and Road countries went up by 15.8% in the first three months. Imports to China went up by 42.9% from the 60 countries of the Belt and Road. There are 781 new companies with investments in the Belt and Road countries that have sprung up. Chinese enterprises signed 952 contracts in 61 countries along the Belt and Road.

So the Chinese economy and the Belt and Road Initiative has long become the real engine of the world economy.

So for the United States to come out its present financial danger, there is only one way out, and that is to implement the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche: First, Glass-Steagall. Separate the commercial and the investment banks, write off the unpayable debt and toxic paper of the investment banks, put the commercial banks under protection. Then, go to a credit system in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton, implement a National Bank; and increase the productivity of the economy by having a massive investment in fusion technology and space cooperation, and other vanguard technologies to increase the productivity of the labor force.

Now, this could be massively helped by the Chinese cooperating with America on the Belt and Road Initiative which has been offered by President Xi Jinping, at the recent Florida summit with President Trump.

Now Trump has said he wants to invest $1 trillion into infrastructure in the United States. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimated that the real need of infrastructure is $4.5 trillion, but Chinese experts estimated that what the United States really would need is $8 trillion worth of infrastructure. And China could easily help America to rebuild its infrastructure because they have an extraordinary expertise from having done the Belt and Road project for the last three and a half years. China also has offered, already, to invest its $1.4 trillion they’re holding in U.S. Treasuries. If this would be channeled, let’s say, through either an infrastructure bank in the United States or a National Bank in the tradition of Hamilton, this could help to revive the American economy.

Now, the same goes for European nations: They urgently need Chinese investment, because the EU has not been providing it, and that is why right now, you have the complete turning around of European nations — they want to be part of the New Silk Road. For example: Greece, Serbia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Belarus, but also Italy, Portugal — they have already all stated they want to become “hubs” of the New Silk Road. So there is a complete change of the wind, representing the potential to really realize this fantastic new perspective.

However, the second existential crisis, the danger of nuclear war, now, it is obviously centered right now very massively around the North Korea crisis. Again, there, the solution will be the integration of the two Koreas into the New Silk Road. But it is extremely dangerous. Pope Francis just put out a statement saying “the situation has become too hot,” that the world is at the brink of war, and he said, “We are talking about the future of humanity. Today, a widespread war would destroy — I would not say half of humanity — but a good part of humanity, and of culture, everything, everything. It would be terrible. I don’t think that humanity today would be able to withstand it.”

Now, if you study the logic of thermonuclear war, the danger is not half of humanity, the danger is that it could lead to the extermination of all life, of all human life on this planet.

This danger is the result of the old geopolitical manipulation, because the situation in Korea is not unsolvable at all. Already in the ’90s and again in 2002, we were very close to establishing a permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea, at that time, in the ’90s, had signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT); they agreed not to build a nuclear weapons plant, and in return they were allowed to build a peaceful nuclear energy facility. Then, at a certain point the U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry in the Clinton Administration was convinced that Pyongyang was diverting plutonium and he was actively considering the option to take out the [North Korean] Yongbyon plant in a surgical strike. At that point, the former President Jimmy Carter went to Pyongyang and met with North Korean leader Kim Il-sung and they reached an agreement which was supported by the Clinton administration, South Korea, North Korea, with the support of China, Japan and Russia, and they called this the Agreed Framework, which included the idea that North Korea would take down its Yongbyon plant in exchange for which the U.S. helping North Korea build a full-scale 1000 MW nuclear plant; and they also began to provide North Korea with oil until this plant was ready. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) went there and started to monitor, and there were pledges that they would move very quickly towards a peace agreement surpassing the armistice which still existed — and still exists.

But then unfortunately the Clinton administration came to its end, and was replaced by the Bush and Cheney administration, which immediately started this talk which we know only too well from the present days, that they couldn’t work with a “brutal dictator,” and not cooperate. So basically, this already put a cloud over this whole project. But still, in 2002, South Korean President Kim Dae-jung adopted the “Iron Silk Road” which had initially been proposed by Lyndon LaRouche, who had always maintained that the way to solve the Korea crisis is with the New Silk Road: That you have to build the railroads from Busan at the southern tip of south Korea, through North Korea, all the way to Rotterdam. And once you have South Korean and North Korean engineers working together building railways, that the real basis for peace could be established.

Now the two railroads started to be built, but also one of them going from Seoul via Kaesong to the old Silk Road, the Chinese railway; and one was supposed to go up the east coast to North Korea and then link up in Vladivostok with the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Also in 2002, in the village of Kaesong, they started to build an industrial park, where South Korean companies deployed very high-skilled North Korean labor to build up industries, set up factories and things actually went along very well. Also, there were Six-Party Talks supporting this Sunshine Policy of the South Korean President.

At that time, Bush and Cheney reluctantly went along with it, but all the time kept nagging North Korea as cheating, “don’t believe them,” and so forth. At a certain point, the Six Party Talks ended, and when Obama came in, and started his “Asia pivot” policy, which was not aimed at North Korea, but really aimed to isolate China, and in encircle it, they started to build up military forces aimed against China.

So under the pressure from President Obama very recently, South Korean President Park Heun-hye cancelled the Kaesong industrial park and agreed to the deployment of THAAD missiles, and these Terminal High Altitude Area Deployment missiles, again, are not deployed against North Korea, but aimed at China and Russia: Because North Korea is only 30 miles away from Seoul, and they don’t need to send ICBMs into space to then hit Seoul 30 miles away because North Korea has sufficient artillery to accomplish the same aim; but these THAAD missiles have X-band radar which can see deeply into the territory of China and Russia, which is why both countries have named these THAAD missiles as an existential threat to their national security.

This is a very dangerous situation, because if North Korea would strike Seoul, all of North Korea would be wiped out in return, the entire North Korean leadership would be killed as has been stated by many forces around the United States, and the population of Seoul would be wiped out very clearly also. If this war would escalate, it would clearly have the potential to escalate to Japan, to the United States and also lead to a global nuclear war.

Now, that danger is presently absolutely real. The only sign of hope, is that since the summit between President Trump and President Xi Jinping in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, where a very positive working relationship and almost friendship has been developed between these two Presidents, this summit has been called by the Chinese a “complete success”; Secretary of State Tillerson has said this has absolutely enhanced mutual trust and both have stated that their common aim is the de-nuclearization of Korea; that they want to resolve the situation through a peaceful dialogue.

Now that requires, also, that the recent Chinese proposal to have a so-called “double suspension,” meaning a suspension of the missiles and nuclear tests on the side of north Korea; and a suspension of the joint military drills on the side of South Korea and the United States on the other side. Russia has completely supported this Chinese policy of double suspension. That would be the first step.

What is needed then, is a comprehensive approach of the New Paradigm, of “double suspension,” to include North Korea in the Belt and Road Initiative, integrate the Sunshine Policy with the New Silk Road and the key to it is the collaboration between Xi Jinping and Trump. It can absolutely work, because there are elections on May 9th in South Korea, where the likely winner already came out against the THAAD deployment, so the hurried deployment now makes absolutely no sense; also, in the recent month, the relationship between Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan with Putin of Russia has absolutely increased and positively developed, where you have joint Russian-Japanese investments in the Far East of Russia, and therefore, the elements of a solution are absolutely there.

What has to be put on the agenda, therefore, is the “Greater Tumen Region Development project, which we also represented in the World Land-Bridge report. This is a regional development project involving the Greater Tumen Initiative, a development project which would build up the entire border region between China, Russia, Mongolia, North Korea, and South Korea, and develop the entire region around it, around the Tumen River which is the border between China and North Korea; and North Korea was a part of this project, until 1993, at least in its initial forms.

So, what has all of this today with the future of Latin America, and the my speech has, that “The Future of Latin America Lies in the New Silk Road”?

