Med formand Tom Gillesberg.
Video:
2. del:
3. del:
Lyd:
Den 19. november (EIRNS) – Formanden for det britiske Labour Parti, Jeremy Corbyn, præsenterede sit alternativ til den britiske premierminister Theresa Mays Brexit-plan i en tale til Den Britiske Sammenslutning for Handel og industri (British Confederation of Business and Industry, CBI) i dag. Han gjorde sine bemærkninger, efter at May selv talte til CBI i dag.
Corbyn kaldte Mays regering en “regering i uorden”, som forhandlede en “forkludret” Brexit-aftale. Han sagde, at hans parti ville stemme imod aftalen og opfordre til nyvalg. Han sagde, at ‘business as usual’ ikke virker …. For at imødegå de største udfordringer for vores land i dag, bør vi ikke frygte forandring, vi bør omfatte den. Dybtliggende ændringer er nødvendige for at undgå en skadelig Brexit, der vil gøre ondt på erhverv, jobs og levestandard, og i stedet bruge det som katalysator for økonomisk transformation, “sagde han.
Han sagde, at der er behov for en forandring for at tackle den enorme ulighed, der har forvrænget økonomien og vansiret vores samfund. En god Brexit-plan for dette land handler ikke kun om, hvad der kan forhandles med Bruxelles; det skal også omfatte et radikalt investeringsprogram og reelle forandringer på tværs af vores regioner og nationer.
“I 2016 stemte landet for at forlade EU på baggrund af den økonomiske nedtur i Storbritannien efter finanssammenbruddet: en million familier, der modtager føden fra godgørende organisationer, over 4 millioner børn der lever i fattigdom, og reallønninger der er lavere i dag end i 2010.”
“Velstanden er ikke nået frem til de nedre lag i samfundet. I stedet har streng og forældet økonomisk tænkning bidraget til at skabe en situation, hvor 20 procent af Storbritanniens rigdom er i hænderne på kun 1 procent af befolkningen.”
Han opfordrede til forhandling om en permanent toldunion med EU.
I mellemtiden giver en vælgerundersøgelse foretaget af The Observer Labour-partiet en tilslutning på 39%, en føring på 3 procentpoint over Det Konservative parti, som ligger på 36% sammenlignet med en måned siden.
“Storbritannien har advaret Bruxelles om, at tusindvis af europæiske investeringsfonde vil blive truet, hvis Bruxelles nægter at bøje sig for kravet om en omfattende handelsaftale med City of London efter Brexit”, rapporterede The Times of London den 30. juli. “Den britiske ‘lige for lige’ advarselsstrategi er designet til at fremhæve den skade der kan opstå, hvis Storbritannien ikke får en særlig aftale for the City.”
‘Lige for lige’ truslen fra Storbritannien går ud på, at hvis firmaerne i City of London ikke får lov til at sælge derivatkontrakter i EU, vil EU-firmaer blive udelukket fra Storbritannien. En unavngivet britisk regeringsembedsmand hævdede næsvist, at “dette ikke var ment som en trussel. Vi ønskede snarere at angive, hvad begge sider kunne tabe, hvis vi ikke får en god aftale, og det blev også modtaget i den ånd.”
Realiteten bag Londons mafia-lignende trussel blev sagt ligeud tilbage i juli 2017 af Jeremy Browne, som tidligere var City of Londons særlige repræsentant i EU, tilknyttet udenrigsministeriet og ‘Colonial Office’, og medlem af parlamentet fra London. “London er Europas finansielle adgang til verdensmarkederne. Det er uden tvivl det vigtigste finansielle center i verden overhovedet. Hvis Europa ikke har London som dets indgang til globale finansielle markeder, vil det ikke have adgang til globale finansmarkeder.”
City of London er også kendt som ‘the Square Mile’, Londons finansielle distrikt og det historiske centrum med sin egen borgmester og regering. Teknisk set er City of London et af de 33 lokale myndighedsområder, som London er delt op i.
16. jan., 2017 – Det transatlantiske establishment er blevet kastet ud i endnu en runde, hvor de må bide i gulvtæppet, af nyvalgte præsident Donald Trumps første interview med europæiske medier, et fællesinterview, han gav til Londonavisen The Times og den tyske avis, Bild Zeitung, udgivet den 15. og 16. januar. Ledere lige fra Frankrig til Storbritannien og videre udtrykte oprør over, at Trump vovede at foreslå en ophævelse af sanktionerne mod Rusland til gengæld for en atomvåbenaftale, over, endnu engang at kalde NATO for forældet, og for at antyde, at, ikke alene var Storbritanniens udgang, Brexit, af Den europæiske Union en »fremragende ting«, men »hvis man spørger mig, vil flere andre lande også gå ud«.
»De har sanktioner mod Rusland – lad os se, om vi ikke kan indgå nogen gode aftaler med Rusland. For det første mener jeg, at atomvåben skal være langt færre og reduceres væsentligt, det er en del af det«, sagde Trump til sine interviewere.
Der vil også komme forandringer i NATO, annoncerede Trump: »Det er forældet, for det første, fordi det blev designet for mange, mange år siden«, for det andet, fordi europæiske »lande ikke betaler, hvad de skal«, og også, fordi NATO-alliancen »ikke håndterede terrorismen«.
Trumps kritik af Ruslands intervention i Syrien som værende en »meget dårlig ting«, der førte til en »forfærdelig humanitær situation«, oprørte ikke den transatlantiske elite, og det gjorde hans gentagne erklæring om, at det var »en stor fejltagelse« af Tyskland at have taget syriske flygtninge ind, heller ikke.
Men det samme kan bestemt ikke siges om Trumps påmindelse om, at det, der oprindeligt skabte denne krise, var USA’s intervention i Irak.
»Hele denne sag burde aldrig være sket. Irak burde ikke være blevet angrebet … Det er ligesom at kaste sten mod et hvepsebo. Det er alletiders værste roderi«, sagde Trump. Hans prioritet, som militær øverstbefalende? »ISIS«, svarede Trump.
Obamas ambassadør til Den europæiske Union, den »indflydelsesrige finansekspert«, Anthony Gardner, var allerede apoplektisk over, at det første spørgsmål, som EU-embedsmænd, Trumps overgangsteam havde talt med, blev spurgt, var, »Hvilket land efter UK er det næste til at forlade [eurozonen]?«, og således udbredte den idé, »at 2017 er året, hvor EU vil falde fra hinanden« (Time-magasinet, 13. jan., 2017).
Fra Trump selv kom den påstand, at »Brexit vil ende med at være en god ting«.
Det faktum, at interviewet til The Times blev udført af Michael Gove, er ved at drive City og London-kredse amok. Gove er den førende Brexit-tilhænger i det Konservative Parti. Efterson han blev fyret sidste år af premierminister Theresa May, ses det som endnu et nap i næsen, i lighed med, at Trump mødtes med Nigel Farage, stifter af anti-EU partiet, Independence Party (UKIP). Trump dryssede også her salt i såret og spurgte Gove mod slutningen, »Hvordan har vores Nigel det? … Jeg synes, han er en storslået fyr.«
Det, der blev rapporteret i The Times, men ikke i Bild, var hans referencer til Tyskland og dets kansler.
»Hvis man ser på Den europæiske Union, så er det Tyskland. Grundlæggende set, et instrument for Tyskland. Det er derfor, jeg syntes, det var intelligent af UK at udtræde«, sagde han til de to redaktører. »Jeg mener, andre også vil udtræde. Jeg mener ikke, det bliver så nemt at holde sammen på det, som mange mennesker mener.«
12. juli 2016 (Leder) – Europa konfronteres med tre mekanismer, der kunne udløse en nedsmeltning, et sammenbrud, af det transatlantiske finansielle system, og enhver af disse mekanismer kunne detonere, hvad øjeblik, det skal være. Og så er de endda på ingen måde de eneste kilder til det transatlantiske, London/Wall Street-ledede systems kollaps.
For det første er de italienske banker på randen af kollaps. Man har offentligt indrømmet, at de førende italienske banker har for 360 milliarder euro gæld, der er i betalingsstandsning – og uofficielle estimater sætter tallet langt højere. Men, som den italienske premierminister Renzi korrekt har advaret om, så er krisen omkring Deutsche Bank »hundrede gange værre«. DB sidder med aktuelle derivater til $72,8 billioner og har et bjerg af insolvent gæld. I søndags krævede DB’s cheføkonom David Folkerts-Landau en omgående haste-bailout af de europæiske storbanker til 150 milliarder euro – med start i hans egen DB. Iflg. EU-love, der trådte i kraft 1. januar, skal banker først gennemgå en bailin (ekspropriering af visse typer indeståender), før de kan få en bailout (statslig redningspakke), og dette udgør i sig selv en sikker udløser af en systemisk nedsmeltning.
Fra mandag at regne konfronteredes Londons store ejendomsfonde med et stormløb fra investorerne, i kølvandet på Brexit-afstemningen, og udsigten til et umiddelbart forestående sammenbrud af hele den britiske ejendomsboble er meget virkelig. I en klar panik over den accelererende disintegration vred det regerende Konservative Parti armen om på den ene af de to tilbageværende kandidater til partiformandsposten for at trække sig som kandidat, således, at Theresa May kunne blive installeret som premierminister på onsdag – for at have en regering på plads til at håndtere den fremstormende krise.
Dette umiddelbart forestående, systemiske krak kan ikke adskilles fra den voksende fare for atomkrig i kølvandet på NATO-topmødet for statsoverhoveder i Warszawa i sidste uge.
Det er præcist pga. denne kombinerede fare for et kollaps ud i kaos og en potentiel udslettelseskrig, at Lyndon LaRouche har krævet en engangs-bailout af de tyske banker for at standse blødningen længe nok til at lancere et reelt skifte i politikken, baseret på hans egne Fire Love for, hvordan verdensøkonomien skal genoplives gennem kreditter, der er rettet mod at forbedre arbejdskraftens produktive evne, gennem investering i infrastruktur, fremskudt, videnskabelig grænseforskning, der anføres af en massiv udvidelse af rumprogrammet, og lignede tiltag. LaRouche advarede kolleger den 10. juli om, at, hvis Tyskland tager et styrtdyk ud i kaos, er krig umiddelbart overhængende. Tyskland sidder inde med nøglen til en ny europæisk politik over for Rusland, baseret på strategisk og økonomisk samarbejde, og hvis dette forhold spoleres, vil konsekvenserne blive katastrofale.
Tiden er inde til at se den nuværende krises virkelighed i øjnene, krævede LaRouche, og til at handle på basis af denne nødsituation, som krisen kræver det.
Læs: LaRouches Fire Love til at redde USA (og verden …)
11. juli 2016 – Pressen i den transatlantiske verden er fuld af dækning af krisen i Deutsche Bank og de italienske banker, som understreger betydningen af Lyndon LaRouches intervention, hvor han kræver en engang-bailout af Tyskland for at forhindre kaos i Europa, men baseret på behovet for gennemgribende ændringer i banksystemet for at forcere kreditter ind i realøkonomien og lukke derivativerne og andre spekulative bobler ned.
Russia Today har David Folkerts-Landaus interview med Welt am Sonntag, hvor cheføkonomen for Deutsche Bank (DB) krævede en haste-bailout til 150 milliarder euro, og det citerer også udtalelser fra Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, formand for Societe Generale, hvor han advarer om, at den italienske bankkrise kan brede sig til hele EU. DB-aktier er faldet 48 % i løbet af de seneste 12 måneder, Societe Generales aktier er faldet 63 %, og Bloombergs Europa-index over 500 banker og finansielle serviceselskaber er faldet med 33 %, det laveste i syv år. En tidslinje i Bloomberg-artiklen har titlen, »Deutsche Banks episke kollaps«, og som gør det ganske klart, at det europæiske banksystem nu står på randen af et umiddelbart krak.
RT har også en nylig, underskrevet kronik af George Soros, hvor han erklærer, at EU’s kollaps er blevet »næsten uundgåeligt« siden Brexit-valget.
»Det katastrofale scenario, som mange har frygtet, har materialiseret sig og gør en disintegration af EU praktisk talt uigenkaldelig«, skrev han for Project Syndicate (som han financierer kraftigt). Han tilføjede, at det finansielle kollaps i UK i kølvandet på Brexit var det værste i tre årtier. »Det europæiske projekts blotte overlevelse er indsatsen i forhandlingerne om, hvordan Brexit kommer til at forløbe.« RT’s dækninger bemærker, at Marine LePen mødtes med den franske præsident Hollande og pressede på for at få en folkeafstemning om en «Frexit«, men blev afvist.
Reuters har også en omfattende dækning af Folkerts-Landau-interviewet. Cityam, en online finans-publikation, bemærkede, at italienske banker sidder med insolvent gæld til 360 milliarder euro, og aktier i samtlige italienske storbanker og andre banker i Middelhavsområdet – Unicredit, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, Banco Popolare og Intesa San Paolo (Portugal) – er faldet med 25 % siden Brexit-valget. Michael Hewson fra CMC Markets UK citeredes for at sige, »hvis Italien går ned, vil det tage resten af Europa med sig«.
The Street havde følgende hovedoverskrift tilbage den 5. juli, »Vil Deutsche Bank initiere den næste finansielle krise? Aktier kunne være på vej til nul«. Artiklen nævnte paralleller til Lehman Brothers og viste, at DB er i en langt værre tilstand end Lehman var mod slutningen. IMF advarede om, at det største overløb fra DB vil ramme Frankrig, UK og USA, der »har den største grad af overløb fra omverden, målt ud fra den gennemsnitlige procent af kapitaltab hos andre banksystemer pga. chokket i banksektoren i oprindelseslandet«. En grafisk fremstilling i Wall Street Journal, der nævnes af The Street, viser bank-til-bank-forbindelserne i Deutsche Bank. DB er belånt med over 40:1, langt værre end Lehmans 31:1 på tidpunktet for dens kollaps; og DB’s aktuelle portefølje af derivater udgør $72,8 billioner, hvilket er 13 % af alle globale, udestående derivater. »Hvis domino-effekten opstår, vil Tyskland, med sit BNP på $4 billioner eller EU med sit BNP på $18 billioner ikke være i en position, hvor de kan få kontrol over det.«
New Europe online har hovedoverskriften, »Hvorfor Deutsche Bank er den farligste bank i verden«, og spørger, hvad prisen ville være for den tyske regerings bailout, versus konsekvenserne af at lade det nedsmelte med systemiske implikationer.
Bloomberg har også advaret om, at Londons ejedomsmarked er ved at krakke, og dette er endnu en konsekvens af Brexit. Standard Life Investments annoncerede, at fra og med i dag, vil de suspendere deres UK Ejendomsfond for at afværge investorer, der kræver deres penge tilbage. Dette udløser allerede smitte, med flere andre store ejendomsinvestorers meddelelse om lignede fastfrysninger af klienternes midler, og med endnu andre, der simpelt hen meddeler, at de trækker sig ud af eksisterende handler om prima ejendomsprojekter i London.
Samlet set er tilstandene i Italien, Deutsche Bank og ejendomsmarkedet i London mere end tilstrækkelige til at eksplodere hele den transatlantiske finansielle sektor. Det er præcis pga. denne allerede igangværende krise, at nødforanstaltninger, nøjagtigt i overensstemmelse med LaRouches krav, omgående må vedtages.
6. juli 2016 – På tærsklen til det ildevarslende NATO-topmøde i Polen d. 8. – 9. juli, der meget vel kunne vise sig at blive snubletråden for global atomkrig, er også hele det transatlantiske finansielle system ved at gå op i sømmene. Sterling-pundet er efter Brexit styrtdykket til det laveste niveau i 30 år; et halvt dusin ejendoms-hedgefonde i London, angiveligt med en samlet ’værdi’ på $20 milliarder, har indstillet handlen for at standse panik-udtræk; og banker i hele Europa – ikke kun i Italien – står umiddelbart over for konkurs og kræver desperat ubegrænset supplerende likviditet for blot at holde sig oven vande.
Bank of England har, sammen med alle de transatlantiske centralbanker, trykket på panikknappen og annoncerer nye måder, hvorpå de vil pumpe en uendelig strøm af værdiløse midler ind i systemet, alt imens de løsner vilkårene for, hvornår banker kan påtage sig en stadigt større eksponering til derivater – det præcist modsatte af den Glass-Steagall løsning, der er påkrævet.
