Det centrale tema for Helga Zepp-LaRouches webcast i dag er, at dagens udgivelse af de to dokumentarer om Lyndon LaRouches liv og livsværk leverer vigtige våben til at besejre det apparat, der har ført os frem til det punkt i går, der lå mindre end ti minutter fra udløsningen af 3. Verdenskrig. Den internationale mobilisering for at rense LaRouche, sagde hun, er den eneste måde at stoppe 3. Verdenskrig på. Hun opfordrede gentagne gange seerne til at deltage i at opnå det bredest mulige publikum for disse to videoer.

Præsident Trumps beslutning om at afblæse et angreb på Iran, ti minutter før det blev iværksat, er en utrolig historie! Efter hans tweet som afbrød angrebet i sidste øjeblik, et tweet der blev udsendt lige efter at New York Times rapporterede om “den dobbelte magtsituation” i den amerikanske regering vedrørende beslutningen om at optrappe cyber-krigsførelsen mod Rusland, er spørgsmålet der bliver rejst af mennesker over hele verden: “Hvem er det lige, der træffer beslutninger i Washington?

De britiske imperialistiske, geopolitiske netværk, der [i sin tid] stod bag lanceringen af “Få-fat-på-LaRouche-udrykningsstyrken”, er de samme som dem der står bag dagens krigskampagne. Målet, for dem der retsforfulgte ham, var LaRouches ideer, som skinner gennem de to dokumentarer, der blev udgivet i dag. Disse ideer kan realiseres, begyndende med topmøderne mellem Trump og præsident Xi og med præsident Putin på topmødet i G20 næste uge. Som dokumentarerne viser, er det apparat, der presser på for krig, efter dets bestræbelser på at fjerne Trump, det samme som uberettiget gik efter LaRouche. Mens krig lige netop blev undgået denne gang, vil der komme flere hændelser, der kan føre til krig, hvis ikke dette apparat bliver stillet for retten.

Der er i dag ikke noget spørgsmål der er vigtigere, end at bringe en forståelse af dette til det bredeste udsnit af befolkningen over hele verden.

Afskrift af uddrag:

HARLEY SCHLANGER: Goddag! Jeg er Harley Schlanger fra Schiller Instituttet, og jeg vil gerne byde dig velkommen til denne uges webcast. Det er den 21. juni 2019. Vi taler med Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlægger af, og præsident for, Schiller Instituttet.

Dette er et utroligt historisk øjeblik. Der er en uge til G20-topmødet i Osaka, Japan, hvor der er potentiale for et historisk vendepunkt omkring ideen om en fire-magts-aftale om etablering af et nyt finansielt system – et ‘Ny Bretton Woods’ – en idé som Lyndon LaRouche fremsatte for næsten to årtier siden. Samtidig kommer der en utrolig krigsmobilisering fra krigspartiet, som forsøger at forsvare et bankerot system.

Men jeg synes at vi, for at starte diskussionen, virkelig skal tage fat på spørgsmålet om LaRouches frifindelse, og det initiativ der er blevet taget af LaRouche PAC og Schiller Instituttet med frigivelsen af to nye videoer; den ene hedder “LaRouche-sagen: Robert Muellers første Lejemord”; den anden er en video om mindearrangementet, der fandt sted i New York City for to uger siden. Så, Helga, vil du ikke give os en fornemmelse af mobiliseringen, der er i gang omkring frifindelsen, og betydningen af at disse to videoer bliver udgivet, rent faktisk, i dag?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Jo, altså, for mange mennesker vil det sikkert ikke være indlysende, men hvis Lyndon LaRouche ikke frifindes, tror jeg ikke at vi kan stoppe de nuværende trommehvirvler for Tredje Verdenskrig: Fordi hans frifindelse og neutralisering af krigsmaskinen, som driver Verden mod Tredje Verdenskrig, det er en og samme ting. Fordi det netop er det apparat, der retsforfulgte min mand på trods af at han var uskyldig i alle anklager, som nu driver verden til randen af udryddelse.