Now, I personally believe for a very long time, that the great German mind, and philosopher, and statesman, and natural scientist, Nikolaus of Cusa was absolutely right, when he, already in the 15th century, said that the solution to fundamental problems cannot be in partial remedies, but that you have to find a level of the solution which establishes a higher level of reason which he called the “coincidence of opposites,” or the coincidentia oppositorum. You have to establish a level of reason where the One has a higher reality than the Many, and that is exactly the “win-win cooperation” of the Belt and Road Initiative today.

Now, in the age of nuclear weapons, of the internet, of air travel which can bring you in a few hours to every part of the globe, the world has become a very small place. And unlike in previous periods, where you had one culture going under and some other culture at some other part of the world didn’t even know about it, because it would take years to travel from one region to the next, this time, we are sitting in one boat, and therefore, people have to start to think strategically and not think that the financial crisis of the trans-Atlantic sector, or the North Korea crisis is something alien to them, but that we have to solve all of these problems simultaneously, or else there will be no solution for anybody.

Now the only way for Latin American countries to solve the problem of the drug epidemic which is haunting some countries in an existential way; or of poverty, or of underdevelopment, is to revive the development plan of Lyndon LaRouche, which he called in 1982 Operation Juárez, when he worked with President José López Portillo to integrate all of Latin America in one large infrastructure-integrated network. This is possible to be realized today, and it is possible, because of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

What we have to do, is we have to build a fast train system connecting the southern tip of Latin America in Chile and Argentina, going all the way up north, through Central America, North America, to the tip of Alaska, connecting through the Bering Strait Tunnel with Siberia, and in that way linking the trans-American transport corridor with the trans-European-Eurasian infrastructure network.

The infrastructure offered by China is already going in this direction. China has offered financing and help in the construction of the Bi-Oceanic Railroad, which you will hear about in the next presentation, which will be a railroad between Brazil and Peru, and another route through Bolivia; China is presently already building a science city in Ecuador, where at the recent state visit of President Xi Jinping in Lima, and Ecuador, and Chile last fall, attended a joint meeting with the former President of Ecuador President Correa in which both stated the intention that very soon China and Ecuador will be on the top of science and technology, representing the state-of-the-art in these areas. Now, this is a very ambitious and very hopeful intention.

Also, the fact that Chilean President Michelle Bachelet will go to the Belt and Road Forum and then add a state visit in China to that, represents the potential of bringing all of these projects a big step forward. The former Ambassador to China from Chile Fernando Reyes Matta said the world leaders who are attending the Belt and Road Forum are betting on the future. He said: Should we think from Latin America about linking with the One Belt and Road if it will have the same effect as the Marshall Plan on Europe? Well, the answer is obviously, yes, because the Belt and Road Initiative is already now twelve times larger than the Marshall Plan was in its time, and it is open- ended and it can be extended without a limit.

Now this fantastic economic development perspective also has, and must have a cultural dimension to it. At the recent Ancient Civilizations Forum in Greece, where the foreign ministers of ten countries that have long, old cultures attended, among them, were the foreign minister of Bolivia, of Mexico, and Peru, all countries which had a very proud, ancient tradition, they were intending to revive this old culture, in order to connect it to the ambition of the future. Because it is necessary for this whole project to succeed, that we revive the best traditions of each nation on this planet, of each culture, and then have a dialogue, so that each nation knows about and finds out about the treasures what actually universal history has accomplished to this present point.

If we have an economic “win-win cooperation,” it will uplift every human being out of poverty, it will unleash the tremendous potential of human creativity, and it will lead, I am absolutely certain, to a new cultural Renaissance. Where people in Latin America must absolutely know about, that we as a human species as a whole are on the verge of a completely decisive branching point in human history: That the New Silk Road allows for a completely New Paradigm, where for example, the old idea that earning virtual money, money figures which could disappear from your bank account instantly, once you have a financial crash, and what you never owned because it was always virtual, you can also never lose, that this wrong idea will be replaced by the concept of a meaningful life where each person can unfold the totality of his or her creative potential; and something which was only possible for a very few individuals in history, such geniuses as Dante, Kepler, Einstein, Schiller, Vernadsky, Beethoven, but very few people could reach that level of personal creativity, because people up to now were so burden by having to earn their livelihood, by the constraints of managing their daily lives, that they could not fulfill this potential. Now this will be possible to change and we will have a society, increasingly, on our planet, where more and more people, and eventually all people can be truly human by developing all potentials they have embedded in them.

So provided we can solve the two existential crises I mentioned, we are really looking at a very bright future. If Latin America would link up with the Belt and Road Initiative this potential can be realized for all of us in a very short period of time.




I dag er Sejrsdag

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 9. maj, 2017 – Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin talte ikke alene for det russiske folk, men for hele menneskeheden, da han holdt en tale efter en militærparade i Moskva for at fejre, at det er 72 år siden, man vandt sejren i den Store Patriotiske Krig 1941-45, som i Rusland er navnet på Anden Verdenskrig.

»Denne sejrstriumf over denne forfærdelige, totalitære magt vil for altid fremstå i menneskehedens historie som livets og fornuftens overlegne sejr over død og barbariskhed«, fremførte Putin. Han fastslog, at den »uhyrlige tragedie« med millioner af dødsfald skete på grund af »den kriminelle ideologi med raceoverlegenhed, og som følge af fraværet af enhed blandt verdens ledende nationer«.

Idet han overførte disse lektioner til nutiden, fremsatte Putin krav om, at alle nationer levede op til »vort ansvar over for de kommende generationer« gennem internationalt samarbejde, for at skabe »stabilitet og fred på planeten«.

Dette er i realiteten det overordnede, politiske spørgsmål, som også vil blive adresseret på Bælt & Vej-initiativets Internationale Forum, der skal begynde blot fem dage fra i dag. BVI-topmødet er hastigt i færd med at samle styrke og feje hele menneskeheden ind under sin mission:

* Frankrigs delegation anføres af tidligere premierminister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, der roste BVI som »et fredeligt projekt for global udvikling« og sagde, at »Bælt & Vej-initiativet er rammen for en ny verden«.

* Folk fra erhvervslivet og det politiske liv i Peru kræver nu, at præsident Kuczynski deltager i topmødet, som de kaldte årets vigtigste, diplomatiske begivenhed for gennemførelse af planerne for en Peru-Brasilien bi-oceanisk korridor.

* Nordkorea sender en delegation på højt niveau til BVI-topmødet, meddelte det Kinesiske Udenrigsministerium i dag.

* Og Chiles ambassadør til Beijing, Jorge Heine, anerkendte, at »det har et langt bredere perspektiv at samle et betydeligt antal statsoverhoveder fra mange lande, for at undersøge, hvad der foregår, ud over Bælt & Vejs specifikke projekter«.

Det, ambassadør Heine her beskrev med sine egne ord, er det, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche refererer til som »den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen« – præcis, som de specificeres i EIR’s Specialrapport af samme navn fra 2015. Langt mere end kun en række infrastrukturprojekter er det, der er under opsejling, et totalt paradigmeskifte, som er det eneste, der kan redde menneskeheden.

Det britiske Imperium forsøger at miskreditere Bælt & Vej-initiativet ved at kalde det en alliance mellem diktatorer og autokrater, og med truende forudsigelser om, at BVI aldrig vil komme til at bære frugt, fordi det blot vil føre til konflikter og kaos blandt de involverede nationer. Det er lige præcis del-og-hersk nonsens, mindede fr. Zepp-LaRouche om under en medarbejderdiskussion i dag, og det er, hvad Sir Leon Brittan udtrykte helt tilbage i 1996; han var på daværende tidspunkt EU-kommissær for Handel- og Udenrigsanliggender og blev udsendt til en betydningsfuld, international Ny Silkevejskonference i Beijing for at forsøge at modarbejde Zepp-LaRouches fremlæggelse af politikken med Verdenslandbroen.