Lyndon LaRouche langede i dag kraftigt ud efter dette vanvid, som en total »politisk katastrofe, der ikke vil føre til noget, bortset fra den totale bankerot af hele det britiske system.«
Rent politisk er hele den Europæiske Union og dens institutioner ved at smuldre. Etablissementet aner i bund og grund ikket, hvad de skal stille op og har ingen forbindelse til den virkelighed, som deres egne politikker har udløst, med trussel om atomkrig, uhæmmet satanisk terrorisme og økonomisk nedsmeltning – samt den plagede befolknings voksende had og raseri mod etablissementet. Den samme proces karakteriserer USA under Obama.
Det turde være åbenbart, at videreførelsen af disse politikker i kortere eller længere tid vil føre til en katastrofe for menneskeheden. Enten skaber vi et nyt paradigme for menneskehedens fælles mål, eller også er menneskeheden fortabt, understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag. Det var det centrale budskab ved vores Schiller Institut- konference i Berlin d. 25. – 26. juni, og det er det udsyn, der må gennemtrænge ethvert aspekt af vores aktivitet, og hver diskussion, som vi har på alle dele af planeten. Der er ingen løsning for nogen enkeltdel, uden en løsning for helheden – enhed går forud for diversitet, hvad enten det passer det Britiske Imperium at acceptere dette universalprincip, eller ej.
Hvis folk som modsætning hertil tænker, at mennesket grundlæggende set er et dyr, der først og fremmest hytter sit eget skind; og hvis de handler – eller undlader at handle – på basis heraf, så står vi over for slutningen på civilisationen. En ny tænkemåde, et nyt billede af det kreative menneske, et nyt paradigme er den eneste mulighed.
Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche fremstillede spørgsmålet ved en pressekonference i Washington D.C., der blev holdt i dag ved Chongyang Instituttet for Finansielle Studier og det Nationale Institut for Studier af det Sydkinesiske Hav:
»Der er mange internationale militæreksperter, der advarer om, at situationen i dag er mere farlig end på højden af den kolde krig. Endvidere er vi på vej til at opleve endnu et finansielt sammenbrud, værre end i 2008. Jeg mener, at de terrorhandlinger, der især har fundet sted i de seneste to uger i Bangladesh, Tyrkiet, Indonesien og europæiske lande, klart viser, at terrorismen er ude af kontrol. Og rent faktisk befinder den Europæiske Union sig med Brexit i en disintegrations-proces, der er meget dramatisk.
Så mit spørgsmål er: Kan menneskeheden ikke hæve sig til et højere niveau af samarbejde og satse på et nyt paradigme, hvor geopolitik er en saga blot og erstattet af menneskehedens fælles mål? Jeg mener, at verden har hårdt brug for, at USA og Kina arbejder sammen, for jeg mener, at, uden at de to lande tager hinanden i hånden, så står verden i problemer til halsen. Så spørgsmålet er: Kan verden bevæge sit mod et nyt paradigme med fredeligt samarbejde om hele menneskehedens fremtidige opgaver?«
Foto: Brexit- afstemningen demonstrerer etablissementets manglende forbindelse med befolkningen. Vil vi hæve os til et nyt paradigme for hele menneskehedens fremtid, eller forpasse chancen for at gribe dette store øjeblik?
4. juli, 2016 – Den Europæiske Union ligger hen i forvirring efter Brexit og fortsætter ud ad det spor, der fører til destruktion. Selv inden for samme nationale regering synes der at blive presset på for forskellige politikker.
På den ene side siger en minister i den tyske regering, at EU-præsident Jean-Claude Juncker vil blive afsat. Kilden citeres af Sunday Times og dækkes i mange medier. ”Angela Merkel kunne tænkes at tage skridt til at afsætte Europas føderalistchef Jean-Claude Juncker ’inden for det kommende år’”, har en tysk minister udtalt, som tegn på voksende europæisk splittelse over, hvordan man skal reagere på den britiske Exit-afstemning.
Frankrig, Belgien og Italien ønsker ’mere Europa’ som svar på Brexit, men Tyskland “danner i stilhed en alliance med Polen og andre østlige og baltiske stater” om at slå bremserne i.
”Efter afstemningen d. 23. juni, har både den tjekkiske og den polske udenrigsminister offentligt opfordret hr. Juncker til at træde tilbage – udspil, som en ledende EU-funktionær afviste som ”forudsigelige.” Imidlertid repræsenterer denne rumlen fra Berlin nu en langt mere alvorlig trussel mod hr. Junckers stilling.
“Alle er fast besluttet på, at disse forhandlinger skal føres i det Europæiske Råd – dvs. mellem de 27 regeringsoverhoveder – og ikke af Kommissionen, eurokraterne eller EU-’teologerne’ i Bruxelles”, sagde en fremtrædende kilde i Storbritannien til London Telegraph.
På den anden side siges det, at Juncker selv, den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble, præsident for Europaparlamentet Martin Schulz, udenrigsministrene for Frankrig og Tyskland og andre ledende politikere presser på for ’endnu mere Europa’. For eksempel fokuserer forslagene på forsvar, indenrigssikkerhed og grænsekontrol, i et fællesmemo fra udenrigsministrene for Frankrig og Tyskland, men også fra Schäuble. Man kræver mere koordinering og standardisering i militærspørgsmål – om end man dog ikke kræver en regulær ”EU-hær”.
Et forslag, der har fået bred dækning i medierne, og som ikke er mindre truende og vanvittigt, kommer fra præsidenten for EU-parlamentet, Schultz, om at erstatte de nationale regeringers bemyndigelse med et EU-parlament, der skal indgå i et tokammersystem med et EU-Senat; og en EU-regering, der ligeledes vil erstatte vitale funktioner i nutidens EU-Kommission. EU-Parlamentet skulle så også vælge en EU-regering. Juncker er allerede i færd med at foretage en prøvekørsel af dette med et forsøg på at presse den transatlantiske frihandelsaftale igennem uden at konsultere de nationale parlamenter, men i stedet ved at konsultere Europaparlamentet.
En EU-regering ville naturligvis inkludere en EU-finansminister, der skulle arbejde med en EU-bankunion og ECB, og potentielt også et overordnet EU-finanscenter, der skulle overtage vitale funktioner, som London hidtil har haft mht. kontinentet. Dette er planer for kontinental-Europa, men der er mange, der er tilhængere af en eller anden form for særarrangement med UK for at holde briterne inde, selv efter Brexit.
Aftenens webcast omfatter en eksklusiv video-premiere fra Schiller Instituttets internationale konference i Berlin, 25.-26. juni – en global intervention, der ikke kunne være kommet på et vigtigere tidspunkt. I kølvandet på Brexit-valget ser vi det finansielle systems sammenbrud dukke op igen og en accelerering af fremstødet for krig – udviklinger, der ikke blev forårsaget af Brexit-valget, men som er udtryk for det samlede transatlantiske systems sammenbrudsproces som helhed. Lyndon LaRouches vurdering er klar: diverse manøvrer og spil internt i systemet kan ikke fungere; systemet er gået ned, og der er ingen måde, hvorpå det kan overleve i sin nuværende form. Dette betyder ikke, at vi absolut skal i krig, men man spiller et meget farligt bluff. Som det blev demonstreret på denne historiske konference, så er den eneste løsning den at indføre en ny tankegang, et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden, et skifte i lighed med det, der fandt sted med den berømte, 14-hundredetals Gyldne Renæssance, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche uophørligt har understreget.
»For det første undersøger vi dette spørgsmål med, hvad er mennesket pr. definition? Menneskets evne til at skabe højere niveauer af udvikling af menneskehedens menneskelige evner?
Det andet er: Hvordan finder vi ting, der vil gøre menneskeden mere succesfuldt eksisterende? Det er endnu et spørgsmål. Alle disse ting er enkle, videnskabelige spørgsmål, og det, vi er afhængige af, er det, vi kalder at fremme fysisk videnskab, og at fremme det til et højere niveau, pr. person, uophørligt. I denne proces må man definere, ved hvilke midler, dette skal gøres. Det har altid været min interesse at komme frem til en ny, mere avanceret teknologi; en teknologi, der vælter og fjerner behovet for en eksisterende teknologi. Mit speciale er at koncentrere mig om revolutionen i anvendelige teknologier. Og dette er det eneste redskab, jeg kender til, ved hvilket mennesket kan forbedre det, mennesket nu har behov for [for fortsat at eksistere].«
Engelsk udskrift.
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening! It's July 1st, 2016. My name is
Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly webcast here
on Friday evening from LaRouchePAC.com. As you'll see, I'm joined
in the studio by my colleague Benjamin Deniston; and we're joined
via video by two members of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee:
Bill Roberts, joining us from Detroit, Michigan; and Michael
Steger, joining us from San Francisco, California.
We have a very special broadcast tonight in which we will be
featuring a short video "teaser," which will provide you a
substantial overview of the conference, the very important and
historic conference, which just recently concluded over last
weekend in Berlin, Germany, sponsored by the Schiller Institute.
As a preface to that video, which will provide us the
material for a further discussion here tonight, let me just say
that it couldn't have come at a better time — this conference.
It's clear to see that there's an absolute disintegration of the
trans-Atlantic system, which we are experiencing right now. This
is not {only} an economic or financial disintegration, but this
is in fact a disintegration of the entire {system} as a whole.
This is a political breakdown, this is a social breakdown; this
is an intellectual breakdown of the axioms which have provided
the foundation of that failed system. The axioms underlying this
trans-Atlantic system have failed. It's bankrupt in every sense
of the word, not only financially, but also politically,
culturally, intellectually, and the only solution to that would
be replacing this failed system with an entirely new paradigm.
This is exactly what Mr. LaRouche had to say when we had an
extensive discussion with him yesterday. The people who are on
this broadcast tonight all participated in that discussion. What
Mr. LaRouche said is that there is no way that this
trans-Atlantic system can survive. It's not to say that it is not
very dangerous and that it could have very terrible consequences
if the war were to be launched or if other things were to get out
of hand. But what's being done under these circumstances by the
so-called "leadership" of this failed trans-Atlantic system "is a
complete bluff. It will not work," Mr. LaRouche said. He said,
"We're facing a very serious kind of collapse, one which mankind
is not well-prepared to deal with."
This is very clear. At the same time that you have a
plummeting of the entire financial markets in the trans-Atlantic
system, you've got an inverse escalation in the bellicosity and
the aggressive stance that is coming out of Obama and his
colleagues, against Russia and China, both. Obama was in Ottawa
just yesterday at [the “Three Amigos”] summit of the North
Americas, in which he was {twisting} the arm of the Canadians,
telling them that they need to participate in a much more
prominent way in combatting so-called "Russian" aggression, by
lending their troops to this NATO deployment.
The Atlantic Council is calling for this NATO deployment to
become a {permanent} deployment on the borders of Russia. Russia
is very clear: Shoigu, the Defense Minister, responded, saying
that NATO has already doubled its deployment along the border of
Russia and this is already before the NATO Summit has happened,
which is scheduled to occur in Warsaw, where you can expect that
that deployment will "significantly increase."
Mr. LaRouche went on to say, when we were discussing this
with him yesterday, that you can see that all the so-called
"leadership" of this system is bankrupt. "The leadership itself
is bankrupt as an institution. Not that they {have} a problem,
but that they {are the} problem." "They are fraudsters," he said,
"and we are, in fact, the only leadership available on the
scene."
What Mrs. LaRouche had to say — and this is, again, in the
aftermath of her experience as the primary organizer and keynote
speaker of this very important conference which you are about to
see some excerpts from — she said, "Look, this could not have
come at a better time. This was literally two days after the
Brexit vote. And the Brexit is merely paradigmatic of the entire
breakdown crisis. You have an ongoing disarray, ongoing chaos and
disintegration coming out of this. You have the breaking apart of
the entire leadership of the United Kingdom. All of the major
political parties are like gangs of wolves at their own throats,
and it's very possible that Scotland, Ireland could both leave
the United Kingdom, turning 'Great' Britain into 'Lesser'
Britain, or 'Very Small' Britain."
She said we have no idea where this is going, but it makes
it very clear that this conference couldn't have occurred at a
better time, because what was presented and what you will see in
this brief overview that we're about to play for you, is that
{there can be no piecemeal solutions.} Too little, too late. You
can't solve this problem here and this problem there, and try to
piece it all together. The only thing that will work is an
entirely new paradigm that supplants the failed way of thinking
with an entirely new of principles, she said, "A new era of
civilization. And, if you don't make the jump," she said, "you're
just not going to make it."
With that said, I would like to present to you a brief
overview of the conference which occurred in Berlin. This is to
entice you to watch the full proceedings, which will be available
in video form in due time.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think we all have all come to this
conference because everybody who is in this room knows that we
are experiencing an absolutely unprecedented, systemic, and
existential crisis of civilization. You have the coincidence of a
war danger, where NATO is confronting Russia in a very, very
aggressive fashion which could lead to a third world war. You
have a U.S. confrontation against China in the South China Sea.
You have the danger of a new 2008-type of financial crisis which
could blow up the financial system. And, two days ago, you had
the Brexit — Great Britain voting to leave the European Union.
As we all know, this was not a vote against Europe as such, but
it was a vote against a completely unjust system and a corrupt
elite.
The conference has one subsuming topic, and that is to
define solutions to these crises, to discuss what would be the
new paradigm, and is mankind capable of solving such an
existential crisis?
We have distinguished speakers from four continents, from
many countries. They are representative of the kinds of people
who are determined that a solution is being found. Before I go
into touching upon these various mortal dangers, the solution is
easy. So, be addressed and be calm. If men unite for a good plan
and act in solidarity with courage, {any} crisis in human
civilization can be overcome, because that is the nature of human
beings: that when we are challenged with a great evil, an even
greater force of good is being awoken in our soul.
AMB. (ret) CHAS W. FREEMAN, JR: Helga, I'd like to thank you for
that very inspiring set of opening remarks. We have entered a
world in which, as William Butler Yeats put it in 1919: "Things
fall apart; the center cannot hold; mere anarchy is loosed upon
the world." In Europe, in America, and in parts of Asia there is
a sense of foreboding — an elemental unease about what is to
come. There is vexing drift amidst political paralysis.
Demagoguery is ascendant and the stench of fascism is in the air.
This is the global context in which China has proposed to
integrate the entire Eurasian landmass with a network of roads,
railroads, pipelines, telecommunications links, ports, airports,
and industrial development zones. If China's "One Belt, One Road"
concept is realized, it will open a vast area to economic and
intercultural exchange, reducing barriers to international
cooperation in a 65-country zone with 70% of the world's
population, with over 40% of its GDP, generating well over half
of its current economic growth.
In concept, the Belt and Road program, which is one of the
major topics of this conference, is the largest set of
engineering projects ever undertaken by humankind. Its potential
to transform global geo-economics and politics is proportional to
its scale.
COL. (ret) ALAIN CORVEZ: I want to congratulate the Schiller
Institute for organizing this conference at a critical moment
when the threat of a nuclear war which would lead to the
extinction of humanity becomes clearer every day, because of the
concentration in the heart of Europe of weapons capable of
destroying the planet within seconds.
To respond to the reinforcements of U.S. strategic forces
inside NATO on European territory, Russia was forced to deploy an
equivalent arsenal of deterrence on its western borders. It's
therefore high time that the strategists of various countries,
even those far from the European Theater, demand restraint and
more wisdom from the heads of state of the entire world.
This is the purpose of this beneficial institute founded by
Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, whom I wish to compliment personally.
JACQUES CHEMINADE; French Presidential candidate: So,
LaRouche thinking proceeds from the becoming, as a science which
is the active principle of the economy. The trans-Atlantic
financial system in which we are living, based on accumulation of
money, is leading to the opposite, not to increasing the size of
the physical economy, but to chaos and war, or, more precisely
and more tragically, to a combination of both.
The preceding speakers have shown that the current world is
more dangerous, yes, more dangerous, than it ever was during the
height of the Cold War. Those proclaiming themselves "realists"
and "reasonable," while following the rules of the system, in
reality contribute to its collapse by the mere fact that they
operate inside the system without fighting it.
Now we have arrived at the point in history where systemic
change, a just concept of economy and man, are necessary for the
survival of all. Money has no intrinsic value. It is nothing but
an instrument, acquiring value through what it promotes. From
there on, what is the goal to reach?
LYNDON LAROUCHE: First of all, we're looking at this issue
of man, as such — man's ability to create higher levels of
development of the human powers of mankind. The next thing is:
how do we understand, how do we find things that are going to
make mankind more successfully existent? That's another question.