I dag har vi, på samme tidspunkt i mange lande rundt om i verden, søsat en international operation med udgivelsen, i særdeleshed, af dokumentarfilmen “The LaRouche Case (LaRouche-sagen). Jeg vil opfordre alle seere, alle Jer som ser dette program til straks at gå på vores hjemmeside, downloade videoen og se den; send linket til enhver mulig kontakt, du har – e-mail lister, sociale medier, bare nogen du kender – og hjælpe os med at sprede dette internationalt. [https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/2019/06/20/feature-video-the-Larouche-case-Muellers-først-hit-job /]

Denne video, som viser den fuldstændig uhørte bøjning af loven i sagen mod Lyndon LaRouche, hvor vi har de absolut autoritative stemmer fra hans tidligere advokat, Odin Anderson, og USA’s forhenværende justitsminister Ramsey Clark, der kommer ind på årsagerne til, at LaRouche-sagen er det mest utrolige tilfælde af bøjning af loven og destruktion af det amerikanske retssystem i USA’s historie.

Nu er det vores mål at få disse videoer ud overalt, og få handlet på dem; hvilket betyder, at vi har brug for frifindelsen af Lyndon LaRouche. Grunden til at dette er så absolut vigtigt er, at det efter min og mine kollegers bedste dømmekraft, er den eneste måde hvorpå Tredje Verdenskrig kan stoppes. Årsagen er meget enkel. Det apparat, der retsforfulgte min mand i 1980’erne, og fortsatte med det i 1990’erne og 2000’erne, er den samme maskine, som lige nu er den drivende kraft bag konfrontationen med Rusland og Kina. Blot for at nævne hvor absolut påtrængende det er, og hvor tæt vi er på hvad der kunne blive Tredje Verdenskrig, er det faktum, at ifølge et tweet af Trump, var ordren til at angribe Iran – efter at de skød den amerikanske drone ned – allerede givet; og 10 minutter før angrebet, der havde tre steder i Iran som mål, aflyste Trump angrebet. Ifølge hans eget tweet, spurgte han de relevante militære kommandanter, hvor mange dødsfald et sådant angreb på Iran ville have, og de sagde omkring 150. Så sagde han: “Dette er ude af proportion”, og han aflyste angreb. Se, dette er en utrolig historie, for hvis det var sket, var vi måske på vej til Tredje Verdenskrig; og dette er ikke nogen overdrivelse.

Trommehvirvlerne for krig var absolut utrolige. Tag blot et par skridt tilbage. Man havde artiklen i New York Times, der sagde, at de amerikanske sikkerhedsstyrker – Pentagon og så videre – har optrappet cyber-angrebene mod Rusland bag ryggen på Trump, hvilket Trump kaldte forræderi. Så havde man historien om at det angiveligt var den iranske Revolutionsgarde, der stod bag angrebet på de to olietankskibe i Oman-bugten. Dette er efter al sandsynlighed endnu en af disse falske nyheder, en falsk-flagoperation. Og det peger på det faktum, at man i USA lige nu har en dobbelt magtsituation. Som du nævnte, eller som vi vil diskutere mere, sker det en uge før G20-mødet, hvor, hvis dette blæses op, den sidste chance for fred kan gå tabt. Og på den anden side har man potentialet for Trump at mødes med Putin og Xi Jinping i særdeleshed og finde en løsning på de mange problemer i denne verden. Så vi er i en nedtælling. Men som jeg sagde, er frifindelsen af Lyndon LaRouche helt afgørende; fordi den eneste måde man kan afvæbne og neutralisere krigspartiet i USA er at gøre denne sag til det mest prominente problem. Fordi det peger på sammenhængen mellem krigspartiet i dag og det apparat som er ansvarlig for mørklægningen af 11. september samt ‘Russiagate’, og folk er nødt til at forstå denne forbindelse.

Schlanger: Videoen er tilgængelig med et link på denne hjemmeside, og den er også tilgængelig på LaRouche PAC [Https://action.larouchepac.com/exonerate]. Helga, hvad der står klart efter at have set denne video og talt med folk om det er, at selvom høringerne er fra 1995 eller 1996 – mere end to årtier gamle – er emnerne de samme, som det der sker i dag. Det er forbløffende, vil du ikke sige det?