Problemet er, at de fleste regeringer er amatører – de ved ikke, hvad menneskeheden er, understregede Lyndon LaRouche i går. Vi må skabe en praksis, som udvikler befolkningens evne til at optage egenskaber som igangsætter for de handlinger, der kan bringe menneskeheden som art op til standarden for samfundet som helhed. Det er vores opgave at skabe sådanne instrumenter for forenet handling, der løser menneskehedens problemer, sagde LaRouche; og denne enhed og evne kommer af, at borgerne udvikler de nødvendige intellektuelle, skabende evner. Det er grundlaget for handling i dag, for at redde menneskehedens fremtid i morgen.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche understregede i dag, at udelukkende kun en sådan fremgangsmåde vil fungere for at besejre Det britiske Imperiums organiserede splittelse og pessimisme. Vi må i befolkningen vække det højere princip om hele menneskeslægtens selvudvikling. Få amerikanere til at tænke på denne måde omkring det USA, som de ønsker for deres børn og børnebørn om 50 år, og USA kunne atter blive elsket af hele menneskeheden.

Vise ord for Sejrsdag – og for det, der nu må ske.

Foto: En ældre kvinde, tydeligvis højt dekoreret, deltager i Sejrsdagsparade i Rusland. Billedet viser 3 generationer, med den ældre kvinde, der ser hen til et ungt barn. 




Vi befinder os midt i en kamp for USA’s sjæl.
»Hvorhen, USA:
Ny Silkevej, eller Atomkrig?«
LaRouche PAC Internationale Webcast,
28. april, 2017

Vi befinder os midt i en kamp for USA’s sjæl, for det amerikanske præsidentskabs sjæl. Vi ser denne kamp blive mere intens over spørgsmålet, »Hvorhen, USA?«, med den titel, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche gav den nylige Schiller Institut-konference i New York City – »Hvorhen, USA: Ny Silkevej, eller Atomkrig?«. Der er i løbet af den seneste måned, siden det meget ukloge angreb, som Trump-administrationen beordrede mod Syrien, sket det, at det er kommet offentligt frem, at der rent faktisk finder et britiskanført kup sted i USA imod Trump-administrationen. Indholdet er de løgne, de fabrikerede efterretninger, der er kommet fra britisk efterretning og er blevet bulldozet hen over præsident Trump; meget på samme måde, som Tony Blair brugte løgnene om maseødelæggelsesvåben i 2003 for at bringe USA ind i Irakkrigen.

Vi må bruge det bedste fra alle kulturer og skabe en virkelig universel renæssance!

Vært Matthew Ogden: God aften; det er 28. april, 2017; jeg er Matthew Ogden; velkommen til vores LPAC webcast fredag aften, her på larouchepac.com. Med os i studiet i dag har vi en særlig gæst, Mike Billington fra Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), som vi har inviteret i dag pga. af den aktuelle, strategiske situations ekstraordinære natur.

Vi står naturligvis blot to uger fra det meget betydningsfulde Bælt & Vej-topmøde, der finder sted i Beijing, Kina, den 14. og 15. maj; og det er altså præcis to uger fra i morgen. Flere dusin statsoverhoveder fra lande i hele verden har bekræftet deres deltagelse. Som vi har rapporteret, så er den russiske præsident Putin inviteret som æresgæst til at deltage i Bælt & Vej-topmødet. Vi fortsætter vores kampagne for at opfordre præsident Donald Trump til at deltage i dette topmøde, som særlig gæst; og for at bruge det som hans mulighed for at gengælde præsident Xi Jinpings tilbud om, at USA kan gå med i det nye paradigme for udvikling og fred, som repræsenteres af Bælt & Vej, eller den Nye Silkevej.

Vi befinder os midt i en kamp for USA’s sjæl, for det amerikanske præsidentskabs sjæl. Vi ser denne kamp blive mere intens over spørgsmålet, »Hvorhen, USA?«, med den titel, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche gav den nylige Schiller Institut-konference i New York City – »Hvorhen, USA: Ny Silkevej, eller Atomkrig?«. Der er i løbet af den seneste måned, siden det meget ukloge angreb, som Trump-administrationen beordrede mod Syrien, sket det, at det er kommet offentligt frem, at der rent faktisk finder et britiskanført kup sted i USA imod Trump-administrationen. Indholdet er de løgne, de fabrikerede efterretninger, der er kommet fra britisk efterretning og er blevet bulldozet hen over præsident Trump; meget på samme måde, som Tony Blair brugte løgnene om maseødelæggelsesvåben i 2003 for at bringe USA ind i Irakkrigen.

Men dette var ikke et enestående tilfælde for Irak i 2003, eller for Syrien i 2017. Dette er den måde, hvorpå briterne har spillet deres imperiespil i det ene årti efter det andet; de har brugt USA som deres dumme kæmpe, med det formål, fortsat at holde verden opdelt. Denne del-og-hersk-strategi har været en britisk imperiestrategi i århundreder, og tiden er inde til, at USA bliver intelligent og siger, »Det er slut! Vi vil ikke lade os bruge på denne måde; og vi vil tage imod det Nye Paradigme med ’win-win’-samarbejde«. Briterne og deres rejsekammerater i USA har sandelig været meget ligefremme i deres forsøg på at destabilisere og vælte Trump-administrationen, fordi de var meget bange for, at han ville gennemføre, hvad han har sagt. Ikke flere regimeskift; ikke flere imperialistiske krige, og vi vil samarbejde med Rusland og med Kina. Det sidste var lidt mere komplekst, men det om Rusland var meget klart. Men som vi ved, så har præsident Trump og præsident Xi Jinping fra Kina, siden topmødet med præsident Xi, haft meget tætte, personlige relationer og har regelmæssigt haft samtaler. Denne kommunikationskanal er afgørende, især med det brændpunkt, som nu er vokset frem direkte på Kinas grænse, i tilfældet Nordkorea.

Vi vil bruge tilfældet Nordkorea som en case study, men i sammenhæng med denne meget bredere opfattelse af opgøret over, hvilket system, der i fremtiden vil styre verden: det imperialistiske del-og-hersk, eller et nyt ’win-win’-paradigme for fred og udvikling. I denne sammenhæng har vores gæst her i dag, Mike Billington, netop udgivet en ny artikel, som er en meget vigtig artikel, I bør læse . Den er meget klar. Den har den provokerende titel og stiller spørgsmålet, »Hvorfor er Korea ikke allerede genforenet?«.

(Artiklen findes i EIR’s seneste nummer, men er kun tilgængelig for abonnenter. Andre artikler kan læses gratis – se knappen EIR på vores hjemmeside. Du kan henvende dig til vores kontor mht. at tegne abonnement på EIR, tlf. 35 43 00 33 – red.) 

Hermed giver jeg ordet til Mike og lader ham gennemgå lidt af indholdet, de aktuelle udviklinger, og så spørgsmålet, som han fremlægger i sin artikel:

(engelsk):