All these things are simple, scientific questions. What we depend
upon, is driving what we call "physical science," and driving it,
{per capita}, to a higher level, always.
In that process, you have to define what the means is by
which you're going to do this. My concern is always to come up
with a new technology, a more advanced technology, one which
overturns and obviates the need for an existing technology. My
specialty is concentrating on the revolution in the applicable
technologies; and that is the only device by which I know that
mankind can improve the requirements for mankind now.
MARCO ZANNI; head of M5S delegation in the Eco. and Monetary
Affairs Cttee. of the European Parliament: The European financial
system is collapsing; it's collapsing because of wrong policies
brought about by European governments and by the European Union.
Clearly, a first step — and we proposed one bill in the Italian
Parliament and one in the European Parliament in the framework of
the banking structure reform is restoring banking separation. We
think that we have to set up a sort of modern European
Glass-Steagall that will simplify the regulation on the banking
system, and will make the separation between the core part of a
bank and a speculative bank in order to create a banking system
that is no longer focussed on speculation, on the financial
system; but on the needs of the real economy, on the needs of
people. This is the first step.
AMB. (ret) LEONIDAS CHRYSANTOPOULOS: Another threat facing
humanity is the US animosity towards Russia, as if we were still
in the Cold War period. This was discussed in the previous
panel, but very roughly I would just say about it. A missile
system is being set up to encircle Russia; and of course, Moscow
is preparing a defense field to counter it. The EU embargo on
Russia after the Ukrainian crisis is not at all helping the
situation. Also, threats have been recently made by Obama
against China and the need to restrict her economic power. With
a collapsing EU and a USA looking for confrontation with Russia
and China, a solution for humanity can be the BRICS initiative;
which is the initiative of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and
South Africa to pursue a policy of economic development for the
benefit of humanity. They have created their own development
bank to invest in the necessary development projects. China has
established the Asia Infrastructure [Investment] Bank; joined by
over 20 Asian nations as founding members, and has set up a Silk
Road Development Fund.
AMB. HAMID SIDIG; current Ambassador of Afghanistan to
Germany: I would like to express my gratitude and honor to be
part of this important event. Over the past 30 years, the
Schiller Institute has played a significant role in promoting
international discussion on major topics, and has shaped the
future of our work. Since ancient times, the Silk Road has been
a symbol of the commercial artery to connect Asia and Europe;
creating wealth and cultural exchange to benefit all countries
involved in this area. Our conference today — and I hope to
build on this ancient tradition, by bringing together scientists
and politicians to develop a New Silk Road; and begin the process
of healing, integrating, and regenerating this very important
region — Central Asia. Our vision is to create a secure and
peaceful life for our region, which will allow thousands of
refugees to return back to their homes and rebuild their
communities again.
BEREKET SIMON; chairman of Commercial Bank of Ethiopia,
advisor to PM: I would like to express my heartfelt sympathy and
support to the people of Syria, Iraq, Libya, and the larger
Middle Eastern and North African countries who are subjected to a
wanton destruction as a result of a mistaken policy of regime
change by some global powers. Allow me also to thank the
Schiller Institute for inviting me to speak on a broad topical
issue — the importance of the economic development of Ethiopia
in the context of the New Silk Road and the greater African
region.
Dear Friends, Ethiopia considers China's Silk Road economic
projects and maritime Silk Road projects jointly known as One
Belt, One Road as another milestone opportunity that could
contribute to sustain its economic development together with all
the countries in our region. We believe that the last decade or
two have witnessed the resurgence of trade between Africa and the
East. The New Silk Road would also further strengthen the mutual
benefits of expanded trade between nations. This will apply to
the relationship between Ethiopia and its traditional partners
[inaud; 20:49]. Together with our neighbors in the region, we
are determined to an Ethiopian, and indeed African, renaissance
which can harness the new possibilities opened by developments
like the New Silk Road. I thank you.
AMB. (ret) MICHEL RAIMBAUD: Good morning. I want to talk
to you about Syria and the title of my intervention is "In Syria
and Elsewhere, Against the War Party and the Law of the Jungle,
We Have to Rebuild Peace and International Law"; these are my
themes. First of all, the world today is in great danger of war;
more than ever before. It's going through a global crisis —
that has been said already. One hears much about a new Cold War,
which would lead us back to the old confrontation between the
free world, so-called, the Axis of Good, and the totalitarian
bloc, dubbed the Axis of Evil by George Bush.
We have lift immediately the sanctions; if there's a message
I want to give you, these sanctions have to be lifted. It's a
crime of war; it's a major crime of war. This has to be lifted
right away; we have to fight for this.
Message from FOUAD AL-GHAFFARI; Chairman of Advisory Office
for Coordination with BRICS, Yemen: Dear Mrs. Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, the noble chairwoman of the Schiller Institute and
the New Silk Road Lady; dear Mr. Hussein Askary, the Middle East
coordinator of the Schiller Institute, Ladies and Gentlemen who
are gathered in this conference here in Berlin today; I carry a
great deal of joy and gratitude for you and for your team for the
outstanding awareness achieved in my country about the New Silk
Road and the World Land-Bridge, and the new economic system of
the BRICS. All that awareness delivered special marks that is
occurring through our advisory office, the rights to publish and
distribute the Arabic of the EIR Special Report, "The New Silk
Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge"; and printing 1000 copies for
the Yemeni market.
DR. BOUTHAINA SHAABAN; from the Presidency of Syria: If we
need to create a world for all, if we need to create a peaceful
world, if we need to create a prosperous world for all, we need
to create a conceptual, intellectual concept of one world; we
need to create a conceptual concept of the Silk Road. Not only
an actual Silk Road, but an intellectual Silk Road. All of you
know that Aleppo and Syria were extremely crucial in the ancient
Silk Road that connected Asia to Europe. Syria and the Syrian
people will be more than happy to be also very active in a New
Silk Road, in a political, social, intellectual Silk Road that
connects Asia to the West; that connects Eurasia to the West.
PROJECT PHOENIX video: Not only Aleppo, but all of Syria with
its people, culture and artifacts, represents a unique and living
testimony to the coexistence and continuity of different human
civilizations. It is imperative that the world defend and
preserve it; and when peace is established, make it the world
capital for the dialogue of civilizations.
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: So, I think we should be fully
conscious that in this present crisis lies a tremendous chance to
reach a new Renaissance as significant, and maybe even more
significant, than the change from the Middle Ages to the modern
times. That if we break with the axioms of the globalization, of
the deductive thinking, of all the things which have led to this
crisis; and focus on the creativity of mankind as that which
distinguishes us from other species, that many of us can probably
live to see a world where each child is educated universally and
that the normal condition of mankind will be genius. That that
which is human will be fully developed, to have all the
potentials developed of the human species as creative composers,
scientists, engineers, extraordinary people discovering things
which we doesn't even know the question here of; like China going
to the far side of the Moon. We will understand secrets of the
Universe which we don't even know yet to ask. And people will
become better people. I believe that the true nature of human
beings is good; that every human being has a capacity of
limitless perfection and goodness of the soul. And to accomplish
that, is within reach; and let's work for it.
OGDEN: So, as you can see, this was an absolutely
extraordinary conference. And on the final screen, you saw
briefly the website displayed where you can find the full
proceedings of the conference. It's
newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com. And although that was a tour
de force of incredible speakers of a really incredible caliber,
that was not even all of the speakers who were present. So, we
encourage you to go to the website and watch all of the
presentations in full. Mrs. LaRouche was emphatic in saying
after the fact, that this was an absolute breakthrough in terms
of the activity of the LaRouche Movement, the types of people,
the caliber of people who were there. This was not just an
analysis, or talking about issues, or the problems of the planet.
But it could be seen very clearly that we are the center of
organizing the solution, organizing the change in paradigm.
One of the other things that was a major feature of this
conference, which we just couldn't include in that overview, was
an outstanding Classical musical concert that was organized on
the evening of the conference. This included a Russian
children's choir singing Russian songs; it included a string
orchestra based out of London that plays professionally at the
lower Verdi tuning of A-432; it included a performance of Chinese
folk songs and other Classical music; and then a grand finale
performance of the Mozart Coronation Mass by the greater European
Schiller Institute Chorus, joined by other choruses from around
Berlin.
So, this is an absolute breakthrough; and as Mrs. LaRouche
said, the conceptions which lie at the heart of the solutions to
the crisis were there. And this was representative of the
leadership of the world. And I think that's what we have to
offer in this moment of danger and uncertainty.
So, I think we can open up the discussion from there; it's a
hard act to follow, I'm sure, but …
MICHAEL STEGER: Well I think that the point that Helga made
that you just referenced, Matt, on this question of shaping
policy; what you see increasingly now not only in Eurasia, but
what we saw with the participation at the conference with
significant participation from Europe, high-level participation
from the United States. You see an increasing desire to look at
the fact that this current system, even the {New York Times} had
the intellectual ability to recognize that this post-World War II
system, the system set up by Churchill, by the FBI — this Wall
Street system — since Franklin Roosevelt's death, is essentially
now coming to an end. That's what the Brexit references. The
conference as a whole was in the context of the Brexit vote; but
it's not simply a vote to leave the European Union. This is a
reaction by an increasing majority in the trans-Atlantic within
the population; which recognizes that the system is dying. It's
dead. There's no longer a future, a life in the current system
they're living in. Whether that's Great Britain, whether it's
the United States, where you see the major populist revolts here;
this was discussed by many of the speakers. And many of them
didn't expect it to occur; and yet, when you're on the ground and
you're organizing the population, when you have increasing
suicide rates, increasing drug overdoses, increasing levels of
unemployment, it's not hard to figure out when talking to the
population.
It's a new system, a system of value, a financial system;
but it's a policy. It's a policy for the long-term development
of mankind that has to be conjured and redeveloped in the minds
of the population. And I think that's what's so essential about
the conference is that Helga's entire intent with this
conference, and why Lyn's participation was so important, was
because it provokes a quality of discussion. A new conception of
where mankind must go and what mankind must become; and that
really is the essential nature. Because at this point, this
trans-Atlantic system has no longer any life; it almost like it's
breaking, it's fracturing. Each break leads to more breaks. The
question is, what's the new whole; what's the new conception of
mankind in the trans-Atlantic and for the world?
And I think we have a lot of work to do, but clearly it's
the most open situation politically that we've ever seen.
WILLIAM ROBERTS: I would just add that I think for an
American audience, the thing really to take away from this whole
process is that clearly what we're seeing in terms of the process
of development of the New Silk Road, and in terms of the beauty
of the idea which I think people, as they have a chance to
experience the cultural panel, the musical process from this
conference, will geopolitics is irrepressible at
this point. What that means is that there's no turning back;
there are no half measures or piecemeal measures to do anything
of a halfway nature at this point. I would say that this
includes that it really should be very obvious to the American
population that this current election process is a complete and
utter sham. A so-called "democratic" election process, where you
have a couple of candidates, but there's absolutely no discussion
of the ridiculous war crimes of the last 15 years of
administrations in the United States. Even in Britain now, you
have Jeremy Corbyn who is threatening to bring a war crimes
tribunal, should he come into government, against Tony Blair. The
Blair crowd is shaking in their boots, and you can see that there
is a complete and total situation of weakness of this entire
British Empire at this moment. And because this is really
unclear in the minds of the American people, and because it's
very unclear how close we are to thermonuclear war, how
aggressively the threat of thermonuclear warheads is being used
against China and Russia. Because the ignorance to that is the
most dangerous thing that's contributing to the danger that's
facing this planet right now.
I think the one pathway or one tool in the United States
that expresses that level of an abrupt shift against geopolitics
in particular, is what is now the motion around the 28 pages to
expose the role of the British and the Saudis and the cover-up of
that process. Sen. Bob Graham has made the point in a recent
interview in the {Daily Beast} that it's very clear now that the
two-month period that the Obama administration gave him
assurances of that they would review the pending release of the
28 pages. That's come and past now; and it's clear the intent is
to keep this thing in the dark and continue the desperate war
push.
I'll just mention one more thing. There are also now, the
Obama administration is completely pushing a lie and vastly under
counting the number of innocent civilians that have been killed
by drone strikes throughout the countries that we're not at war
with. It should really just hit people, the contrast between the
beauty of this process of a world beyond geopolitics and the
unconscious war crimes and the acceptance of the legitimacy of a
process which completely covers over and overlooks the tremendous
war crimes of these recent two administrations. So, I think that
should be a real immediate wake-up call that we do have to, as
Americans, break out of this current paradigm.
OGDEN: What Helga began the discussion with, which I think
shaped the entire quality of all of the panels, was the statement
— which was a very profound statement — that in the face of
great evil, mankind is capable of finding within himself great
good. And I think that you were witnessing that in all of the
speakers. The spirit that was moving all of these speakers, is
one that this system can no longer be allowed to continue; it has
reached the point where it is too horrible to contemplate the
logical outcome of following through with a continuation of the
values that underlie this system as a whole. And we see it
breaking itself down all around us. None of these events that
have occurred are somehow causal of the breakdown of the system;
they are merely systematic, they are paradigmatic. The Brexit is
paradigmatic; everything that you see in terms of what Michael
was sighting about the depression, the demoralization, the
despair in the populations in both the United States and Europe.
This is symptomatic of a system that is in dire need of dramatic
change.
The good news is that that change, the wind is blowing in
from the East. You have a new system, which has come to life
based on proposals that Lyndon and Helga LaRouche laid out in
their seed form 30 or 40 years ago. It's now taken the form of
the official policy of the most populous country in the world.
You have the official, public integration between the New Silk
Road and the Eurasian Economic Union; this is explicitly based on
a return to the values that Franklin Roosevelt envisioned would
dominate the world following World War II. However, [they] were
supplanted by some very evil and destructive forces. Now you
have the New Silk Road, you have the opportunity for an entirely
new paradigm, which Helga says repeatedly; and which she said at
that conference. It would be so easy; this is not some daunting,
never-ending distant dream of a new system which is a fantasy.
It's very real; it's very present; and it's something that, on
the turn of a dime, by a handful of leaders comprised of many of
the people you saw speaking at that conference and the circles
that they represent. A decision overnight to enter this new
paradigm and to drop some of the failed values that have led us
down this path to danger and destruction, would be sufficient to
bring Europe, to bring the United States, to bring the Western
world into harmony with a New Paradigm which is already emerging.
Not that anything is perfect, but there is a directionality,
there is an impulse towards the perfection of man, towards the
increase of the productive powers of the human race, towards the
greater good of the human species; which is guiding us or pulling
us into the future. And if we're willing to listen to that
voice, the voice from the future; we can save man at this
critical juncture in our history.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: I think it really goes to the issue to the
power of ideas in this whole process. Because I think Helga made
the very emphatic point that this was a major breakthrough
conference. If people are familiar with the Schiller Institute,
much of its activity is centered on these international
conferences. And if you go back to the mid-'90s, the conferences
we were involved in, Helga was involved in then, and the
launching of the whole Eurasian Land-Bridge perspective when it
was just an idea. It was just a conception; it was a right idea,
it was true, it was on principle. And Lyn and Helga fought for
that conception; and now you see it coming to fruition. So I
think this whole process is useful, especially for people who
watch too much TV in the United States and are immersed in the
insanity of the United States, to get a sense of what's actually
real; what's actually powerful. What matters in history. It's
not the crap you see thrown around that this culture is inundated
with; that is a passing breeze in history that's going to come
and go. What matters is your truthful commitment to principles,
to true ideas.
And I think Helga's concluding remark about looking at where
we are from this much longer historical perspective and saying
"We need a new shift in our very recognition of what mankind is.
We need to look to things like the Golden Renaissance; and look
at mankind in the Middle Ages, in the Dark Ages. And compare
that to what mankind became after the Renaissance. It's a
complete transformation of the human species that I think Lyn was
intervening with in some of the discussions; that we have to
recognize that that character of continual complete revolution in
the very nature of our existence, is human. So you're looking at
a moment like this, and Lyn really emphasized the self-breakdown
of this trans-Atlantic system. This self-feeding breakdown
process. People talk about the Brexit like what maneuvering are
they doing; why did they decide to do that. They're panicking;
they're responding to crises that are being created by the
breakdown process itself. This is not something that's in
control. In that complete disintegration, it's these
conceptions, these ideas, this gathering of people of this
caliber for international discussion around what does mankind
really need to be doing as mankind on this planet. Can we
finally reach the point where we actually unite nations around a
real conception of what is a universal, unifying, truthful
principle about humanity? About what makes our species unique
and different from anything else we see on this planet. That's
us; that's mankind. We can have that as a common goal, as a
common unifying factor; and that's emerging now.