Zepp-LaRouche: Ja, jeg mener at tribunalet, der fandt sted i 1995, hvor mange internationale VIP’er, amerikanske lovgivere gennemgik sagen og hørte vidnesbyrd fra Odin Anderson og Ramsey Clark; jeg synes at det gør det helt klart, at der må rådes bod på denne, min mands sag.

Jeg vil stærkt tilskynde folk til at se videoen om Lyndon LaRouches sag sammen med den, ganske vist, lange video af mindearrangementet, fordi man bør se de to ting sammen. Retsforfølgelsen og bagvaskelsen af min mand er i fuldstændig modstrid til hans virkelige liv og livsværk, hvilket man får et glimt af i den meget smukke video om mindehøjtideligheden. Det er i virkeligheden nøglebudskabet, som skal ud til verden. Som jeg sagde i tribunalet, var uretten mod Lyndon LaRouche ikke alene det, at han blev sat uskyldigt i fængsel; men hvad der så at sige også blev sat i fængsel, var hele tankegodset af hans ideer og løsninger til verdens kriser, og dette er endnu mere påtrængende i dag. Så igen beder jeg om, at man tager sig tid; se disse to videoer [https://action.larouchepac.com/exoneate]. Og hjælp os så med at få dem rundt om kloden ad hvilken som helst kanal man overhovedet kan, fordi det er nøglen til at løse faren for krig. Så det er min indtrængende appel til Jer alle.

Schlanger: Se, som du sagde, kunne vi have været i 3. Verdenskrig fra i aftes. Alt imens det blev undgået, fortsætter presset for denne konfrontation fra krigspartiet. Ser du nogen ændring i det, som følge af præsident Trumps beslutning om at holde sig tilbage?

Zepp-LaRouche: Det må tiden vise. Jeg synes, det er en hel utrolig demonstration af, at vi faktisk har en dobbelt magtsituation i USA. Det er blevet et emne for offentlig diskussion. Bare for at gennemgå det igen, fordi især vores internationale seere måske ikke har bemærket det på samme måde, men det faktum, at New York Times havde en artikel, i hvilken de pralede af, og de henviste til, at John Bolton sagde dette på et seminar afholdt af Wall Street Journal for et par dage siden, at USA’s sikkerhedsstyrker, efterretningstjenesten, Pentagon, optrappede den allerede eksisterende cyber-krigsførelse, som oprindeligt blev bestilt af Obama; at de optrappede dette og gik efter el-nettet i Rusland. Nu er dette ikke nogen lille affære, for naturligvis forsyner el-nettet i ethvert land energi til hospitaler, til militærkommandoen og kontrol, til vandforsyninger; så det må betragtes som en krigshandling.

Trump tweetede straks og sagde, at dette var forræderi. Han sagde også, at det på eller anden måde var falske nyheder, når hele historien blev lækket på denne måde. For eksempel påpegede professor Stephen Cohen, som er en meget kendt Rusland-analytiker i USA, det faktum, at {New York Times} efter al sandsynlighed lækkede denne historie i det øjemed at ødelægge potentialet for et topmøde mellem Trump og Putin på det kommende G20-topmøde; ligesom medierne har gjort det før ved mangfoldige lejligheder. Hver gang der er et potentiale for en løsning, lækker de noget, eller gør noget uhyrligt for at sabotere et sådant topmøde. Så dette er én ting; og det rejser helt åbenbart spørgsmålet om, at hvis præsidenten ikke er informeret, hvem er det så, der styrer USA? Det er et spørgsmål, der bliver stillet af mange menneske rundt om i verden; mennesker der bemærker det faktum, at Trump er en ting – som demonstreret af at han holdt angrebet mod Iran tilbage – men at sådanne medlemmer af hans kabinet som Bolton, Pompeo og andre, klart er ‘noget andet’. Så det er ikke klart, hvem der giver ordrerne.