MICHAEL BILLINGTON:  Thank you, Matt.  In fact, the purpose
of this article was to show that the answer to that question is
that there is {no} legitimate reason that Korea is not peaceful
and at least on the way to reunification already.  I’ll review
some of that material here.  But let me start.  There were some
extraordinary developments today; so let me give a short update
on the crisis.  It has to be noted that this is a very serious
crisis, in the sense that were something like what happened with
Syria, where Trump was — as Matthew said — lied to coerced into
carrying out an attack against Syria for absolutely no reason; on
totally false intelligence.  Were that to happen in Korea, this
would not be like an attack on an airbase in Syria.  This would
lead to a total disaster throughout all of East Asia and perhaps
even global nuclear war.  Whether or not they could take out
North Korea’s nuclear capacities, North Korea — as I’m sure
people know, because it’s all over the press — they have massive
conventional capacity.  Their armaments lie a total of 30 miles
from the capital [of South Korea] Seoul, this beautiful,
developed, advanced city; which could be just absolutely wiped
out if there were a war.  And they could possibly attack even
Japan, let alone US bases within South Korea; so this would be a
move of insanity.  The Japanese and the South Koreans know this
very well.  I should point out that our friends in South Korea
note that there is no panic in South Korea; because they’ve been
through these kinds of things before, and they simply assume that
nobody is crazy enough to launch a preemptive attack on North
Korea.
But, because of what happened in Syria, a lot of people —
including all of us — were very concerned that the British might
pull off another stunt and get Trump to go with this.  What
happened today is extremely important.  Trump himself did an
interview with Reuters, in which he said on North Korea, “We’d
love to solve things diplomatically, but it’s very difficult.
But Xi Jinping is playing a crucial role in this.  I believe he’s
trying very hard.  I know he would like to be able to do
something.  Perhaps it’s possible that he can’t, but I think he’d
like to be able to do something.”  Then, most extraordinarily, he
said about Kim Jung-Un, the leader in North Korea and grandson of
the founder of North Korea, Kim Il-Sung, he said, “He’s 27 years
old.  His father dies; he took over a regime.  So, say what you
want, that’s not easy; especially at that age.  Now I’m not
giving him credit, or not giving him credit.  I’m just saying
it’s a very hard thing to do.  As to whether or not he’s
rational, I have no opinion, but I hope he’s rational.”  So, this
is useful.  He then returned again to the fact that he has very
good personal relations with Xi Jinping: “I feel that he’s doing
everything in his power to help us with a big situation.  I
wouldn’t want to be causing difficulty right now for him; and I
certainly would want to speak to him first before taking any
action.”  Very useful.
Then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who chaired a meeting
at the UN Security Council this morning of ministers, taking the
place of that wacky lady we have in there right now speaking for
the US too often.  But Tillerson was not wacky; not at all.  He
was very clear in his presentation to the UN Security Council.
He said, “For too long, the international community has been
reactive in addressing North Korea.  Those days must come to an
end.  Failing to act now on the most pressing security issue in
the world may bring catastrophic consequences.”  Now, what does
he mean to act now?  The press headlines all over the world are
“Trump and Tillerson Are Threatening War on North Korea; They
Want To Act Now.  It’s the End of Strategic Patience”, which was
the policy of Obama.  But keep in mind, “strategic patience” was
not being patient; it was saying “We will not talk to North
Korea.  We refuse to talk to North Korea; we simply sit back and
constantly increase the sanctions, increase the military build-up
around their border until they do what we say.”  Which, of
course, they won’t do as long as they’re being threatened.
So, the question is, what does it mean to act now?  Does it
not mean, let’s get back to talks, let’s negotiate.  What the
President said about Kim Jung-Un is a very serious comment.
Here’s somebody who’s in a difficult position.
Then, Tillerson said the following: “Our goal is not regime
change.  Nor do we desire to threaten the North Korean people, or
destabilize the Asia-Pacific region.  Since 1995, the US has
provided $1.3 billion in aid to North Korea; and we look forward
to resuming our contributions once the country dismantles its
weapons program.”  Now that 1995 is a reference to something
called the Agreed Framework, which I’m going to mention when I go
through some of the history on this.
Even more powerful, Tillerson — in an interview with NPR
before he went into the UN Security Council — said the
following:  “You know, if you listen to the North Koreans, their
reason for having nuclear weapons is that they believe it is
their only pathway to secure the ongoing existence of their
regime.  We hope to convince them that you do not these weapons
to secure the existence of your regime.  We do not seek a
collapse of the regime.  We do seek an accelerated reunification
of the peninsula; we seek a de-nuclearized peninsula, and China
shares this goal with us.”
Now these are very positive steps; and they refute the
British headlines and the {Washington Post} and {New York Times}
headlines that say “Get ready. We’re going to have a war in
Korea.”  So, this I think is extremely important.  Let me go
through a bit, some of the history of this; because even in my
reviewing to write this article, I was a bit astonished at how
close we were, twice before, to having a peaceful relationship in
the Korean peninsula and potentially even being reunified or
being on the course to reunification.
The key point, I think, is that the British assets in the
White House over the last 16 years — Bush and Cheney, and then
Obama, who served the British purpose of keeping the world
divided East and West, as Matthew was pointing out.  The key to
doing that was making sure the US did not have good relations
with Russia, and making sure the US did not have good relations
with China.  They used the South China Sea, they used Ukraine,
they used Syria; all of these really had nothing to do with the
South China Sea or Ukraine or Syria.  They had to do with
preventing any potential for the US and Russia to work together,
and the US and China to work together.  This is empire; that’s
the way empire works to keep the world divided, especially the
East-West divide.
Let’s go back to what Tillerson was referring to in 1995.
What happened was that the North Koreans were part of the UN
Non-Proliferation Treaty and non-nuclear development agreements;
that they wouldn’t develop nuclear weapons.  Then in the early
’90s, the IAEA — the International Atomic Energy Agency —
believed that they were using small test reactor at Yongbyon.  It
was a graphite-moderated reactor which produces plutonium as a
side-product of producing energy.  So, they believed that they
were hiding the plutonium being produced at the Yongbyon plant
and using it produce weapons.  This led to a very serious crisis.
The Clinton administration and their Defense Secretary at the
time, William Perry — and I’ll mention Perry a couple of times
here — were very seriously considering a strategic take-out of
the Yongbyon plant.  Would that have been as serious as now?  I
don’t think so, but it would have been very serious.  What
happened is quite interesting.  Former President Jimmy Carter
went to North Korea — supposedly on his own; I’m sure this was
very carefully worked out with President Clinton.  But he went on
his own; he met with Kim Il-Sung who was still alive at that
time, the original head of North Korea.  Out of that meeting,
[they] came to an agreement that they would, through
negotiations, come up with an agreement to solve the crisis;
which they did.  It was called the Agreed Framework of 1994.
This was quite extraordinary.  The North Koreans agreed to
dismantle the Yongbyon nuclear plant and to stop construction on
two other plants that also were graphite and could produce
plutonium.  In exchange, the US built a nuclear plant for North
Korea.  The US and the South Koreans were, and they began — they
didn’t get very far — to build a large 1000-megawatt nuclear
plant; but it was going to be a light water reactor that didn’t
produce fuel for nuclear weapons.  It was a safer form of a
nuclear plant.  In the meantime, they did provide oil, until they
got the nuclear plant going, for heating.
They agreed to start negotiations toward a peace agreement.
The US and North Korea are officially still at war.  After the
Korean War, there was not a peace agreement, but just an
armistice to stop the fighting.  Officially, there is no peace
agreement; we do not have normal relations with North Korea.
We’re actually in a state of war with North Korea.  Clearly, the
North Koreans want to have a normal relationship with the US, not
to be constantly threatened.  It was agreed that that would
happen.  This was moving forward quite well; it was slow, there
were problems.  The US didn’t live up to all its agreements; but
it was moving forward.
Then, extremely importantly, in 1998, Kim Dae-jung was
elected President of South Korea.  Kim Dae-jung was a very
interesting character; he had been a very strong opponent of the
military regimes in South Korea.  He had been thrown in jail
several times, and there was a point where he was about to be
executed; the US intervened and saved his life at that time.  By
1998 things had changed; there was more of a move towards getting
away from military regimes.  They weren’t exactly dictatorships;
they were elected, but they were military regimes.  Kim Dae-jung
was elected.  He immediately began to not only democratize
domestic policies, but he set up something called the Sunshine
Policy, which was we will work with North Korea on development;
on opening up economic collaboration as the basis over the long
term to establish peace between us and long-term reunification.
So, Kim Dae-jung was in power.  William Perry, the Defense
Secretary — he had left being Defense Secretary by that time —
but in a recent article on his history in all of this, said that
towards the end of the Clinton administration, they were working
to take that agreement even further.  To have the North basically
swear that they were giving up all weapons programs, in exchange
for having a peace agreement and setting up normal relations
between the two countries.  It was so close that they had
actually planned a Presidential visit to North Korea; that
Clinton would visit North Korea.
Unfortunately, as William Perry points out, the Clinton
administration ran out; and Bush and Cheney came in.  You may
remember that the Defense Secretary under Bush and Cheney was
Colin Powell, a general; a fairly wise gentleman.  He, in his
first press conference, said we intend to engage with North
Korea, and pick up where Clinton left off.  Very important.  The
{next day}, Bush — with Cheney behind him and Paul Wolfowitz
around — said “There will be no engagement with North Korea.
They’re a dictatorship.”  Sounds familiar, right?  Dictators.
“We will not talk to them.  There will be no engagement.”  And
Colin Powell was basically put in his place, and the whole
process began to fall apart; at least in terms of the US working,
collaborating, and playing a key role in collaboration with North
and South Korea, and Russia and China and Japan.
In any case, Kim Dae-jung and the others — Russia, China,
Japan, North Korea, South Korea — continued the process.  They
basically said OK, that’s what Bush and Cheney are saying; but
this is the future lives of our country and really of the world.
They moved forward.  Kim Dae-jung, by 2002, was successful in
setting up an extraordinary process.  I should mention here that
Lyndon LaRouche’s ideas through that period — 2000-2002 — were
all over South Korea.  One of our members, Kathy Wolfe, was going
back and forth; she was meeting with people in the government,
around the government, cultural people in South Korea.  You may
remember that 1992 was when Lyndon LaRouche first came up with
the idea at the time of the fall of Soviet Union, that we should
build a New Silk Road; we should have a Silk Road which would
bridge Europe, Russia, China, and bring them together around a
development process by building the New Silk Road — what the
Chinese called the Eurasian Land-Bridge.
So, Kim Dae-jung, the South Korean President, built a
process he called the Iron Silk Road.  I can assure you there was
an influence there; that term didn’t come out of nowhere.
LaRouche had always said that the New Silk Road should go from