So, I think for people inundated with the degeneracy of the
political process, the cultural process, this stands out as a
reference point that people can use to lift their minds out of
the gutter of popular opinion and into history and see what's
actually happening right now.
OGDEN: Absolutely. One thing that people will have noticed
from that overview video that you had the opportunity to watch,
is that there was a very significant involvement from leadership
within Syria. Right in the war zone, including a government
advisor, Her Excellency, the advisor who you saw speaking; which
was a live video hook-up directly from Damascus. And she engaged
in a dialogue process with the attendees of that conference,
which was very significant. Helga LaRouche said that that panel,
which was an entire panel on the reconstruction of Syria. What
happens after we bring peace? How can we bring peace to this
region? A region which is a crossroads of civilization; was a
crossroads of the old Silk Road, is a crossroads between three
continents. She raised the fact that President Assad, prior to
the outbreak of the fighting, had proposed an idea called the
Five-Sea Strategy. And if you look at the five oceans — the Red
Sea, the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, and the
Persian Gulf — you have Syria situated right in the middle of
those. So, it's not only a crossroads of the Silk Road as a land
route from Asia to Europe to Africa; but it's also a crossroads
of the Maritime Silk Road, and the connections between these five
seas.
There was a video presented which was prepared prior to the
conference called "Project Phoenix"; which is a vision for the
reconstruction of Syria. And there was other dialogue at the
conference from very high-level persons from within cultural
circles and also government circles within Syria. So, Helga was
emphatic to say that this panel on the reconstruction of Syria
was certainly a highlight of the conference; and I think it was
just exemplary of the fact that the Schiller Institute really is
the go-to body in terms of these people who are desperate for a
solution, desperate for a future for their countries. They know
who has the ideas, they know where to go to get those ideas. So,
the combination between the expansion of the New Silk Road, the
reconstruction of Syria, there were three resolutions that were
passed at the conference. One for the immediate end to the
sanctions against Russia; another for an immediate end to the
sanctions against Syria; and also one against the Saudi
bombardment of Yemen, which is ongoing to this day. And you saw
a gentleman who sent in a video from Yemen; right from the war
zone there.
I can't emphasize enough, and I think you got a little bit
of a flavor during that overview, of the caliber of this
conference. But I really can't emphasize enough: You need to
watch this conference in full. You need to share this; you need
to get this around to everybody who you know. As you were
saying, Ben, this is a completely different perspective on the
world than what you would normally get from your average
mainstream media. So, I just wanted to encourage you, again, to
— as the videos become available — to go the
newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com website.
STEGER: Just to add to that, Matthew, I think you might
have mentioned this at the beginning; but in the discussion with
Helga and Lyn yesterday, the reality is that the kind of collapse
and crisis we are now incurring is something beyond anything
mankind has experienced up to this point. This is not a collapse
of the stock market; it's not a Lehman Brothers financial
collapse. You're now seeing the political dissolution. The
Presidential spokesman for Russia, Peskov, made some comparison
to the breakdown of the Soviet Union; but you see that this is
even of a greater scale than that kind of collapse. You might
say that the world is better prepared for this crisis than the
one in 1989, but I would say that it's not prepared sufficiently.
And the leadership in the United States and the trans-Atlantic is
not prepared sufficiently at all at this point. And the
population has to bear some responsibility on this. There's so
much emphasis on democracy in the West; democracy in and of
itself is not a principle. As Ben referenced, we need an actual
return to a sense of universal principles; knowable scientific,
physical characteristics of the Universe to shape our policies.
But those principles cannot exist within a small set of people;
you can't expect an elite to somehow solve and address the
problems we now face. The population as a whole — and this is
why our outreach in the United States to uplift people beyond
this Presidential fiasco; and to recognize that there is not a
preparation, there is not yet a capability to address this
problem sufficiently. But what this conference addresses is the
level of discussion, the level of participation that begins to
move it in that direction. And that is of an urgent nature;
because these events, as we saw last week, are only going to
increase in the weeks ahead.
Just in the last couple of weeks, you've seen fundamental
changes in orientation from Japan towards Russia and China. The
new Philippine President Duterte made major motions toward the
FDR and Lincoln tradition and a collaborative effort towards
China. You've seen major changes even in the last week by Turkey
and their rapprochement towards Russia. There are major
developments constantly happening which are reshaping the world.
But the crisis of a collapse of this trans-Atlantic system is far
beyond anything most people have ever imagined; and I think the
seriousness and urgency to develop these ideas and participate in
this dialogue has never been greater.
DENISTON: The collapse goes to the heart of this British
system. A lot can be said, but go to Adam Smith, go to the
original fundamental cultural assumptions, ideas about the nature
of man. Man is governed by pleasure and pain; that mankind is
just a species that can respond only to pleasure stimulus, avoid
pain stimulus. The whole ideological framework of the British
system, which has increasingly infected and taken over the United
States and run the trans-Atlantic system, goes to those deep
issues about what is your understanding of the nature of mankind
in the Universe. And we're seeing the breakdown of this entire
British ideological imperial cultural system that has dominated
really for centuries. I think that is the scale that we're
looking at. This is the breakdown of a century-spanning imperial
outlook that's had ebbs and flows and increases and decreases of
its dominance; but it's not reaching the point of self-inflicted
collapse. So in a certain sense, Americans have a certain
tradition in direct opposition to that clearly; and people should
be celebrating that in the next couple of days, not just hot dogs
and fireworks. But actually use this as an opportunity to get a
real rooted sense of what is our mission as Americans in
opposition to this imperial ideology. In direct resonance and
collaboration with what you're seeing out of Asia right now; this
is the time to bring that back.
OGDEN: Right. It's exactly what you said — to constantly
come back and say what is the ideological failure which is
underlying all of the events that you're seeing. The breakdown,
the refugees, the disintegration politically, financially,
culturally of the European system; and as Helga emphasized at
this conference, it's only a paradigm shift on the level of
change from the Dark Age to the Renaissance which will something
that will function at this moment. That didn't just happen; that
was not some sort of organic process of historical materialism
transforming itself. That was a willful change; that was a
willful change in the fundamental ideas underlying society and
the way that society worked. It's people who have to ability to
self-consciously reflect on the fact that we are facing the
failure of a system of thinking; and then to say to examine what
those failed ideas are. And then to say, how do we replace them;
how do we discover a new principle and create a fundamental
intellectual revolution which will allow mankind to carry itself
forward into the future? I think that's what we witnessed in the
proceedings of that conference; but as Michael said, it's
something which cannot stay within the confines of that
conference and the people who attended it. It is something which
must become an integral part of our national dialogue as a
people; and it's our responsibility to bring that about. That's
not something that we can sit back and wait for somebody else to
do.
So, I think that's a good Independence Day message.
DENISTON: People think they are what they experience; they think
that's what they are. That's not what you are; people are what
they create, or what they fail to create. People are not just
your experiences in life; people are what is your new fundamental
contribution you're making to human society, or you're failing to
make to human society. Until people completely transform their
understanding of what they think their lives mean, we're not
going to reach the level needed to make the transition that was
presented very clearly this past weekend.
OGDEN: All right. I'm going to bring a conclusion to our
show at this point, but what you should immediately do is visit
the newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com website. Some of the
videos are available; I know that Helga Zepp-LaRouche's keynote
video is available in full. That's a 30-35-minute length video;
so at least please watch that. And then, as the other videos
become available, it'll be posted on that website; so bookmark
it, make sure that you follow the YouTube channel, and you'll be
notified as soon as those videos are made available.
So, I'd like to thank all of you for joining us today. And
I'd like to thank Bill and Michael for joining us via video. And
again, to emphasize: newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com. And we
will have continuing coverage on larouchepac.com as well. So,
thank you very much. Happy Independence Day, and good night.
Med formand Tom Gillesberg
Lyd:
28. juni 2016 (Leder) – Ved afslutningen af todages-konferencen i Berlin, sponsoreret af Schiller Instituttet, hvor ledende talere fra fire kontinenter fremlagde det rædselsvækkende billede af både den ’evindelige krig’, der finder sted i dag, og truslen om en atomkrig i morgen, samt de nødvendige løsninger med den Nye Silkevejs-proces, kom Lyndon LaRouche med følgende bemærkninger (parafrase):
Vi kan som et folk indgå aftale om ideer om en fredelig løsning på den krise, vi står overfor, hvilket er afgørende. Send et stærkt og klart opråb; spred ordet. Vi søger ikke krig. Der er en anden løsning end atter at blive krigens offer.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche afsluttede dernæst konferencen, som stifter af og præsident for Schiller Instituttet, med ordene: »Jeg opfordrer jer til at tilslutte jer Schiller Instituttet og, hvad der ligeledes er vigtigt, at følge Lyndon LaRouches vise ord.«
Aldrig har den overhængende krise stået mere skarpt. Den britiske Brexit-afstemning sidste torsdag afslørede den kendsgerning, at Imperiets finansielle system går rundt i den bare natskjorte. Brexit forårsagede ingenting – den afslørede simpelt hen den kendsgerning, der i mange år har været åbenlys for alle, for nær de blinde, at det enorme spillekasino, kendt som det transatlantiske finansielle system, ikke kan »reddes« – og ganske bestemt ikke ved, at man trykker flere penge for kunstigt at stive de bankerotte banker af i endnu nogle uger eller måneder. Londons førende bankaktier er kollapset med over 30 % siden Brexit-afstemningen torsdag, og med halvdelen i løbet af det seneste år. Alle de vestlige »To Big to Fail«-banker – ’for store til at lade gå ned-banker’ – står over for en lignende skæbne, der allerede er i gang.
Vi må gøre en ende på systemets elendighed med en total Glass/Steagall-afskrivning af de værdiløse værdipapirer, der dominerer de såkaldte aktiver i storbankerne. Først da kan et kreditsystem efter Hamiltons principper blive genindført, som det kræves, for at Vesten kan tilslutte sig Rusland og Kina i den globale udviklingsproces, der nu er i gang, sammen med verdens nationer og folk, gennem programmet med Ét bælte, én vej, Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen, den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union, den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank, BRIKS’ Nye Udviklingsbank – som alle er helliget til, og nu aktivt investerer i, regionale infrastrukturprojekter i stor skala i hele verden. Som LaRouche har understreget hele sit liv – udelukkende kun en sådan kreativ transformation af verdens borgeres produktivitet, gennem videnskabelige opdagelser, kan gøre en ende på det mareridt, menneskeheden nu står overfor.
Det vestlige finansoligarkis frygt er, at Storbritanniens afgang fra EU vil indgyde mod i det voksende antal ledere i Europa, der ønsker at afkaste City of Londons og det sjælløse EU-diktatur i Bruxelles’ lænker. Den tyske udenrigsminister Steinmeiers fordømmelse af, at NATO rasler med atomsablen og udøver militære provokationer mod Rusland, har mange støtter, der blot mangler modet til at tale offentligt. Dette er vores opgave – LaRouches »stærke og klare opråb« om, at der er en løsning, hvis folk finder det sublime i sig selv og handler på vegne af menneskeheden som et hele.
Foto: Lyndon og Helga LaRouche på Schiller Instituttets Konference i Berlin, 25. – 26. juni, 2016.
25. juni 2016 – Under en pressekonference ved afslutningen af Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationens (SCO) topmøde i går, svarede den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin på spørgsmål om Brexit-afstemningen. Han lagde ud med at angribe den britiske premierminister Camerons kommentarer om, at, nu havde Rusland fået det, de ville, med Brexit-afstemningen. Putin sagde, ”Rusland har aldrig haft planer om, og har heller ikke søgt, at influere afstemningen”, og at Cameron indlod sig på et ”virkelig lavt niveau af politiske taler”. Putin fortsatte med at bemærke, at det var tydeligt, at ”det overvældende flertal af britiske borgere ikke synes om … magtkoncentrationen … [og] udviskningen af nationale grænser”, som medlemskab af EU medfører, og at der desuden ”ikke er nogen, der ønsker at brødføde og give understøttelse til svagere økonomier og betale støtte til andre stater og hele nationer” … en klar henvisning til EU-økonomiernes kollapsede tilstand.
Putin tilføjede: ”Jeg er sikker på, at alt falder på plads i den nærmeste fremtid. Vi forventer ingen global opstand som resultat.”
Han forventer heller ikke, at sanktionspolitikken imod Rusland vil ændre sig som følge af Brexit-afstemningen. ”Med hensyn til, hvad der vil ske i den økonomiske og politiske sfære i kølvandet på Storbritanniens exit, så vil vi få det at se i den nærmeste fremtid. Vi får se.”
Foto: I forbindelse med SCO-topmødet i Kasakhstan vedtog Rusland, Kina og Mongoliet at skabe en økonomisk korridor mellem landene. Mongoliet har p.t. observatørstatus i SCO.
Så vi ser nu, mht. efter denne afstemning, indikationer på det fortsatte sammenbrud i Europa og det transatlantiske system, der allerede var i gang; men på den anden side har vi noget fuldstændigt bemærkelsesværdigt, der introduceres. Vi ser Putin og Modi – Indiens premierminister, præsident Xi i Kina, SCO-topmødet i denne weekend og indgåelsen af massive aftaler for økonomisk samarbejde og udvikling, inklusive samarbejde om rummet. Spørgsmålet lyder, hvor er USA i alt dette? Ideen om, at renæssance-begrebet om menneskeheden, baseret på denne identitet med at skabe fremtiden og genoprette en moralsk værdi i samfundet, ses direkte i det, som Rusland og Kina gør netop nu; og hvorfor dette er et krav til USA’s moral, der er af afgørende betydning, om, at USA skal ændre dette og tilslutte sig denne kurs.
Det er i dag den 24. juni, 2016 – en særdeles lovende dato. Det er en meget, meget farlig periode, og vi står med ekstraordinære udviklinger på hånden. Det kunne vel næppe være tydeligere netop nu, forskellen mellem sammenstillingen med det døde-og-døende transatlantiske system, centreret omkring den Europæiske Union; og så fremtiden med det Eurasiske System. På den ene side, med det totale sammenbrud og den bogstavelige disintegration af det europæiske system – briternes exit af den Europæiske Union, samt det transatlantiske finansielle systems totale bankerot, der nu afsløres. Og, på den anden side, Vladimir Putins og Xi Jinpings igangværende indsats for en konsolidering og sammensmeltning af den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union, den Nye Silkevej, og hele verden centreret omkring Stillehavet, som Lyndon LaRouche i mange årtier har arbejdet hen imod, i form af samarbejde mellem de store nationer Rusland, Kina, Indien og andre. Valget er meget, meget klart.
Engelsk udskrift.
(En oversættelse af første del af webcastet følger snarest. Bliv på kanalen! -red.)
BREXIT VOTE IS MUCH MORE SERIOUS AND DEADLY THAN MERELY A REACTION. WE MUST PROVIDE THE LEADERSHIP TO AVOID WAR.
LaRouche PAC Webcast, June 24, 2016
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon! It's June 24th, 2016. My
name is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly
LaRouchePAC Friday evening webcast. I'm joined in the studio by
Ben Deniston from the LaRouchePAC Science Team; and via video, by
three members of our Policy Committee: Diane Sare, from New York
City; Kesha Rogers, from Houston, TX; and Rachel Brinkley, from
Boston, MA.
Today is June 24th, 2016 — a very auspicious date. It's a
very, very dangerous period, and we have extraordinary
developments on our hands. I think it could not be more clear
right now the distinction between the juxtaposition of the
dead-and-dying trans-Atlantic system, centered in the European
Union; and the future, of the Eurasian system. On one hand, with
the complete breakdown and {literal} disintegration of the
European system — the exit by the British from the European
Union, and the complete bankruptcy which is now being exposed of
the trans-Atlantic financial system. And on the other hand, the
ongoing efforts by Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping to consolidate
and coalesce the Eurasian Economic Union, the New Silk Road, and
the entire Pacific-centered world that Lyndon LaRouche has been
working towards for many decades in the form of the collaboration
between the great nations of Russia, China, India, and others.
The choice is very, very clear.
Earlier today we had a discussion with Mr. LaRouche. He was
very emphatic to emphasize that the crash that we're now seeing
in the trans-Atlantic financial system must be blamed on Obama.