Busan to Rotterdam.  Busan is at the southern tip of South Korea.
In other words, it had to go through North Korea, through Russia,
and also through China into Europe.  So, this idea of the Iron
Silk Road was taking shape.  It was taking shape so much — put
that first map on [Fig. 1].  This is the map.  The plan was to
reconstruct two rail lines from South Korea into North Korea,
which of course had been shut down.  There was an armed
Demilitarized Zone [DMZ] with fences on either side; and a no
man’s land in between.  The idea was to build rail connections as
you can see on the map.  One of them going through the West, that
would go up through Pyongyang and then into China.  One that
would head out towards the West and go up towards Russia into
Vladivostok and hit the trans-Siberian railway in both
directions, actually.
Indeed, they began this process.  Kim Dae-jung went to the
North and met with Kim Jong-Il, who was the son of Kim Il-Sung;
who was in power.  Kim Il-Sung literally died the year they
signed the Agreed Framework; but his son continued it.  They made
this process; they built this process up.  By 2002, they
literally opened up the Demilitarized Zone fences in both of
those spots.  Both the North-South and the [inaud; 21:43]; they
cut the DMZ fences.  Soldiers from both the North and South went
into the DMZ and began clearing the mines that were all over the
place in the DMZ.  They reconstructed the rail line between the
two countries.  In 2002 [Fig. 2] you had the extraordinary event
of a railroad going across the DMZ; going from South Korea into
North Korea.  Symbolic, because there had to be a lot of
construction on the rail lines to make them connect all the way
through.  But as you can see here, they had a big banner in the
front; the Reunification of the Koreas.  This was an
extraordinary event, which we reported in {EIR} at some length;
these pictures were in those articles back in 2002.
It wasn’t just the railroads.  At the same time, Kim
Dae-jung began an industrial park in North Korea — the Kaesong
Industrial Park.  This was across the border in North Korea with
South Korean companies setting up factories in the North with
North Korean labor.  This grew to the point where recently there
were 123 South Korean companies working in the North.  This was
obviously in the direction of setting up collaboration between
the South Korean industry and the skilled but very poor workforce
in the North.  So, this was proceeding forward.
They also set up six party talks.  You’ve probably heard of
the Six Party Talks.  This was where Russia, China, Japan, North
and South Korea, and the United States began a series of talks to
try to regroup from the failure, the collapse, the shutdown by
Bush and Cheney of the Agreed Framework.  These meetings began.
I won’t go through the details of what happened; it’s tedious,
because every opportunity that Bush and Cheney had to say that
the North Koreans were cheating, the North Koreans are lying; you
can’t trust these vicious dictators.  Every opportunity they had
to sabotage forward direction; there were some positive
agreements made.  If you read the history of it from the US
press, it’ll say the North Koreans reneged.  Well, it wasn’t that
way.  It was sabotage by Bush and Cheney every chance they got.
It went into the Obama administration and Obama continued
sabotaging it every chance he got.
So eventually, these fell apart under Obama.  Obama then
began this so-called “strategic patience”; which meant no talks,
build up your military, impose sanctions.  They might have said
that the purpose was that they expected the North Korean regime
to collapse; but that wasn’t it at all.  Bush and Cheney and
Obama {wanted} North Korea to build nuclear weapons.  Now why
would somebody be so insane as to want North Korea to have
nuclear weapons?  First of all, they knew that they wouldn’t use
them, or they’d be blown off the face of the map.   William
Perry, in his recent article, said the North Korean regime is
reckless, but they’re not crazy; they’re not suicidal.  If they
were to use a nuclear weapon preemptively, they know that the
country would be obliterated overnight and their leadership
entirely killed.  They’re not crazy.  But why would the West want
them to have nuclear weapons?  Because the target is not North
Korea; it’s China.  As long as you have this bugaboo of North
Korea threatening the world with their nuclear weapons, you can
go ahead and build up a massive force around China, the way they
were in Europe where they’re building anti-ballistic missiles and
moving NATO right up to the Russian border.  Sending troops,
tanks, planes right up to the Russian border.  And in Asia doing
the same thing, supposedly to counter North Korea.
Most people have read about what’s going on with these THAAD
missiles.  Literally just a couple of days ago, they actually set
up the THAAD missiles in South Korea; claiming that these are
needed for the defense of South Korea against the North.  THAAD
— this is Terminal High Altitude missiles.  North Korea is 30
miles from Seoul; they don’t need to send 8 ICBMs up into space
and back down onto Seoul.  The THAAD is useless against North
Korea; it may be useless in general.  But it’s a threat to China
and to Russia, because with that you have the X-band radar, which
sees deep into Chinese territory and Russian Far East territory.
Which thereby gives them an advantage in a potential first
strike, where they could take out — they fantasize — they could
take out the counterstrike capacity of China.  The Chinese and
Russians are saying this destroys the balance; we’re going to
have to put something together to counter this.
The other thing to point out is the obvious fact that North
Korea sees very clearly what happened to Iraq; what happened to
Libya.  Two countries that voluntarily gave up their nuclear
weapons program with all kinds of praise and promises from the
West, although they lied about Iraq.  But as soon as they did,
their nation was bombed back to the Stone Age, their leaders
killed, and their country turned over to warring terrorist
forces.
So, the North Koreans are not crazy!  And they’re aware
that, were they to give up their nuclear weapons program
preemptively, they’d probably get the same regime change
statement.  Which is why it’s so important Tillerson is saying we
are not going for regime change; which is what Trump had said
throughout the campaign — that they weren’t going to have regime
change.  They also see that the targetting of China, they’re
aware of this, is part and parcel of this operation.  You should
point out that the Obama administration had this TPP — this
Trans-Pacific Partnership — which was also a part of the attempt
to isolate China.  It didn’t work; largely because the countries
there recognized that this was an attack on China, and they
absolutely depend upon and appreciate the infrastructure
development coming from China through the New Silk Road the New
Maritime Silk Road.
That’s where this stood.  And the last thing I’ll bring up
here is that the last administration in South Korea — Park
Geun-hye; I’m sure that everybody has seen that she was recently
impeached and thrown out of office.  The impeachment was upheld
by the Constitutional Court, and there’s now an election which is
taking place in less than two weeks on May 9; which makes it all
the more absurd that the US deployed this THAAD missile system,
literally few days before an election in which the candidates are
both against the THAAD missile system.  They rushed this in, in
order to make it — hopefully, they think — make it impossible
to be reversed.  But we’ll see.  It was a foolish move by the US
to ram this through.
But in any case, Park Geun-hye started her administration —
this is the daughter of Park Chung-hee, who was the brilliant
leader who brought Korea out from being one of the poorest
nations on Earth to being one of the great industrial, nuclear
power producing and exporting countries in the world.  His
daughter, Park Geun-hye, was elected President.  But
unfortunately, she was elected mostly on her name.  However, she
began her administration with what she called the Eurasian
Vision.  This was, in fact, part of the New Silk Road process.
She saw working with Russia, China, and Japan, that Korea
belonged to Eurasia; which obviously meant that it had to work
through North Korea.  Officially, the regime in the South under
her and her predecessor were not allowed to have relations with
North Korea, except for the Kaesong Industrial Park.  But, Park
Geun-hye allowed three major South Korean companies — Hyundai
Merchant Marine, which is their biggest ship company; KoRail,
which is their state rail company; and POSCO, a huge steel
company — to have a consortium with Russia and North Korea.
Literally, a consortium; a business agreement where the Russians
rebuilt a port in the north of North Korea; rebuilt the railroad
from Vladivostok down to that port.  They were shipping Russian
coal into North Korea, where it was picked up by a South Korean
Hyundai ship; shipped to the South, put on South Korean rail and
shipped to a South Korean steel mills.  This was, again like the
Kaesong, it was a model for the kind of collaboration which could
lead towards long-term economic progress and development and
trust; and lead towards a reunification.
Then, without going into details, the North Koreans tested I
think it was the fourth of their nuclear tests.  Everybody knew
it was going to happen for the reasons I said.  They’re not going
to give this up unless they can get an honest pledge that there’s
not going to be a war, a regime change against them.  They did;
and unfortunately, Park Geun-hye who was weak, capitulated
entirely to Obama.  She shut everything down; shut down even the
Kaesong Industrial Plant which had been up for 15 years, which
killed their own industries.  Shut down the [inaud; 31:25]
process of the rail, and basically cut off all ties to the North
all together on behalf of Obama, on behalf of a war against
China.  Despite the fact that in 2015, she had gone to Beijing on
the 70th anniversary of World War II’s victory against the
Japanese and the Germans.  She’d gone there and stood on the
podium with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin; the three of them
standing together, honoring the war victory.  Then she comes back
and basically pulls the plug on the whole thing.
She wasn’t impeached because of that; she was impeached
because of a corruption case within South Korea.  But I’m certain
to this led to the loss of any trust in her; that she’d
undermined her own industries; that she’d capitulated to an
American policy, that she was going ahead with this THAAD
deployment.  She lost the industry, she lost the left factions
that were about to win the election, the more liberal side.  So,
this was a real disaster for South Korea, and potentially for the
world.
Now, we have Trump; we have Xi Jinping; we have Abe in Japan
working very closely with Putin.  And we’re going to have a new
regime in South Korea.  I won’t go into exactly who these guys
are; but in general, both the leading candidates want to work
with Russia and China and want to open up better relations with
the North.  So, you have the geometry.  If Trump goes with the
Silk Road process, you have a geometry which is going to end this
last British outpost of destabilization and instability — this
North Korea monster.  The monster issue; it’s not that North
Korea is a monster.  But this has served the British imperial
purpose of keeping the US at a point of conflict with Russia and
China.  If we can solve that, then all of Asia is now unified,
except for the North Korea issue.  With the election in the
Philippines of Duterte, his rejection of the war policy in the
South China Sea, it basically united all the Southeast Asian
countries; all ten of them are now united around working with
China.  Not cutting off ties to the US, but working with China.
So, you have tremendous potential; and it’s all really
coming down to the next very short period.  Weeks, months at
most.  A lot of this is going to be determined in the very near
term.  As LaRouche has always insisted, to look at any particular
crisis — like the North Korean crisis — you have to look at it
in the context of the entire world; and certainly in the context
of the Eurasian potential of the New Silk Road.  I think there’s
every reason to be confident that some sort of talks are being
discussed privately; not just threats.  That this is going to
move forward in the context of the Silk Road.  As Matthew
mentioned, if Trump were to go to this meeting on May 14 and 15,
Abe would probably then go from Japan; and there’s no question
that we would have a peace process that would be almost
unstoppable, no matter what the British claim they’re going to
unleash.
So, this is a very great moment in history.  A dangerous,
but potentially great optimism is in hand.