This is not something which can be construed as a reaction to an
event, but in fact the bankruptcy of the trans-Atlantic financial
system was already a reality before this [Brexit] vote even
occurred. This is not a reaction, he said. This is something
that's much more dangerous, and much more serious, and much more
deadly, especially when you consider the fact that Obama is
continuing to push the world towards the brink of thermonuclear
war with the emerging Eurasian system of Russia and China.
Mr. LaRouche said we're experiencing a complete change in
the whole fundamental situation. Everything is now going towards
a crash. And it's not because of a reaction to an event, but it
was already pre-determined. Mr. LaRouche said, "We're on the edge
of thermonuclear war, which under the current circumstances Putin
would probably win; but Obama is insane enough to continue to
push the world in that direction." He said, "Putin is currently
in charge, in terms of his role being hegemonic. That was very
clear by the recently concluded events in the St. Petersburg
International Economic Forum, and then the bilateral meetings
that are going to happen this weekend between Putin and Xi
Jinping."
Mr. LaRouche said, "We're on the edge of something very big.
You must get Obama out! It's very dangerous to have him in office
under these circumstances. Our job is to calmly bring a solution
to this crisis from inside of our role here in the United States,
with Putin playing a key leadership role internationally. We are
in a position," Mr. LaRouche said, "to enter into a phase in
which a solution is possible."
Now, I want to open up the discussion; I want to invite
Diane to elaborate a little bit more on the role that Obama,
together with David Cameron, played in creating the circumstances
that we are now observing in terms of the aftermath of the
Brexit.
DIANE SARE: Well, everyone has heard of the famous
expression "the kiss of death"; and Obama delivered this in
London on April 22nd when he went there for two purposes. One
was to express his firm support for Great Britain remaining in
the EU; and I'm going to read his exact comments, so that there's
no question on that. And then also, to celebrate the birthday of
Her Majesty the Queen, whom he says is one of his favorite people
— I'm reading from his remarks; and he said, "And we should be
fortunate enough to reach 90, may we be as vibrant as she is. She
is an astonishing person and a real jewel to the world; not just
to the United Kingdom." And in fact, that has been Mr.
LaRouche's point — that the Queen of England does not see her
realm as the United Kingdom; she's been trying to run a global
dictatorship, and Barack Obama is one of her tools. And like a
typical malignant narcissist, Obama either intended to crash the
entire system; or is blithely unaware of how despised he is. So,
at a joint press conference at 10 Downing Street with a British
Prime Minister who is now resigning, David Cameron, Obama admits
he said, "Yes, the Prime Minister and I discussed the upcoming
referendum here on whether or not the UK should remain part of
the European Union. Let me be clear: Ultimately, this is
something that the British voters have to decide for themselves;
but as part of our special relationship, part of being friends is
to be honest and to let you know what I think. And speaking
honestly, the outcome of that decision is a matter of deep
interest to the United States; because it affects our prospects
as well. The United States wants a strong United Kingdom as a
partner, and the United Kingdom is at its best when it's helping
to lead a strong Europe. It leverages UK power to be part of the
European Union." And then he adds: "Let me be clear. As I
wrote in the op-ed here today, I don't believe the EU moderates
British influence in the world, it magnifies it. The EU has
helped to spread British values and practices across the
continent. The single market brings extraordinary benefits to
the United Kingdom; and that ends up being good for America,
because we're more prosperous when one of our best friends and
closest allies has a strong, stable, and growing economy."
So presumably, the time between April and this referendum
was enough for people to stop vomiting and make it to the polls,
and vote to get out of the European Union as quickly as possible;
which is what many of them did.
OGDEN: Well, I think also, according to what Mr. LaRouche
said — and this is absolutely the case — the crash was already
happening. It's a faulty view of history to say, "Well, an event
happened, and therefore there was a reaction." And Mr. LaRouche
is saying, the problem is that people think in terms of
reactions; one thing happens and then another thing happens. In
fact, Europe was already bankrupt. Think about what was already
happening. You had major European banks refusing to put their
money into the ECB; you had negative interest rates at the ECB,
which is an unprecedented, never-before-happened event in the
history of that system. And you had a complete breakdown of the
ability of both the European and the American workforce to be
able to have productive jobs or anything of that means. So, we
already were in a complete bankruptcy of this entire
trans-Atlantic financial system; and now today, it is more clear
than ever that the New Paradigm — which is represented by
Vladimir Putin's and Xi Jinping's collaboration; the combination
between the Eurasian Economic Union and the New Silk Road policy
of China, which is based not on an idea of rival blocs or
economic competition or something like that. It's based on the
idea of a win-win collaboration. Now's the time for the European
countries and for the United States to finally reject this Obama
paradigm; and say we are going to join this New Paradigm. And
many other nations in Europe could follow very closely behind
Britain and leave the European Union, since it's now clear that
it's a completely bankrupt institution.
KESHA ROGERS: And Obama can follow behind Cameron and leave the
United States immediately. What you're seeing right now, as Mr.
LaRouche once said, is the end of a delusion; an end of a dead
system. And the end of an era of a zero-growth paradigm; which
has dominated the culture and society for far too long. And it
actually goes against the true essence of our nature and being as
human beings. And this is exactly the strategic conception of
man and the fundamental understanding of human beings that Putin
actually understands; and those who are taking this direction of
the New Paradigm forward. Because it's based in the identity for
the future, of actually creating the future.
I just wanted to say that tomorrow, there will be several
meetings, including one I'm going to be hosting here around the
space program and the identity of the great mind of Krafft
Ehricke. The title of the event is going to be "Free Mankind
from Terrorism and War; Embrace Krafft Ehricke's Age of Reason".
I think that's where we are right now; the question is, can we
bring about an age of reason by getting the population to
understand that what they have accepted in terms of the policy of
dictatorship and backward, degenerate culture that we have been
under for the last 15 years. Namely, with the destructive and
murderous policies of 9/11, that have not to this day been
brought to justice; and 9/11 never ended. That's why Obama is
continuing to get away with the murderous policies that are
influencing the entire world right now. That we haven't brought
these crimes to the forefront; that we haven't brought the
perpetrators of these crimes — Obama, the Saudis, the British —
to justice and actually declared that we are going to join with
this New Paradigm. That's what really has to come across right
now.
The conception of Krafft Ehricke is very crucial in
understanding what has to be the turning point for the thinking
and identity of our nation, based on its foundation around being
the example of a true Renaissance culture. When you think about
the Apollo mission, and you think about what we did with the
space program; and why Obama has targetted the space program. It
wasn't a matter of opinion or a budgetary question; it was a
direct targetting on this potential for human progress and to
continue to promote this zero-growth paradigm. What we're seeing
right now is that Russia and China are saying that this is not
the direction that we will allow and have mankind to go in; we're
going to actually develop and promote the true conception of what
human destiny actually is.
So, what you see right now in terms of after this vote
indicating the further breakdown of Europe and the trans-Atlantic
system, which was already in the process on the opposite side,
you have something that is completely remarkable being brought
in. Putin and Modi — the Prime Minister of India, President Xi
Jinping in China, the SCO summit this weekend, and the signing of
massive agreements for economic cooperation and development,
including space collaboration. The question is, where is the
United States in this? The idea that the Renaissance conception
of mankind based on this identity of creating the future and
restoring a moral value to society, is seen directly in what
Russia and China are doing right now; and why this is a critical
call to the moral of the United States to change that and to join
with that direction.
RACHEL BRINKLEY: Another important aspect is what is the
solution; what are the new systems. And the question of the
space collaboration between Russia and China is not just over a
few projects; this is what they emphasized over the last few
days. They're looking at two things — space travel for one, and
space station collaboration for two; and also with an emphasis on
health and the implications [of space] on human bodies. So,
these are big questions; these are not just, let's put a rover
and test geology or something. This is looking at how the
Universe works, how the Solar System works, how the human body
works; and saying that this is going to have implications on
Earth in medicine, to give people a sense that this is how
mankind makes advances.
This has to be in the context of the question of Alexander
Hamilton, which LaRouche has emphasized, and he recently made the
point that what was it that was important about Hamilton? He
said, what he did in Philadelphia, what he did in creating the
Constitutional system of the United States. He knew that it
wasn't just the military victory that would enable the United
States to survive; the intention of the United States was to be a
system that created a better future for every single individual,
not a slave system. So, he created the inherent economics of
political economy to create that better future; and that is what
the discussion is right now. This is not just Russia and China
making some oil deals, or a new pipeline or something like that;
it's actually above nations as such. That's what LaRouche said
about this Brexit vote; it's not just business as usual, this is
not a vote on pragmatic politics. There's something bigger
acting. People did not want war; they're tired of Obama's kill
policies which have terrorized the planet through his support for
ISIS, the refugee crisis out of Syria; this is clear. So, this
is something that's being called for, there's something acting
which is coming from the future.
The problem with Americans is that they've lost the sense of
how to think about that, about the future. So, that's our job
right now, to create that discussion and that optimism about how
to do that.
BENJAMIN DENISTON: I think that's the question now. What can we
create? I was just reflecting on the discussion with Mr.
LaRouche earlier and some of his remarks throughout the week, and
I think his emphasis that you can't respond to or interpret
events is really critical at a time like this. When you're
seeing these types of developments — because the Brexit vote is
one example; these are not events causing the process. These are
events caused by the process; you have a breakdown process. This
is an explosive development in that context, but there's already
an ongoing breakdown of the trans-Atlantic system; the cultural
system as much as the monetary system, the whole political
system. Look at the British imperial ideology.
But the point is, if you're responding to the events of that
process, you are still contained by that process. How do you
break free from that process? It's a question of creativity.
What are you doing to actually bring something fundamentally new
to the world situation? I think that's why what you're seeing
out of Russia and China now is that; it's something new. It's
not just a response, crisis management or trying to handle it, or
trying to respond to the events per se. We're beyond that; the
events per se are death, that's where this thing is going. Be it
a complete breakdown of the system, or whether it's that drive to
thermonuclear war. So the question on the table now is, what can
you create? What can you do that's fundamentally new to create a
new system; to actually generate a new orientation for mankind,
for leading nations, that doesn't come from a response to current
events? That comes from a new orientation to create in the
future.
The coverage of this in the media — the markets responding
this way or that way — it's just ridiculous. The whole thing
has been going down for years; and we've known it. The question
now is, not who has the best spin on what mechanism caused what;
that doesn't matter. The question now is, who's actually got an
insight into what the necessary future has to be?
SARE: I just wanted to say along those lines, to really
caution our viewers and anyone who's thinking that the way to
think about this is not to say how do we put together this broken
system; like Humpty Dumpty has fallen off the wall. It's over;
and only recognizing that almost every fundamental axiom that
people had about economics in the trans-Atlantic was faulty. And
I do have to point out that in 1988, Mr. LaRouche called for the
reunification of Germany based on his knowledge of the collapse
of the Soviet Union's economy. And he made a proposal that the
West would provide food to Poland in return for early steps
toward an early reunification of Germany; and exactly one year
later, the Berlin Wall came down, and one year after that, Berlin
was the capital again and Germany was re-unified. And he and his
wife both said at that time, the Soviet communist system has
failed; but that does not mean that the free trade trans-Atlantic
system is a success. This, too, is finished; and it's end will
be much larger and more catastrophic than the disintegration of
the Soviet Union as we saw in '89. So now we are truly there;
and the point is for the United States to recognize what Rachel
just said about Alexander Hamilton, what's embedded in our own
Constitution. That that understanding of the intent of our
republic, combined with what Kesha represents in terms of the
space program and a true scientific orientation, is the platform
from which the United States can move to the future.
And I just want to add — because Ben had sent something out
and I think Kesha, too — there's something circulating on the
web of 30 gigantic projects that China is engaged in building
which are changing the whole planet; these are huge
infrastructure projects. One of them is a 16-mile long
suspension bridge across the Yangtze River; another is a group of
nuclear power plants; and so on. I think the most expensive any
of these projects was, was something like $3.4 billion. The
bridges might have been $1 billion or $750 million or something.
Think about that and think about the bail-out. The first
bail-out of AIG — and there was more than one; but the first
bail-out of AIG was $80 billion. Now, $80 billion is probably
more than the sum of what was spent on all of these 30 giant
projects combined. You will also argue that this is not the same
kind of dollars; just like that's the problem with the metric of
what the space program generated, but I'm just using it as an
example. Because particularly in the United States and Western
Europe, people have a totally insane view of what constitutes
value and what is money. And if you just look at something like
this, you can see that the destruction, the degradation and
collapse of the United States has absolutely nothing to with
money per se; because we could have taken that $80 billion from
the AIG bail-out and invested it into high speed rail, nuclear
power, getting back to the Moon, any of these things. And I
think we've done a number of $80 billion [bail-outs] just for
AIG, but the policy decision was not to do that. And that's the
point of the insanity; and that's what we have to change, because
money itself has no intrinsic value. Once you understand that,
you can stop panicking about all the money that's going to be
wiped out if everyone crashes and has their silly irrational
responses, or maybe it's finally rationality setting in. Money
doesn't matter per se; the question is, what is the direction of
human progress, what is the direction of humankind? From that
standpoint, we can turn on a dime; not that everything is going
to be repaired instantaneously. It'll take probably two
generations for the United States to achieve a standard of living
that would be appropriate for this nation. But nonetheless, the
direction could occur tomorrow; provided we do what Kesha said
first at the beginning, which is that Obama is no longer in
control of running the direction of this country — nor anybody
who thinks like Obama.
OGDEN: Well, I think it's very important that you brought
up this question of the fictitious values at the root of this
entire trans-Atlantic system; because what we're seeing in the
distinction between the bankrupt collapsing system in the
trans-Atlantic Europe-centered area, and then the growth in
China, in Russia, in India, and in that new Eurasian system.
These are not comparable types of systems; this is not one
person's loss is another person's gain or something like that.
These are completely two distinct species of outlook on the
world; and I think that's what we're getting at here. What we're
experiencing with these crashes within the span of just a few
hours, HSBC lost 10% of its stock value; Standard Charter lost
10% of its stock value; the pound was down to a 31-year low —
lower than it's been since 1985. But what is all of this? This
is just the evaporation of fictitious value.
On the other hand, you have substantial, real growth in the
form of the reconstruction of the New Silk Road, the development
of the vast interior Eurasian continent, the development of new
transport routes, these new development corridors. Diane, I
think it's appropriate that you brought up the turning point in
1989 with the crash of the Soviet Union, because what we're
experiencing now is something at least of that caliber, if not
far, far greater than the caliber of 1989. And you're right, Mr.
LaRouche was clear at that point that the Soviet system was
merely the first show to drop; now we're experiencing the second
shoe has dropped. This system is bankrupt. And at that time in
1989, is when Lyndon and Helga LaRouche planted the seeds for
what has now emerged as the New Paradigm, as the new Eurasian
economic system. At that time it was first — in its nascent
form — the Productive Triangle; then it became what was the
Eurasian Land-Bridge. This was adopted in the form of the New
Silk Road; and now this is being expanded to the World
Land-Bridge. This is a vision for a global and extraterrestrial
development policy. But Mr. LaRouche made several trips to
Russia during the 1990s; several trips to India as well. Mrs.
LaRouche has travelled now multiple times to China in the last
several years. This is the center; this is Mr. LaRouche's
emphasis on the impetus of leadership, the hegemonic influence at
this time of the creative leadership of the leaders of these
nations. President Putin, President Xi Jinping, Prime Minister
Modi, and others.
DENISTON: I think it's worth underscoring that it's still
playing out, too. We have this SCO summit going on right now, in
which the heads of these nations are going to meet. After that,
Putin is going to be travelling to China for a heads-of-state
meeting with Xi Jinping. In this whole process, you're having
these dialogues to solidify — and I think this is really big —
solidify the Eurasian Economic Union cooperation with the New
Silk Road; which I think is a huge step in these very large but
regional projects moving closer to this Eurasian Land-Bridge,
World Land-Bridge perspective that Lyn and Helga have defined.
So another point of emphasis that Mr. LaRouche has had over
the past weeks, I think is very sobering and represents a very
high level of thinking, is don't assume we know how any of this
is going to play out. This is a developing, creative process;
there's a lot more things going on right now. And we should be
orienting towards not trying to assume we know how all these
things are going to be finished, or what the results are going to
be. This is an ongoing, creative process right now, and this is
how you have to think about it. In the next days, as was
mentioned, out of the activity we're going to be engaged in over
this weekend which is very significant — both here in the United
States and in Europe — that's going to be a critical escalation.
But then over the next weeks also, we're just going to see a lot
of important developments coming.
ROGERS: I think it's important what Diane brought up on the
point of the system of monetarism that has dominated the culture
and society, that has actually set mankind backwards from what
the intention of the foundation of our republic actually
represented under the conception of Alexander Hamilton. That's
really what you have to look at, too, when you think about the
cultural pessimism and the zero-growth paradigm that has
continued to dominate for the past several decades now. It's
interesting, because people try to say that the targetting of the
space program has to do with not having enough money; we just
have to take these budget cuts. And that's the same point. How
much bail-outs have we put on these various financial speculators
and derivatives and so forth that we could not put into the space
program? The idea was that it was never about the fact there
were not enough financial resources to put into the space
program. It was in the intention not to invest into the future.
And there were many people who promoted this zero-growth paradigm
that Krafft Ehricke took on directly, who stated that the space
program represented too much of a "false optimism" for the
population; that it actually gave the population a sense of
optimism and a sense of their identity as human beings and a
commitment to the future. The empire and those promoters of
zero-growth were adamant that they had to put a stop to that. I
was reading an article from back in 1963 in the {New Atlantic};
it was referenced in a book by Marsha Freeman — "The Conquest of
Space and Stature of Man" by Hannah Arendt. Hannah Arendt was
one of these major promoters of zero-growth and backwardness; and
she made the point that the fight against the space program is
not that of money, but a question of man being inherently corrupt
and that nothing good could come out of scientific progress.
And that's the thing right now, is that what Russia and
China and this New Paradigm are promoting that only good can come
out of the nature of mankind's creative mental process in terms
of shaping and defining the future and creating that which has
never been created before. As we're seeing with the outcome of
what China is doing with their space program. That used to be
our mission; why we went to the Moon in the first place, and why
President Kennedy made the announcement that we would send a man
to the Moon and bring them back before the decade was out. It
was our obligation to take on something that was fundamentally
new; that's our creative nature.
That just puts the question that this monetary system has to
be thrown out the window; a new system of economic value based on
the real conceptions of the creative powers of the human mind has
to be brought in. And the best conception to bring that about is
the space program.
BRINKLEY: Absolutely. And Mr. LaRouche made the point that
also what do we replace this system with? The idea has to be a
Eurasian policy; and that's what you see in space, that's what
you see in real economy is what are the mutual interests.
Europe's only chance is to join with this policy; so Obama has
explicitly prevented that. He's called for everybody on the
planet not to join with Russia and China; he tried to prevent it,
whether it was Japan, Mexico, all the coups going on in South
America right now — Argentina. Puerto Rico is being destroyed
and murdered by Obama and Wall Street. LaRouche said this is
also why the [Brexit] vote occurred; Obama's economic policies,
his defense for this doomed system is clear. Also the question
of Obama said our great ally is Great Britain, and it will be now
and forever. Well, what are we showing with the 28 pages? Saudi
Arabia did not act alone; actually this part might not be in the
28 pages, but it's in many other pages that are there to be
released. Through the BAE deal, Prince Bandar, to be found out
that Great Britain might not be our greatest ally. And Obama's
defense of Britain, of Wall Street, his continual murder policy,
the fact that somewhere 111-114 Americans commit suicide every
day; that this is Obama's policy. He is a murderer; and he has
got to be removed. That's the fact; it's an absolutely evil
intention, and he's got to be thrown out.
SARE: I'd just like to add along those lines: One is we
are having our regular Saturday meeting here in Manhattan,
although it's slightly expanded. I will be keynoting it; and we
have Jason Ross from the Science Team is here and others, to
present these two views. We also are holding a concert on Sunday
afternoon, dedicated to Sylvia Olden Lee, called "In Praise of
Sylvia Olden Lee", who was one of our very important
collaborators in the Schiller Institute in this fight for the
question of Classical beauty. And Classical music is something
which can strengthen people, which strengthens our better angels,
as Abraham Lincoln might have said, to actually insure that
justice is done. And I bring these things up, because here in
the US, you have this really diversionary, silly spectacle of
debates about gun control and Congressmen rolling around on the
floor and things like that; pretending that they're in some kind
of civil rights sit-in, when here you have the murderer-in-chief
— President Obama — presiding over a weekly kill session on
Tuesdays, deciding who he's going to kill. Then you had
September 11th, which Rachel was alluding to, where close to 3000
Americans were killed; and justice has not been done. And Obama
— as Bush before him — is covering up for the perpetrators of
othe crime and colluding with them as best we know.
And I think this is a very important flank for those people
who say, "Well, it's impossible; we only have a couple more
months. In January, we have a new President anyway." Well, just
look at what's been happening in the last few weeks, to see how
quickly things can change. NATO has deployed 50,000 troops in
exercises on the border of Russia. Do you really think we should
just presume that we're going to safely avoid thermonuclear war
while we have a killer lunatic who is now more desperate than
ever as President of the United States? I think it's very
important that people stop pretending or picking other so-called
"issues" which are really non-issues; when we have a great crime
which was committed 15 years ago on September 11, 2001, which has
not been addressed. By addressing this and getting to the truth
of what was involved in this — the Saudi role, the British role,
the Wall Street role, the FBI role, the Bush role, Obama's role;
by addressing that, we have a lever by which to expel the current
President from the White House and hopefully land him safely in
jail where he belongs. And to change therefore, the direction of
the United States.
OGDEN: If Obama was so interested in Britain's staying in
the EU, perhaps as Kesha suggested, he could follow suit after
David Cameron and announce his resignation as well. To his
credit, David Cameron has announced that he is leaving his post
as Prime Minister before his term is over.
DENISTON: Obama might be too big of a narcissist; it'll
take more aggressive action for that one.
OGDEN: But I do think that absolutely, Diane, what you just said
about the events that are coming up this weekend — both in New
York and then, Kesha, what you're hosting down in Texas — the
emphasis has got to continue to be, what is the creative
intervention that can be made to uplift the American people and
to lead the American people. That was one thing that really did
stick out when we were speaking with Mr. LaRouche earlier today;
that it's never enough just to have the correct analysis of
events. Our emphasis has got to be, how do we calmly bring a
solution to the table that will be the solution to this crisis?
And that's what you were saying, Ben, that we're in completely
uncharted territory; this is an unprecedented situation in the
history of mankind. You have no idea what's going to happen
tomorrow, what's going to happen the next day. It was almost a
comedy to watch how surprised all the pundits and the investors
and the big masters of universe and everybody were, when they
thought that they were going to sleep last night with the remain
vote having come out on top. And then they wake up this morning
and lo and behold, it's the completely opposite result. That
proves to you that these guys have no idea what they're doing.
Diane, you brought this up in the webcast last week. Why
would you give anybody any credit, when they had no idea that the
Crash of 2008 was right around the corner? Why would you put
your trust in these people? So, you have a completely
unprecedented situation. The rise of the Eurasian system is not
something which is a fait accompli; this is what's driving the
directionality of the possibility of a thermonuclear war breaking
out. Granted, the support for the sanctions and for the NATO
maneuvers in Europe is now becoming increasingly less strong; but
that doesn't mean that you're by any means guaranteed that we can
avoid a fate such as that. So, it's decisive action and it's
creative leadership in the case of what we are able to provide;
and Mr. LaRouche was clear that it's the unique capability of the
members of this Policy Committee to provide that kind of
leadership within the United States.
So again, I just want to emphasize the importance of these
two events that we have coming up this weekend. So, I think with
that said, you can watch for coverage of those events as they are
broadcast. The regular Saturday meeting will be live, available
on the LaRouche PAC website tomorrow for Manhattan; and we
encourage you to participate in that in person if you are in the
area, as well as the events in Texas. And please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com as things rapidly change.
If you haven't yet, make sure you subscribe to our YouTube
channel; make sure you don't miss any of these critical
discussions. And also become a regular subscriber to our Daily
Updates which are delivered directly to your inbox via email.
So, thank you for tuning in, and please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.
21. juni 2016 (Leder) – En intens række af diplomatiske engagementer er planlagt for de næste to uger, som kunne være bestemmende for, om verden tager en tryg kurs hen imod et Nyt Paradigme for udvikling – som det klarest er blevet fremlagt i præsident Vladimir Putins forslag til »en plan for Stor-Eurasien« på Skt. Petersborg Internationale Økonomiske Forum den 16.-18. juni, og ligeledes i den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings program for ’Ét bælte, én vej’ – eller, om verden går i krig, med udslettelse til følge, sådan, som det promoveres af London og dets skakbrik Obama.
På torsdag afholder Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen (SCO) sit årlige topmøde i Tasjkent, Usbekistan. Indien og Pakistan skal indføres som nye medlemmer, og Iran vil få en højere status over observatør nu, da FN’s sanktioner er blevet ophævet i kølvandet på P5+1-aftalen. Fra Tasjkent vil den russiske præsident Putin rejse til Kina for et officielt statsbesøg hos præsident Xi. Den russiske vicepremierminister Dmitry Rogozin er allerede i Kina, hvor han forbereder mødet med Kinas vicepremierminister Wang Yang. Man er allerede i gang med at udarbejde aftaler om samarbejde om rumteknologi, om det mulige salg af en $11 mia. stor andel i Ruslands statslige olieselskab, Rosneft, samt en mulig kinesisk investering i højhastigheds-jernbanelinjen Moskva-Kazan, som sluttelig kommer til at løbe hele vejen til Beijing.
Torsdag den 23. juni vil den længe ventede Brexit-afstemning finde sted i Storbritannien. Den 28. juni træffer de europæiske statsoverhoveder beslutning om, hvorvidt de skal forlænge sanktionerne mod Rusland over Ukraine i yderligere seks måneder. Den franske udenrigsminister gjorde det i mandags klart, at han forventer, at sanktionerne forlænges, men han indikerede, at Frankrig vil gennemtvinge en debat for en tidsramme for sanktionernes reducering og fjernelse. På et eller andet tidspunkt, måske før afstemningen den 28. juni, forventes Normandiet-4-gruppen (Putin, Merkel, Hollande og Poroshenko) at mødes for at forsøge at kickstarte Minsk II-processen, der er gået i stå, og som er et nøglespørgsmål mht. sanktionerne mod Rusland.
NATO’s krigsprovokationer imod Rusland forårsager tydeligvis dybe rifter i de europæiske regeringsinstitutioner. Den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeiers skarpe angreb på NATO i søndagens Bild am Sonntag er tydeligvis en indikation på sådanne splittelser. Den italienske premierminister Renzis og EU-kommissionens præsident Junckers tilstedeværelse i Skt. Petersborg er en anden.
En mere dybtgående undersøgelse af NATO-forsvarsministrenes møde i Bruxelles i sidste uge, som en forberedelse til NATO-statsoverhovedernes topmøde i Warszawa den 7.-8. juni, demonstrerer det vanvid, der har grebet Alliancen. De deltagende ministre aftalte at tilføje cyberspace som et yderligere militært domæne – i tillæg til luft, land, vand og rummet. Hvad dette rent konkret betyder, er, at et angiveligt cyber-angreb imod et NATO-medlemsland kunne udløse en anråbelse af den fælles forsvarsklausul (artikel V) i NATO’s charter, som kunne føre til et militært NATO-angreb på det land, der får skylden for cyber-angrebet. Dette er topmålet af galskab og kan blive en ny, hårfin udløsermekanisme for krig med Rusland og Kina – to lande, der gentagent er blevet beskyldt for at føre cyber-krig imod USA og Europa (sidste uges hackerangreb ind i det Demokratiske Partis database, som det oprindeligt var blevet »bevist« var blevet udført af den russiske stat, fandtes senere at være blevet udført af en hacker uden forbindelse til Rusland).
Som en kommentar til denne række af diplomatiske begivenheder fastslog Lyndon LaRouche den basale pointe: Vi ved endnu ikke, hvad der vil komme ud af disse begivenheder. Vi ved imidlertid, at Putin har sin egen, klare strategi og dagsorden, og han vil handle på det. Alt imens vi ikke specifikt ved, hvad Putin vil gøre, så ved vi, at det vil blive en faktor, der vil forme den globale situation.
Foto: Et amerikansk Air Force B-52 Stratofortress anfører en formation af fly, inklusive polske, tyske og svenske styrker, over Det baltiske Hav, 9. juni 2016. NATO-allierede udfører en række realistiske øvelsesmissioner på Ruslands grænser. (U.S. Air Force photo)
17. juni, 2016 – Brexit-afstemningen den 23. juni, der nu er sat i forbindelse med attentatet på parlamentsmedlemmet for Labour Jo Cox, holder hele Storbritannien i en tilstand af total tumult. Den sidste redelige meningsmåling viser meget tæt løb i Brexit-afstemningen, med 15 -18 procent af vælgerne, som stadig ikke har besluttet sig, og hvoraf de fleste ikke er tilknyttet de to store partier. De britiske myndigheder spiller med kortene meget tæt på kroppen vedrørende mordet på Cox, så det er stadig uklart, hvorvidt det blev udløst af højrefløjsforbindelser til morderen, der også gennem længere tid har lidt af alvorlig mental sygdom.
Alle de britiske nøgleinstitutioner er, ifølge en ledende amerikansk kilde, splittet over Brexit-afstemningen. Det inkluderer City of London, Club of the Isles (internationalt netværk af britiskkontrollerede virksomheder og banker, -red.) og Monarkiet. Nogle, selv inden for City, argumenterer med, at en Brexit vil befri Storbritannien fra den evigt ekspanderende indtrængning af EU-kommissionens bureaukrati i Bruxelles, mens andre frygter, at tabet af bånd til kontinentet i høj grad vil svække City’s position som verdens finanshovedstad. Ifølge kilden er krigen bag scenen brutal. Hvis Cameron taber afstemningen og Storbritannien forlader EU, vil han næsten omgående være ude. Han er desperat og har forskertset muligheden for at gå sammen med Corbyn, der også støtter Storbritanniens forbliven i EU. Hvis Brexit vinder, er det også sandsynligt, at Skotland og Irland i løbet af de næste få år begge vil tage skridt til at forlade det Forenede Kongerige, og rette ind efter kontinental-Europa og EU.
Mordet på parlamentsmedlem Jo Cox passer ind i mønstret med mentalt forstyrrede personer, der fremstilles som noget andet – præcis som Omar Mateen (gerningsmanden ved Orlandoskyderiet, -red.) fejlagtigt portrætteres som en ISIS-agent, snarere end den britisk/saudiske/FBI-agent, som han var. Verdenspressen gav genlyd med historien om, at den mordmistænkte Tommy Mair havde råbt ”Britain First”, da han dræbte Cox, med reference til en stærkt højreorienteret organisation i UK. Britiske kilder fortalte i dag EIR, at der kun var én kilde til den historie – Maria Eagle, en forsvarsminister, der er tilhænger af Blairs politiske ideologi, i Labourpartiets skyggekabinet (den officielle oppositions skyggekabinet, -red), som kun få minuttert efter mordet tweetede, at Mair havde råbt ”Britain First.” Hun befandt sig ikke engang på drabsscenen! Hun slettede hurtigt opslaget på Tweeter, men på det tidspunkt var det allerede i alle overskrifter i hele verden.
Jo Cox, mordofret, var en radikal anti-Assad fanatiker, der krævede krig mod Assad. Hun arbejdede med Obamas kampagne i North Carolina i 2008, men sagde, at Obama (og Cameron) begik en frygtelig fejltagelse ved ikke militært at gennemtvinge regimeskifte i Syrien, og forlangte nye sanktioner mod Rusland for dets handlinger i Syrien.
Foto: Medlem af det britiske parlament for Labour, Jo Cox, myrdet i en alder af 41.
– Vi befinder os tydeligvis i en situation under hastig forandring, i hele verden. Vi har i løbet af de seneste dage haft uddybende diskussioner med både Lyndon og Helga LaRouche. Lyndon LaRouche var meget kortfattet i sit råd, da han i går sagde: »Vær årvågne. Tingene kommer til at ændre sig meget hurtigt. Dette er en farlig periode.« Vi har stadig væk en trussel om global atomkrig, som er meget umiddelbar, men der er også en masse ting, der ændrer sig, som det meget tydeligt ses af de skiftende holdninger i Europa, Xi Jinpings besøg i Centraleuropa netop nu for at fremme Den Nye Silkevej, samt begivenhederne på det Internationale Økonomiske Forum i Skt. Petersborg.