OGDEN:  And you can tell that the British are definitely
very anxious of what could be lurking around the corner for the
future of their divide and conquer strategy.  I know we were
talking before the show, Mike, about the very appropriate and
incisive statements that were made by the Russian representative
at that meeting at the United Nations Security Council.  Here’s
the quote.  This is the Russian Deputy Permanent Representative
to the UN, Vladimir Safronkov, and he turned to Matthew Rycroft,
who is the British Permanent Representative at the United Nations
Security Council, and he said the following:  “The essence is,
and everyone in the United Nations knows this very well, is that
you are afraid.  You have been losing sleep over the fact that we
might be working together with the United States; cooperating
with the United States.  That is your fear.  You are doing
everything to make sure that this kind of cooperation be
undermined.”

BILLINGTON:  This has had a tremendous impact, because
people know that LaRouche has argued all the last 50 years, that
the problem is the British Empire.  Almost nobody of stature has
ever acknowledged that continuing role of the British Empire
until this, really.
I learned today that Ambassador Rycroft, who was a close
ally and advisor to Tony Blair, and was one of the authors of the
“dodgy dossier” which started the Iraq War in the first place.  I
learned today from our friends in England, that Rycroft was
meeting today with the head of the White Helmets; the terrorist
so-called “humanitarian” group that works with al-Qaeda and
al-Nusra, and who provided the fake evidence of Assad carrying
out a chemical weapons attack.  So, this is confirmation that
this open collaboration with a terrorist organization funded by
the British, and functioning to try to start a war in Syria for
which we can and must prevent that in league with this overall
fight to bring about the New Silk Road, not a new war.

OGDEN:  Let me end with this, and I’ll let you respond to
it.  I think as everybody knows, a very significant personality
in Korea and that area of the world, was the great US General
Douglas MacArthur.  In the aftermath of the original Korean War,
Douglas MacArthur came back to the United States, and he reported
back to Congress.  This is a quote from MacArthur’s speech to a
Joint Session of Congress in 1951.  I think it gets directly at
the much broader point that Helga and Lyndon LaRouche have been
making at the present time about what is really at stake, and
what is necessary if we’re going to move civilization into a new
paradigm of survival.  This is what Douglas MacArthur said:
“Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations,
all in turn fail; leaving the only path to be by way of the
crucible of war.  The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out
this alternative.  We have had our last chance.  If we will not
devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be
at our door.  The problem, basically, is theological and involves
a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that
will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science,
art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of
the past 2000 years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save
the flesh.”
So Mike, you were one of the speakers at the conference the
Schiller Institute sponsored in New York City two weeks ago.  The
subject of that conference was not only the diplomatic and
strategic cooperation which is necessary between the United
States and China right now, the United States joining the New
Silk Road and the Belt and Road Initiative.  It was also a
dialogue of civilizations; a dialogue of the greatest parts of
these two great cultures — European culture and Chinese culture.
In a form where Helga Zepp-LaRouche, in a really profound way,
stretching across generations, across centuries, across millennia
really put the great German poet, the revolutionary poet and
philosopher Friedrich Schiller in dialogue with the poet and
philosopher who really is the basis of all of modern Chinese
civilization — Confucius.  That dialogue she set up between
Friedrich Schiller and Confucius, speaking to each other across
the span of millennia and across literally two sides of the
world, created the kind of image of mankind, the possibility of a
mankind which could emerge if we were to finally put an end to
this imperial system of dividing the East and the West and
bringing these two great cultures into a dialogue with each
other.
So, you presented at that conference, and maybe just in that
context