Hr. LaRouche gik i dybden med nogle punkter tidligere på dagen, men jeg vil bede Jeff [Steinberg] foretage en hurtig gennemgang for at få en hurtig orientering om den globale situation, og vi vil dernæst i diskussionens forløb trække mange af punkterne frem og følge flere af de ledetråde, som både Lyndon og Helga LaRouche fastslog i deres bemærkninger tidligere på dagen.
Engelsk udskrift. Dansk oversættelse af uddrag af webcastet følger snarest. Bliv på kanalen!
LaRouche Friday Webcast, June 17, 2016
MATTHEW OGDEN: Good Afternoon! It is June 17, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly webcast
here from LaRouchePAC.com, which we hold every Friday evening.
I'm joined via video by Dave Christie from our Policy Committee,
who's joining us from Seattle, Washington; and Megan Beets from
the LaRouche PAC Science team, who is currently joining us from
Houston, Texas, where she's engaged in some activities there with
Kesha Rogers. Here in the studio I'm joined by Jason Ross from
the LaRouche PAC Science team as well; and by Jeffrey Steinberg
from Executive Intelligence Review.
We're obviously in a very fast-changing situation,
worldwide. We've had extensive discussions over the past few days
with both Lyndon LaRouche and Helga LaRouche. Lyndon LaRouche was
very concise in his advice when he said yesterday, "Stay alert.
Things are going to change very rapidly. It's a dangerous
period." We still have a very proximate threat of global
thermonuclear war, but we also have a lot which is changing, as
can be seen very clearly by the changing attitudes in Europe, the
visit by Xi Jinping to Central Europe right now, to push the New
Silk Road, and the events at the St. Petersburg International
Economic Forum.
Mr. LaRouche had some points to elaborate earlier today, but
I'm going to ask Jeff to go through a very quick sort of overview
briefing of the global situation, and then in the course of the
discussion we can draw out a lot of the points and follow a lot
of the threads that both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche made in their
remarks earlier today. So, Jeff.
JEFFREY STEINBERG: It's critical to bear in mind that
between now and when we sit down a week from today for another
LaRouche PAC discussion, that we will know the outcome of the
Brexit vote in Britain. People are terrified of the implications,
no matter which way that vote goes, and now we have the added
dimension of the assassination of a Labour Party member of the
British Parliament, Jo Cox, which may or may not have been
directly related to the issues of Brexit. We'll still wait
judgment on that.
Mr. LaRouche had a much more fundamental point that he
wanted to make to us today, which is that regardless of these
short-term factors, the entire trans-Atlantic financial system is
really about to blow. We don't know exactly when it's going to
happen, but we know it's absolutely inevitable, and therefore the
critical question is: what kinds of plans will be in place; what
kinds of reasonable players here in the United States, in Europe,
are going to develop a strategy for replacing the current system?
It's hopelessly bankrupt. There is no way to manage that process.
There was a commentary earlier this week by an economist
named Simon Black, who just pointed out that major U.S. banks,
led by Bank of America and Wells Fargo, have resumed the whole
liar loans, just absolute fraudulent mortgages, that was one of
the root factors at least involved in the 2008 blow-out. He joins
Mr. LaRouche in saying that we're headed for a far bigger
blow-out at some unknown point in the very near future.
Mr. LaRouche's point was that what's needed under these
circumstances is a return to classic economic principles,
Hamiltonian economic principles, in which {physical} economic
factors, and not {money} factors, are the priority, and where you
have to start, is by wiping the slate clean and wiping out all of
the existing gambling debt on the books.
You've got a clear recognition, on the part of some world
leaders, that this is the nature of the crisis-moment that we've
now reached. President Putin spoke yesterday during the opening
plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic
Forum. There were around 16,000 people there. Whatever Obama's
plans, or British plans [were] to isolate Russia, clearly the
isolation is broken. The Italian Prime Minister Renzi was there.
Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the EU Commission, spoke
there on the opening day. The Secretary-General of the United
Nations, Ban Ki Moon, was there.
We're still awaiting the complete translation of Putin's
speech, but what from what we've seen so far, he's made it very
clear that the global financial situation, the system, is very
unsettled. The problems of 2008 have not been resolved. He
emphasized Russia's commitment to be the bridge between the Asia
developments centered around Xi Jinping's One Belt, One Road
policy, and the bringing of Europe into that equation as a
cooperative factor.
So, there are alternative ideas out there, but there's a
desperate moment from the standpoint of the British. We see it in
these two incidents, almost back-to-back: of the brutal terrorist
attack in Orlando, Florida, followed a few days later by the
first time in {hundreds of years} that a British Member of
Parliament was assassinated in cold blood on the streets of
Britain.
OGDEN: Absolutely! Right in the midst of that, you have a
very important initiative from Congressman Walter Jones, who has
taken the next step beyond what he has already done, around the
campaign to release the 28 pages, which would expose the entire
Anglo-Saudi apparatus behind what led to 9/11 and what continues
to be the threat of terrorism, world-wide today.
He had 70 co-sponsors on H-Res. 14, but this week he has
introduced a new resolution, which says, Look, we don't have to
wait for Obama at all. We're going to bypass the Obama
administration, and Congress itself needs to take the initiative
to de-classify these 28 pages. It's a very important bill. The
text of it should be read in full. It cites the precedent. The
Supreme Court decided in favor of (former) Senator Mike Gravel,
who read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record; and
also cites the fact that this is Congress's prerogative indeed.
That continues to be a very critical element in this fight
to dismantle what is in fact, as you were saying, the Anglo-Saudi
apparatus behind this entire campaign. Actually, just because
we've brought that up, I wanted to read, very quickly, our
"institutional question" for this evening, and then we can follow
the discussion out from there. It reads as follows:
"Mr. LaRouche: Recently a scholar at the Johns Hopkins
School of Advanced International Studies penned an article in the
{Asia Times} warning that the Saudi-sponsored Wah'habi terrorism
is coming to Southeast Asia, and the United States has been the
essential enabler of this spread by boosting the Saudis with
protection. Dr. Christina Lin described the Saudi
'religious-industrial complex' as the source of spreading
Wah'habi ideology. Hillary Clinton recently rebuked Saudi Arabia
and two other U.S. allies — Qatar and Kuwait — by name, for
their support of terrorist networks and ideology. Mr. LaRouche,
in your opinion, what types of religions reform must Saudi
Arabia, Qatar, and Kuwait, and other Wah'habi-oriented nations,
need to enact, to deal with Salafi-inspired jihadi terrorism?"
Jeff, I know that you wrote a sort of summary article
earlier, in the beginning of this week, that goes through the
entire Al-Yamamah case, and everything that is implied by the
fact that that's still an on-going apparatus. Maybe you want to
give a little bit of a background on that, in response to this
question.
STEINBERG: Well, let me just start by saying that I think
the idea of any kind of near-term reform of Saudi Arabia or these
other countries that subscribe to Wah'habism, is a very unlikely
phenomenon. We've got to take the approach that this whole
apparatus has to be exposed, top down, and completely dismantled.
It's going to have to come from the outside.
A very, very interesting discussion took place earlier this
week [on June 14] on the John Batchelor [radio] show in New York,
where Dr. Stephen F. Cohen, a Russia specialist, professor
emeritus of Russian studies, history and politics at New York
University, for the first time touched on the issue of Obama's
removal from office. He said one of the greatest crimes that
Obama has committed, has been the breaking of the cooperation
with Russia, that basically the U.S. has no understanding or no
capacity for dealing with this threat of Salafist terrorism, but
Russia does. Therefore Obama's demonization of Putin, refusal to
cooperate with Russia, is piling up the body-count around the
globe.
In a very real sense, the Obama question and the British
Al-Yamamah question goes to the heart of what Dr. Lin said in
that [{Asia Times}] article, namely, who are the enablers? Who
makes it possible? Because Saudi Arabia on its own could do very
little, were it not for the sponsorship by Washington, by London,
and we can't leave out Paris in this equation, of the whole
development of the strategy of playing the Islamic fundamentalist
card for regime change. It started with the Soviet Union. It
extended to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now this is really
what's playing out in Syria.
Unless you're willing to force the severing of the British
and U.S. support for this jihadist spread of terrorism, then
you're really not going to address the problem. If you single out
Saudi Arabia and leave out Britain, then you're leaving
Al-Yamamah and everything that that implies off the hook. This
was an arrangement that was made in 1985 between [then-Saudi
Ambassador to the U.S.] Prince Bandar [bin Sultan] and [then
British Prime Minister] Margaret Thatcher, to set up what was
ostensibly an oil-for-weapons deal. But under the cover of that,
they amassed hundreds of billions of dollars in offshore
slush-funds, and those funds have been really what's been behind
the terrorism.
The 28 pages make it clear that Prince Bandar was a source
of funding to the 9/11 hijackers at a time that he was getting
upwards of $2 billion wired into that account from the Bank of
England, as the result of his sponsorship of Al-Yamamah. If you
talk about the Saudis without talking about the British and
without talking about Bush, and now Obama, then you're never
going to solve the problem.
OGDEN: You mentioned what Stephen Cohen had to say. I think
this is obviously a very big step for him to make these remarks,
but he said, "The major single largest cost of this unnecessary
cold war with Russia, is Washington's refusal to cooperate with
Russia against international terrorism, whether in Syria or in
homeland security. That, I think, is an indictment of our
political class, the Obama administration and Congress in
particular, that we all should judge very, very harshly, because
they're endangering each and every one of us and our families.
Russia knows how to do counter-terrorism. We know we don't know
how to do it very well."
And then he said, "I would call this anti national security.
These are impeachable offenses by our government, that they are
not doing things, out of this political, ideological Cold War
against Russia, that could help protect us. Whether we talk about
Syria or talk about homeland security, it's a pattern, and it
needs to end right away."
One thing that just developed out of this yesterday, is
front-page coverage in the {New York Times} of a "dissent
channel," [a draft copy of an internal memo] by 50 mid-level
State Department officials, "urging the United States to carry
out military strikes against the government of President Bashar
al-Assad to stop its persistent violations of a cease-fire in the
country's five-year-old civil war," which is obviously a direct
declaration of war against what Russia is doing in Syria right
now.
STEINBERG: Absolutely!
DAVE CHRISTIE: This is occurring in the middle of where the
Syrian government has just unleashed leaflets into Rakka, saying,
"We're coming!" The Russians have been very clear on this, that
they're not going to sit around and play games, or allow Obama
and his gang to play games, around this idea that we need more
time to separate out the moderate terrorists, which don't exist
anyway. This is a move to shut them down.
Coming back to this point that what has been raised on the
nature of the terrorism, going back to the Al-Yamamah deal, this
was effectively the geo-political enforcement wing of what was
ushered in at that time. We had some discussions earlier this
week where this was coincident at the same time that Thatcher
brought in the whole "Big Bang" program to have London be the
center of global finance and this speculative offshore financial
system, which was sort of the consolidation of what had come in
in 1971, as Mr. LaRouche forecast, that when they broke with the
Bretton Woods system, they turned their back on the real economic
progress that we saw under Kennedy and, of course, Roosevelt
before then.
There was an explicit destruction of the American System
that could have swept the planet, were it not for that
intervention by the British in '71. Mr. LaRouche was clear at
that point, that this would result in fascism. We've now seen
that come to fruition. But the point is, that's the bankrupt
system that is now collapsing; and what Mr. LaRouche said today I
think is very important on the Obama question, and more
importantly what Obama represents. Because he represents the
British Empire, he represents this integrated financial apparatus
which is funding itself through the dope trade, enforcing it
through terrorism, the whole migrant crisis; all of this is part
of the integrated policy of the British Empire. And what
LaRouche said about Obama and that system is that they can't win;
Obama is going to lose, period. The question is, will others
win? And what Lyn also said today I think is very important, he
says that Putin has shown this leadership; he's straight on this,
he's the best leadership we have so far. And I think that's part
of this growing recognition that the BRICS nations and
specifically Russia, China, India, are now the world leadership;
the British are having to react. And I think what we're seeing
in terms of their reaction is, of course, increasingly dangerous;
because they see what the writing on the wall is in terms of the
imminent collapse of their financial system while this New
Paradigm is being consolidated. Helga made the point on this
question of the German bonds; their 10-year bonds are trading at
negative interest rates, so that is a huge psychological shock to
the German people. Anybody in business knows the implications of
that.
So you can really see that the political turmoil here in
terms of the potential of Europe to begin to shift towards this
new emerging leadership; similarly in Japan that we see. The
fact that the situation in Korea is similarly potentially
shifting; and of course, Ban Ki Moon just spoke in front of the
St. Petersburg Economic Forum. So, you just really get a sense
of what the potential is to shift this thing. And I think what
we have to do is recognize that that global leadership is now
being established; but it's up to the American people to
recognize that Obama will lose. People think that he's
all-powerful and they look at this crazy political election,
which is frankly designed around Obama. The whole circling of
the wagons around Hillary wasn't so much circling the wagons
around Hillary in terms of her campaign; it was really circling
it around Obama. And of course, Trump, what is this? It's
nothing but a clown show to allow Obama to continue with this
agenda. But as Mr. LaRouche said, he will lose. The question
is, will we take up the leadership and responsibility to win?
OGDEN: And the point that Jeff made about the attempts to
isolate Russia clearly have failed. I think that the St.
Petersburg Economic Forum is a testament to that fact. And then
you have the very strong collaboration between Putin and Xi
Jinping right now, which is being acknowledged on all fronts. I
think that it was very poetically at the St. Petersburg Economic
Forum by one of the visiting ministers from Ecuador, who said "We
view with envy the great projects that change the history of
civilization." That's where we are. I think Helga LaRouche was
calling it an "epical moment"; it's a change in epic, both with
the emergence of this new world system, but also the fact that
we're experiencing for the first time in history the negative
interest rates within the European system and so forth. But this
Ecuadoran minister said, these projects that change the history
of civilization, with the New Silk Road that China has proposed,
the creation of the AIIB, the BRICS bank, the Eurasian project
which Russia has defended. I don't know if people saw the full
speech that Indian Prime Minister Modi made when he came to
Washington last week; but when he spoke in front of the joint
session of Congress, what he concluded his remarks with was
beautiful. He said, "The foundations of the future are now
firmly in place." And then he quoted from a poem by Walt Whitman
from {The Leaves of Grass}; a poem called "To Think of Time." And
Modi said, "The orchestra have sufficiently tuned their
instruments. The baton has given the signal"; and then Modi
said, "Let me add to that if I might, there is a new symphony in
play." And I think that's a perfect way of describing the new
world system which is now breaking onto the horizon. And it
really has, despite the attempts by Obama and his allies, to
isolate this and to try to beat this back. It is continuing to
take hold.
ROSS: That's true; it's undeniably taking hold in the world
in such a way that it's clear to everybody, too, that that's a
real standard of value. You're not looking at the U.S., you're
not looking at the European Central Bank; you're looking at where
the growth is coming from; anyone can see that who is looking at
it. And the obligation that we have to prevent the U.S. from
being the stumbling block in this; because it's astonishing to
read the contrast between the speech that Modi made, or the
remarks of this Ecuadoran who you mentioned, with these kinds of
think-tanks or institutions in the U.S.. They're talking about
threats to American power; how are we going to secure American
power in the coming world with all of its difficulties. It's
such a bizarre outlook to even try to have. It's so outdated, so
European oligarchical, it sounds like it's something from
centuries ago; it hardly sounds like anything that represents
what the U.S. was founded to be under the economic leadership of
Hamilton, under the direction that we have taken at our best
times. So, the great opportunity that we have to join in this in
the U.S., can make all the difference in the world; and it's
unfortunate that it comes to us from such a negative direction.
If we don't do something, the U.S. is blocking this and Obama is
going to create a war to prevent it.
STEINBERG: Putin made a point in St. Petersburg that
clearly there is now a profound strategic partnership between
Russia and through Russia the Eurasian Economic Union, with
China. And he said, this is not a closed partnership; we welcome
European participation with open arms. And then he went after
the TTIP, this U.S.-British free trade agreement that is, in
fact, an exclusive arrangement that would cut off Europe from any
cooperation across Eurasia with Russia, the Eurasian Economic
Union, China. And he just said, look, we're past the point where
we create alliances that are exclusionary; and he pointed out
that there are now 40 countries that are seeking trade agreements
with Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. So, I think that
this idea of this openness and a common future and destiny, is
something that is not only at the core of what Xi Jinping is now
in Poland, and he's on a five-day tour of eastern and central
Europe; and then he's going back through central Asia. So, he's
clearly got this idea of moving forward with the extension of
these policies into Europe; and in effect, there's a major split
beginning to develop in Europe. It comes down to this
fundamental question of, do you focus on physical economy, or are
you stuck in the British system purely money game. It's a point
now of clash where the two systems are so irreconcilable that
they can't both survive. That's also why the war danger is so
pronounced at this point.
BEETS: Well, let me just add something in on this point
about this newly forming world system being led by China and
Russia. I was remembering that a couple of years ago, around the
time of the BRICS summit in Fortaleza, Brazil, Mr. LaRouche said
that this is the beginning of a world system; but it's not the
final form. There has to be now a discovery process undertaken
by peoples of the world to uncover and come to a point of
discovery of what the human species ought to be. And I think is
really the point that is missing from 99% of the discussion that
goes on; most especially in the trans-Atlantic. But even — and
I would put this out as a question — how self-conscious of a
discussion is this in other parts of the world as well? And I
think it's important, because Mr. LaRouche's emphatic point this
morning was that the entire system has to be scrapped; we are at
the point of blow-out. Any moves that are taken to try to save
it are complete foolishness; because anything you try to save in
the system is about to become completely worthless.
So, you have to re-found a new system upon a newly
discovered notion of physical value. And that gets exactly to
the principle that is the most fundamental; but is also the least
known, and the most contradicted in the United States today. The
most fundamental principle of economics; which is that man is not
an animal. And that there is a scientifically knowable principle
which separates mankind as a species from all other species known
to us today. And that's expressed in the fact that as a species,
mankind is the only species that is not fixed. We're the only
species for whom the new generation can be fundamentally
different than the previous generation; as expressed in the
powers wielded by the individual. The scientific powers, the
powers in and over processes in the Universe, which is expressed
in the productive powers of labor of the individual; which
reflect knowledge of principle which is completely new to that
generation. Which is both more perfect and higher than the
knowledge of principles of the Universe possessed by the previous
generation.
I think if we go back and look back to the United States and
to our tradition, we see this expressed most recently — aside
from the leadership taken by Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche in the recent
decades — we see this expressed by the leadership of Krafft
Ehricke and his role in establishing and fighting for the United
States space program. Krafft Ehricke was completely committed to
the idea, and it was a discovery in his own mind, that for human
beings there are no limits to growth. There's no such thing as a
fixed set of resources, for exactly the reason I cited, of man's
potential to always discover a higher principle. Krafft Ehricke
fought for the idea that man must always progress; and therefore,
man cannot be limited merely to the Earth. Man cannot be a
species of a single globe. We have to move out into conquering
space; becoming a species which is exerting power in an over the
Solar System. Reorganizing, shaping, perfecting other planets in
the Solar System, beginning with the Moon. Just to put it
forward, that's the only legitimate basis for an economic system,
is to organize the social activity of man to effect and promote
that kind of activity; and to protect and promote that kind of
capability which exists in potential in each and every human
being. I think that we in the United States especially, have a
responsibility to wake up, and to have a renaissance in the
United States. Where we once again demand our space program, and
demand that it represent the kind of principle expressed by
Krafft Ehricke; and expressed by Mr. LaRouche's insights into the
science of economics.
CHRISTIE: Just to follow up on that, I think that is
probably also the place where geopolitics is — it's the symbol
of the absolute end of geopolitics. And Mr. LaRouche has been
discussing the idea of moving beyond nation-states. That doesn't
mean a homogenized global McDonald's or something like that kind
of approach to economy. What it means is, you're still going to
celebrate the cultural differences, you're going to still
celebrate the fact that people have histories and shared
languages and so on and so forth; but you're going to see that
the core of what it is to be human. We're all human; there's
only one species. And that's no better expressed than in space
exploration.
I also think that what you're beginning to see is how that's
operating now in terms of breaking up — or nations now
collaborating and not allowing themselves to be manipulated
around the British strategies of divide and conquer. For
example, you just recently had Xi Jinping make a trip to the
Baltic nations; to work out the Baltic nations' entry into the
Silk Road program. And that is one way to defuse the tensions
that the Baltic nations would have with Russia. India is working
with Iran on the Chabahar port; where you get access to some of
the central Asian nations, which of course, could be pitted
against China. And of course, China's working with Pakistan
around the Gwadar port; and defusing potential confrontations
that Pakistan and India might have. You being to see that they
are all collaborating around this common mission; and seeing that
all these nations' relationships and integration is important.
And I think that, in terms of what has to happen in the United
States, we should also recognize that what is going on in these
nations, that is determining the global dynamic; and that is also
what is going to determine the internal political situation.
So, all the Americans who are depressed about this crazy
election process, should just flush it down the toilet where it
belongs; because it has no real bearing on what is actually
occurring internationally. It is being defined by this new
concept of thinking beyond nation-states; or at least beyond the
manipulation that can occur under geopolitics where these nations
are beginning to collaborate. That's the point of space
exploration; that's also the point of Mr. LaRouche's Strategic
Defense Initiative, which he raised today in discussions. This
present war drive, which is why the British are trying to tear
down this emerging New Paradigm, really began with the Bush crowd
sabotaging the Strategic Defense Initiative of Mr. LaRouche. Had
that gone through, we wouldn't be on the edge of thermonuclear
warfare; we would have already begun that collaboration back
then. So now is really our last opportunity to take up that
initiative; but we've got to bring this New Paradigm into the
United States.
STEINBERG: I was at an event in Washington when Prime
Minister Modi was here, and one of the speakers was a former
Indian ambassador to the United States. I thought he made some
very important and pretty frank points. He said, first of all,
the most important thing that came out of the meeting, other than
the speech that Prime Minister Modi gave before the joint session
of Congress, was the nuclear deal. The fact that Westinghouse
had been contracted to build six nuclear power plants in India.
So, he's viewing what remains of the actual technology base of
the United States; of course, it's now a company that's working
very closely with the Japanese in order to even meet the
construction requirements. But the other thing that he said was
that the United States has been blocking India from playing any
kind of constructive role in Middle East peace. He said India
has a very important role to play; we have close relations with
all of the Arab countries. But, he said, India views Iran as a
crucial ally; not only economically because of the Chabahar port
and the prospects of India, Iran, Afghanistan economic
integration. But, he said, the threat to India and to Asia of
Islamic terrorism, is coming from Wah'habism; and that they've
never had any experience of terrorism coming out of the Shi'a
branch of Islam. Therefore, India views Iran as a buffer against
the spread of this kind of Saudi-sponsored terrorism into South
Asia and the subcontinent. So, these are areas where there's an
enormous amount of room for a change in policy being forced in
Washington; where the kinds of problems that are right now
seemingly intractable, can be solved through that kind of new
approach.
On the question that Megan raised; Jason, you may want to
say something about this. There was a very high-level dialogue
that was going on 300 years ago between Western and Chinese
scholars on this question of the nature of man. Leibniz was
engaged in a tremendous exchange with China, via some of the
Jesuit missionaries who were there in China for a period of more
than 100 years. So, this common concept of the nature of man is
not something that is alien to leading thinkers in Asia; and I
think what China and even Russia are doing now, is really
reflective of at least an intuitive, if not completely
self-conscious idea of this unique character of human beings as
the only creative species.
ROSS: Xi Jinping — I forget the occasion of his making his
speech — but in some recent remarks that he made, he had traced
through the history of mankind. He was detailing all the big
discoveries that made modern humanity possible; but he went all
the way back. Fire, metallurgy; he talked about in the past 200
years, the incredible revolutions of steam power, of chemistry,
electricity. So, there's definitely a recognition that something
very special happened in a scientific way coming out of Europe
from the period of the Renaissance; that's undeniable. The
aspect of it that was universal, you bring up the work that
Leibniz was doing about 300 years ago to try to maintain and have
a dialogue with China; to have an opportunity for European
science to make inroads into China, to uplift people's living
standard there and to find more collaborators to work on things
with. And also at the same time, his view that Chinese natural
philosophy, or natural theology, or an outlook on the world and
on social relations, that there was a potential for the rest of
the world to learn a great deal about that from China. His view
was that if one were to ignore Christianity, which he saw as
given as a revealed religion based on — in other words, it
wasn't a discovery that anybody could have made. It occurred
through a personality who was in the Western world. That leaving
that aside, China was superior in its moral and cultural outlook.
The attacks on it today are pretty astonishing. People
saying, "Oh, look at China's economy; it's faltering. Look their
growth rate is only 10 times ours; it used to be 20 times ours.
They're going down." Meanwhile, it's just negative interest
rates; it's obvious where the growth is coming from. Also, the
way they have to play up the idea of China being a threat; it
sort of seems like a psychological case of projection almost.
STEINBERG: Sure, yeah. I think it was pointed out that in
the case of Russia that the U.S. defense budget, when you count
in all of the defense expenditures, is over $1 trillion a year.
There's a $1 trillion program to completely overhaul and
modernize our nuclear weapons arsenal; and that's in the
Department of Energy budget. That doesn't even show up in the
$600 billion Pentagon budget. That's $1 trillion that's going
into preparation for the insanity of being able to launch, fight,
and win a nuclear war. Russia's entire defense budget is $84
billion; so it's literally less than 10% of the U.S.'s. And
China similarly; it's a fraction of what the U.S. is spending.
OGDEN: Yeah, as Stephen Cohen said, Russia knows how to do
counter-terrorism; we don't know how to do it very well.
ROSS: We're certainly not acting on it if we do have that
knowledge.
OGDEN: And I think there is an element, as Mr. LaRouche was
emphasizing, of President Putin's own unique insight as a world
leader. Going back to the very beginnings of his Presidency,
with what he did in Chechnya to defeat the threat of Islamic
terrorism there; he said the threat here is that Russia is
Balkanized. That we become the new Yugoslavia. And what would
that imply for the civilization of the world? But even going
back to the fact that Putin's background is as an intelligence
officer, he very well knows that the source of this whole Islamic
terrorism threat has its roots in the Al-Yamamah deal and the
efforts that were made by Prince Bandar and Margaret Thatcher at
that time to deploy the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the
Soviet Union. The Al-Yamamah deal was a Cold War deal; and the
fact that this has not been dismantled, means that this is still
an active threat.
STEINBERG: The other thing that sort of begs that same
question is, is it that we're not good at it? Or really on the
other side? I think you've got to look at the case of this
shooter down in Orlando — Omar Mateen; and consider the fact
that he was employed for 7-8 years by a British company called
G4S, which is the third-largest private corporation in the world,
behind Walmart and some Asian supermarket chain. It's a
mercenary company; it's a "private security company". They're
involved in mercenary activities all over the world. They were
in Iraq as part of the so-called "contractors" involved in the
occupation. In Israel, they man the checkpoints; they provide
the technology. They are the security for the illegal Jewish
settlements in the West Bank. Here in the United States, they
have the contracts to provide the security for 90% of the nuclear
power plants in the U.S.. They're a major contractor for the
Department of Homeland Security. And they had this ticking time
bomb on the payroll; even when he was under investigation by the
FBI for a period of a year, his job was never in jeopardy. You
almost get the sense that these British companies maintain a
small army of people who are severely mentally disturbed; who can
be triggered at any time that there's a necessity for a pretext.
Remember that in January of 2001, Mr. LaRouche gave
testimony in opposition to John Ashcroft's confirmation as
Attorney General; because he said the character of the Bush
administration was that they would look to create a Reichstag
Fire incident to go for dictatorship. That was seven months
before the 9/11 attacks that that warning was issued; and it was
absolutely prescient. So, I think what Dr. Lin said in her
article, that the U.S. and the British — although she focussed
on the United States — have used these jihadists as tools in a
policy of regime change that has destabilized the Middle East and
a lot of other parts of the world. We are part of this jihadist
structure; the British — pivotally so through things like
Al-Yamamah — but for the last 15 years with the Bush
administration and now Obama, we've been part of that same
equation. So, this is something that we've got to face the cold
hard truth of if we're ever going to deal with this problem.
OGDEN: And you see this rabid opposition to even the
declassification of the 28 pages and the 9/11 Report. What
Brennan is doing right now to run cover for the Saudis, is
disgusting.
STEINBERG: And who did Obama meet with today?
OGDEN: Prince Salman; exactly. Well, I think with the
activation of this Walter Jones bill, this is definitely going
one step further; and I think a lot of people have begun to
recognize that you have to call out Obama for what he's done on
this front. We've celebrated the courage that Senator Mike
Gravel had on this when he exposed the Pentagon Papers in the
1970s; and I think that this continues to inspire people.
Obviously, it has inspired Walter Jones. The depth of the
resolution is, I think, beyond your average fare for
Congressional "Whereas" clauses. What it says in terms of citing
George Washington, in terms of citing the Supreme Court case in
support of Mike Grave; and just generally making the point. And
also not pulling your punches on the Saudi aspect of this; it
names explicitly the Saudi government and the role that this has
played. And Bob Graham has repeatedly warned — and I think this
every single time there is an attack of this nature, it has to be
repeated — the fact that the 28 pages were not declassified,
means that the logistical support network that was in place
before 9/11, which enabled the 9/11 attackers to do what they
did, was not dismantled. And for all we know, is very well still
in place; and a lot of the connections. The Sarasota aspect of
the cover-up by the FBI of the 80,000 pages, this speaks to the
fact that this attack happened in Orlando. Then, there's the
entire southern California aspect, which was documented in the
investigations that went into putting together the 28 pages. I
know you've said a lot about this already, Jeff, but all of these
points have to continually be touched upon.
CHRISTIE: I would just add, I think that that as a flank is
very crucial; because it goes right to the gut — not just of
Obama and the cover-up — but more simply of the Bush crowd and
their illegal wars that we've launched since under the guise of
so-called terrorism after 9/11. Targetting nations that had
nothing to do with it, but really had to do with the geopolitical
games against Russia, China, and India. But as Mr. LaRouche
mentioned on the occasion of the Orlando incident with this
Mateen shooting up the club; Mr. LaRouche brought it back to
Al-Yamamah. That you have to see it in a much larger context;
these are not isolated cases. So, I think the flank of the 28
pages goes right to that whole structure that has been brought in
since the Al-Yamamah deal, which has been connected to the
various aspects of the financial system and so forth. What Mrs.
LaRouche said is, if you look at everything, we are at an
absolute {punctum saliens} moment; where you have — as we
discussed at the opening of the show — the question of vote on
the Brexit on the 23rd, which is already having huge
implications. Obviously, we don't know all the details, but it's
highly likely that this assassination of the British Member of
Parliament was related to this. You have the Brexit vote, you
have the financial collapse; now admitted that they're going back
to the crazy mortgage fraud that had threatened to bring down the
system in 2007-2008. You have the German bonds trading at
negative interest rates; Japan's central bank putting out
negative interest rates. You just have all of this coming
together. The war games and the desperation by the British. And
what Mr. LaRouche said is that we have a situation that is
unpredictable. And I think what that means for all of us and our
fellow Americans, is to say that this really is open for what we
decide to do.
In other words, there may be various players who might have
all their different ideas of what to do in this moment of crisis;
but we have to have the sense that we know what to do because of
what Lyn and Helga have done over these decades. And this is an
opportunity now to take the leadership and demand that our
program and policies be implemented. But even more importantly
perhaps, is a way of thinking about it; and a way of creativity
being at the forefront of what we think of economics, of what we
think of human relations in general. So, we just seize on this
moment of the {punctum saliens}; that this is the time to exert
leadership.
OGDEN: I think that's a very well-stated point to close our
show on. Again, the {punctum saliens} — the pregnant moment;
the moment of decision. As Jeff mentioned, by the time we meet
here next week, the Brexit vote will have occurred; a lot is
changing very rapidly. We have a lot to watch from that.
I would like to thank everybody for joining me here today.
Thanks, Jeff and Jason both; and also Dave and Megan for joining
us via video. And thank you all for tuning in; please stay tuned
to larouchepac.com for critical daily updates. If you have not
yet subscribed to the LaRouche PAC Daily email, you may do that
through our website. And if you have not yet subscribed to our
YouTube channel, please subscribe to our YouTube channels to be
sure that you do not miss any of our regularly scheduled shows
here on larouchepac.com. So, thank you very much and good night.