BILLINGTON:  Those are available now.  The new {EIR} that
came out today has Helga’s speech and a speech by Patrick Ho, who
is a very good friend of ours from China, from Hong Kong, who is
campaigning all over the world for the New Silk Road.  It’s three
conferences now that we’ve done together.  He gave a presentation
then on Confucian thought and Western thought; but in that
presentation, he showed a very serious problem which I had
addressed over my long years of sabbatical leave in prison, where
I studied extensively the Chinese culture and the relationship
between Confucian culture and the Western Christian Renaissance.
Patrick didn’t take up that challenge for this speech; so he gave
a speech which fell prey to exactly what I then spoke about.
That speech is also in the {EIR} this week; or you can watch it
on the Schiller Institute website.  It’s very important, because
what I learned in studying this, is what the British set about —
as they do in every colony that they took over — in profiling
the backward tendencies within that culture and then grasping
those backwards tendencies that want to stay primitive, stay
backwards; and defining those to be the natural ideology of that
country.
In the case of China, they recognized that Confucianism was
a very great threat to their ability to control and keep China
backwards; because it’s a vision like Platonism in the West.  And
as Helga had brilliantly shown, like the Renaissance thinking in
Europe that professed progress.  It valued the mind of the
individual as that which made him human; it’s the creative power
of the human mind.  Against that, the British said no, no,
Confucianism is keeping you backwards because it’s formal and
it’s structured.  You have to go back to the roots of Taoism,
which basically tells the peasant that he’s a happy peasant; he’s
happy not knowing about science and technology.  Stay backwards.
Or the so-called “legalist” ideology which was punishment and
reward; you treat people like animals.  You punish or reward them
like you do a dog, to make them do what you want them to do.
The unfortunate reality is that the British deployed their
top guns — especially Bertrand Russell — into China; especially
when Sun Yat-sen came along promoting the American System.  They
sent Bertrand Russell in to poison that system; to denounce
Confucianism; to promote the happy peasant and the Taoist
ideology.  Unfortunately, this was deeply ingrained into the
Chinese culture, so that even today, Xi Jinping, who is fighting
to bring that country forward, is faced with this kind of thought
in China.  And, what they presented to the Chinese as “Western
thought” so-called, was not Leibniz and Schiller and Nicholas of
Cusa; the people who gave us the Renaissance, who gave rise to
modern science.  But rather, they said, “We, the British,
defeated you because we have wealth and power.  How do we have
wealth and power?  It’s that we believe in Darwinism, social
Darwinism; that the strong must crush the weak.  That’s the way
you get strong.  So, if you want to be strong, then you should be
like us and believe that Western thought — i.e., British
empirical anti-human thought — is what you should aspire to.
I won’t go into more details, but I encourage you to read
it; because these are fundamental debates.  This question of how
can we create a renaissance, which crosses every great culture;
because every great culture has great moments and bad moments,
bad tendencies.  Weak tendencies, and strong tendencies which
honor the human creative power; the other which tries to keep
people enslaved as master and slave.  We have to pull out the
best of every culture throughout the world.  Islam; Judaism;
Christianity; Confucianism; the Muslim tradition of the Baghdad
Caliphate.  All of these are there — the Indian Gupta period.
We can pull these together and have a Renaissance which is not
this part of the world as opposed to that part of the world; but
is truly universal.  Of man with a common aim for mankind as
Helga likes to say.
This is within our grasp; this could truly be the end of war
for all mankind.  People say, “Oh, that’s naïve; because human
nature is war-like.”  Well, {human nature} is not; human nature
is creative.  It’s the bestial imposition of this backward
ideology on peoples which leads to wars.  If we had a true,
global renaissance based on science and technology, great culture
and great music, there’s no reason to think we could not end the
scourge of war once and for all; as that beautiful quote from
Douglas MacArthur — which I’d never heard — clearly indicates.
These are philosophic and theological issues; but they’re in our
grasp today.  This is what the LaRouche Movement has been about
since its inception; and it’s now literally within our grasp.

OGDEN:  Thank you very much, Mike.  This material is
available; Mike’s article is going to be published.  This is in
the {Executive Intelligence Review}, and it will be made
available through LaRouche PAC as well.  As Mike said, all of the
proceedings of that Schiller Institute conference in New York are
also available.  LaRouche PAC also made a video a couple of years
ago on the question of the reunification of Korea and some of
these initiatives from the 1990s and these reunification efforts.
So, we’ll make that video also available; it will be linked in
the description of this video.  But I think that’s a wonderful
discussion; and it’s extraordinarily valuable for people to have
this view, this depth of background.  But also this vision of
what is possible.  Douglas MacArthur’s point that in essence this
is a spiritual, this is a theological question.  Will mankind
come to know himself as a creative species?  Will we change the
way that man views himself, which is what is necessary if we are
to survive?  The vehicle for doing that is this type of “win-win”
development projects; that’s the true name of peace.  So, I think
we have a wonderful microcosm in what we just used as a case
study in Korea; but this type of thinking is what is so urgently
necessary for the entire world.  That’s absolutely the value of
what the LaRouche Movement has done over the last several
decades, and continues to represent on this planet today.
So thank you, Mike.  And thank you all for tuning in, and
please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.




Væsentlige klip fra Schiller Instituttets 2-dages konference i New York – 35 min.




»Samarbejde mellem Kina og USA
om Bælt & Vej-Initiativet«.
Hovedtale af Helga Zepp-LaRouche,
13.-14. april

Folk tager fuldstændig fejl, når de tror, at Det britiske Imperium ikke længere eksisterer. Der skete det, at, efter Sovjetunionens kollaps, gik Storbritannien og de noekonservative i USA i gang med bestræbelser på at etablere en unipolær verden. Man kan også sige, at det er det samme som globalisering: det er et forsøg på at etablere et verdensimperium, baseret på den angloamerikanske relation; for tidligt erklærede Fukuyama historiens slutning, dvs., at hele verden ville blive forvandlet til demokratiske stater, og de opfandt sådanne ting som »retten til at beskytte« (eller ansvaret for at beskytte, R2P, -red.), »humanitær intervention«, »regimeskifte«; ’farvet revolution’ imod enhver regering, der ikke ville underkaste sig. …

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




En genrejsning af USA’s økonomi med
rumforskning som spydspids, og en
international mission for menneskehedens
fælles mål, som basis for en varig fred

Vi må genrejse fremtiden; og det begynder med kampen for at genoplive NASA. Og de gode nyheder er, at denne kamp nu er i gang; den er endnu i sit begyndelsesstadie, men det er en kamp, der kan vindes. Og USA’s fremtid ligger i vægtskålene.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

DOKUMENTATION:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Gå ud i rummet med Kina, ikke ad Helvede til med Obama

6. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Da Barack Obama annullerede USA’s planer om udforskning af rummet, begik han den største af sine forbrydelser, selv i sin egenskab af en »Vinder af Nobels Fredspris«, der udartede til en krigspræsident og massedræber. Rumprogrammet var Amerikas kultur, dets mission og fremtid, og Obamas handlinger vendte i realiteten den historiske kurs omkring og drev USA tilbage.

Tilstanden for økonomien i USA – for ikke at tale om Europa – er i en håbløs spiral for nedadgående og dræber millioner af mennesker gennem håbløshed, narko- og medikamentafhængighed og krig, som truer hele den amerikanske befolkning.

En total genoplivelse af udfordringerne i forbindelse med udforskning af rummet kan ændre alt. NASA’s rumprogrammer, der nu er skåret væk og suspenderet, er Amerikas eneste potentielle center for økonomisk håb.

For at vende degenerationen af USA og dets befolkning omkring, er den totale genoplivelse af rumprogrammet, på et højere niveau, den eneste farbare vej.

LaRouche-demokraten Kesha Rogers fra Texas fører an på denne vej, med den mobilisering, hun har genlanceret sammen med veteraner fra NASA, for at bringe rumprogrammet tilbage. EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche kalder dette for videnskabeligt arbejde af højeste rang; det er den eneste, videnskabelige aktivitet i USA, der har ægte betydning for menneskehedens fremtid.

Og Amerika vil stå foran et samfundsmæssigt kollaps, hvis vi ikke meget snart gør dette.

De eksempler, som USA må samarbejde med om enhver bestræbelse inden for rumfartsvidenskab, som der gives mulighed for, er Kina og Rusland.

Dér, hvor den amerikanske »fremskridtskultur« engang blomstrede – i udforskningen af rummet – dér er Kina nu den drivende kraft. Kinas plan for de næste fem år er centreret omkring rumforskning. Med målet om at undersøge galaksen fra Månens bagside inden for de næste to år, inkluderer Kinas nye plan for økonomisk og samfundsmæssig udvikling »en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

­Under en diskussion om det økonomiske program den 5. marts sagde chefen for Kinas største rumforskningslaboratorie: »Rumforskning er uadskilleligt fra Kinas innovationsdrevne udvikling. Hvis Kina ønsker at være en stærk, global nation, bør det ikke kun varetage sine umiddelbare interesser, men også bidrage til menneskeheden. Kun dette kan vinde Kina verdens respekt.«

USA har mistet verdens respekt under Bush, og især under Barack Obama. Obama må fjernes fra embedet, omgående, og hans onde »værk« må omstødes. Og mere presserende end alt andet må hans mord på Amerikas rumforskningsprogram vendes omkring i en total genoplivelse af rumforskning – »for en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

 

   




EIR’s Jeffrey Steinberg fremlægger
Lyndon LaRouches analyse af Libyens rolle
i Nordafrikas og Mellemøstens nuværende
situation, med fare for en generel atomkrig,
og Hillary Clintons rolle

Disse handlinger, denne operation for regimeskift i Libyen, førte, som nu er velkendt, direkte til, at Libyen blev til en mislykket stat og skabte et vakuum, i hvilket Libyen kunne blive stedet for iscenesættelse af det, der i dag kaldes ISIS – disse radikale, jihadistiske terrorister, der i mange områder bruger de våben, der blev kanaliseret ind i Libyen på tidspunktet for Hillary Clinton/Obama-operationen, med henblik på at vælte Gaddafi. De bruger nu disse våben til at overtage store bidder af territorium i Nordafrika og Mellemøsten. Dette skal naturligvis ses i forbindelse med de tragiske begivenheder, der udspillede sig den 11. september [2011] i Benghazi, hvor ambassadør Stevens og tre andre amerikanere blev dræbt. Men dette påpeger den mere betydningsfulde diskussion, der burde finde sted: Hvad var Hillary Clintons rolle? Hvad var Barack Obamas rolle i beslutningen om at gennemføre regimeskift i Libyen, og hvad vil resultatet blive, hvis vi tillader denne samme operation for regimeskift at finde sted i Syrien og mange andre lande?

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Titelfoto: En bevæbnet libysk oprørskæmper sparker til en fodbold i nærheden af Moammar Gaddafis kompleks Bab al-Aziziya, mens dette omsluttes af flammer. Libyske oprørere indtog paladset efter flere dages kampe for at vinde kontrollen over Tripoli, 2011. (Maxppp/ZUMAPRESS)




Mulighed for fred i Syrien.
EIR’s Jeffrey Steinberg forklarer,
hvordan våbenhvilen kom i stand,
og hvad der må til for at den bliver varig

LPAC fredags-webcast 26. februar 2016, dansk oversættelse.

Hvis man derfor sluttelig ønsker, at den syriske fredsaftale skal blive en succes, altså holde, så må man, ud over det presserende nødvendige behov for en Marshallplan/Landbro-hjørnesten for at sikre, at freden er varig, også fjerne Obama. Og man må bringe det britiske imperiesystem til fald.

Der findes muligheder for en erstatning, men disse erstatninger vil kun ske, når Obama er blevet fjernet af reelle forfatningsmæssige grunde, og på det tidspunkt, hvor Det britiske Imperium har fået en reglementeret begravelse.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Bliver Ankara et nyt Sarajevo?
Verden har brug for en fredsplan!
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Løsningen er enkel: Kasinoøkonomien må afsluttes gennem realiseringen af Glass/Steagall-loven; en international gældskonference må afskrive bankernes giftige værdipapirer, og et nyt kreditsystem må finansiere investeringer i den Nye Silkevejs projekter. Og hertil har vi ikke brug for et oppumpet, overnationalt bureaukrati i Bruxelles, men derimod en alliance af suveræne stater, som er forpligtet over for den fælles mission for udvikling af de områder i verden, der har et presserende behov for vores hjælp.

Kun, hvis Europa finder tilbage til sin humanistiske tradition, vil vi kunne bestå.     

Download (PDF, Unknown)




»Vi må lancere et »Manhattan-projekt«
i Europa for Klassisk Musik«.
Schiller Instituttet afholder musik-seminar
i Wiesbaden, Tyskland

For at skabe en ny renæssance, må vi gå tilbage i tiden for at finde fortidens største mesterværker og forsøge at se dybt ind i deres skaberes intellekt for at opdage de principper, der medgik til mesterværkernes skabelse. Vi må se tilbage for at se fremad. Med det formål at skabe en ny renæssance, må vi ikke alene stræbe efter at genskabe store mesterværker gennem at fuldkommengøre opførelsen af fortidens store, klassiske musik, men vi må også stræbe efter at bruge opdagelsen af de principper, der kan gøre det muligt for os at fortsætte traditionen efter især sådanne komponister som Bach, Händel, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann og Brahms.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

Link to the english version on The Schiller Institute’s homepage in the U.S.

Titelbillede: Johan Sebastian Bach




Vi må genoptage denne søgen efter
menneskets rolle i universet, og skabe
fremtidige generationer af genier

Så her står vi. Husk på billedet af John og Robert Kennedy; og husk, at vi atter kan genoptage denne søgen efter menneskets rolle i universet, og skabe fremtidige generationer af genier. For det er menneskehedens natur; og det er en synd, hver gang, et barn nægtes evnen til at blive et sådant geni, som gør en opdagelse, der har indflydelse på hele menneskeheden.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Titelfoto: Neil Armstrong, første mand på Månen, 1930-2012.




Stands den umiddelbare fare for atomkrig
og skab i stedet en alliance mellem USA,
Rusland og Kina om menneskehedens
fælles mål

Uddrag af LPAC Fredags-webcast, 5. feb. 2016.  Så hvis man ønsker at standse en umiddelbar krigsfare, hvis man har noget som helst ønske om, at USA skal genoptage sin indsats for menneskehedens fælles mål – hvilket vil sige en alliance med Rusland, en alliance med Kina for at avancere med disse store projekter i rummet, i vores Solsystem, for at udforske disse dybder og dernæst fortsætte ud i galaksen – så må man træffe visse omgående hasteforanstaltninger for grundlæggende set at afskære faren for krig, før vi befinder os i en situation, hvor denne planet vil befinde sig i den største fare i hele menneskehedens hidtidige eksistens.     

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Kun ved at genindføre Glass-Steagall i USA
kan et totalt finanssammenbrud i det
transatlantiske område undgås, og en
økonomisk genrejsning påbegyndes

LaRouchePAC Fredags-webcast 29. jan. 2016.

Ved at genindføre Glass-Steagall gør man en ende på den idé, at der kommer nogen redning fra skatteborgernes penge (bail-out) til dette massive bjerg af ulovlig og illegitim gæld. Jeg siger ulovlig, fordi en af de største komponenter i denne gæld er de illegale fortjenester fra den internationale narkohandel og anden international kriminel aktivitet, der har fået lov at passere igennem de amerikanske banker som en del af hele Bush-Cheney-politikken først og nu, Obama-politikken. Så der er et kriminelt element i systemet i øjeblikket, der gør krisen i amerikanske husstande større ved at sprede afhængighed af narkotiske stoffer i et hidtil uset tempo over hele landet.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Er skønhed en politisk nødvendighed?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Det var en anden af Schillers ideer, hvor han sagde, »Hvert menneske har et ideelt menneske i sig, og det er hans eller hendes store opgave i livet at opfylde dette store potentiale og gøre dette ideelle menneske, der potentielt set findes i enhver, identisk med det faktiske menneske.« Jeg finder også, at dette er et meget smukt svar på ideen om, hvorfor er vi her? Hvorfor er vi på planeten Jord? Hvad er formålet med vores eksistens?

Download (PDF, Unknown)