Det samme synes at være sket i tilfældet med Iran – hvor, du ved, denne historie er utrolig. Iranerne, som svar på beskyldningen om at de var ansvarlige for angrebet på de to olietankskibe – for hvilket der ikke er noget bevis; flere regeringer, herunder den tyske og japanske regering, har krævet beviser, fordi denne video som Pompeo udsendte, klart ikke udgør noget bevis. Så nedskød iranerne en drone. USA sagde, at denne drone var i internationalt farvand, men iranerne har nu udgivet en video der viser, at ikke kun dronen, men også et amerikansk fly lettede fra De Forenede Arabiske Emirater, gik ind i Oman-bugten, vendte tilbage og kom derefter ind i, ikke alene internationalt farvand, men iransk territorium. Ifølge de iranske militærkommandanter sendte de flere advarsler om, at disse to amerikanske fartøjer – drone og fly – var kommet ind i iransk territorium uden at få nogen respons. Derefter nedskød iranerne dronen, men ikke flyet, som en advarsel til USA.

Dette er absolut – hvem vågner ikke op og indser, at vi er på randen af Tredje Verdenskrig? – En sådan person befinder sig ikke virkelighedens verden. Vi er tættere på Tredje Verdenskrig end på noget andet tidspunkt – jeg vil sige end på noget tidspunkt i hele efterkrigstiden. Denne fare er endnu ikke drevet over. Jeg synes det er en rigtig god ting, at Trump greb ind i sidste øjeblik, men det var 10 minutter før angrebet! Folk bør virkelig indse, at dette ikke er nogen vittighed. Men igen, på kort sigt er den eneste måde at respondere på at opretholde processen for at få renset Lyndon LaRouche. Hvis man vil stoppe Tredje Verdenskrig, så hjælp os med at få frifindelsen af LaRouche på dagsordenen internationalt; men i særdeleshed i forhold til præsident Trump, som har en meget god grund til at gøre det, fordi det ville tage sigte mod de samme kræfter som står bag ‘Russiagate’, og dem der gør det vanskeligt for ham at gennemføre hans hensigter med hensyn til at forbedre forholdet til Rusland og Kina.

Schlanger: Helga, med korruptionen af medierne i USA, hvor disse ting ikke på nogen måde dækkes i detaljer eller selv i virkeligheden, synes russerne at være mere direkte end nogensinde før i at advare om krigsfaren. Hvad kan du sige om det, som kan hjælpe med at vække folk op til at indse, hvor tæt vi er på denne situation?

Zepp-LaRouche: Præsident Putin advarer om, at et angreb på Iran vil have katastrofale konsekvenser. Han sagde også – umiddelbart efter St. Petersburg International Economic Forum – i et interview til nyhedsbureauet Mir, at situationen mellem USA og Rusland forværres for hver time der går. Jeg synes det er en fair beskrivelse, i betragtning af hvad der er blevet offentliggjort netop nu – nemlig at ‘The Joint Chiefs of Staff’ (den amerikanske overkommando for hæren, flåden og luftvåbnet, red.) for første gang i flere år har offentliggjort deres atomstrategi. Lad mig læse et citat for dig, der gør det helt klart. Dette er en gennemgang af den atomstrategi, planlægning, målsøgning, kommando og kontrol, som omfatter ideen om brug af kernevåben i enhver konfrontation. Citatet, som jeg vil læse for dig er:

“Brugen af atomvåben kunne skabe betingelser for afgørende resultater og genoprettelse af strategisk stabilitet. Specifikt vil brugen af et atomvåben grundlæggende ændre omfanget af et slag, og skabe betingelser der påvirker hvordan kommandører vil få overhånden i en konflikt. “[Fælles publikation 3-72, Atomoperationer]

Dette er utroligt! Det er ideen om, at man kan bruge et enkelt atomvåben. Som om mange eksperter, som for eksempel Ted Postol, ikke har skrevet lange og meget overbevisende artikler om, at det ligger i atomvåbnenes karakter, at det ligger i logikken af den slags våbensystemer, at når man en gang er startet på at bruge et sådant våben, vil de alle blive brugt. Det ville med al sandsynlighed betyde udryddelsen af vores civilisation.

Denne rapport var offentliggjort i en uge, og blev derefter pludseligt trukket tilbage, og det blev kun genopslået på initiativ af ‘Føderationen af Amerikanske Videnskabsfolk’, der ønskede at påpege denne doktrins faktum. Jeg tror, at alt skal ses i sammenhæng, og det understreger den absolutte nødvendighed af at neutralisere krigsfraktionen; hvis gruppering udtrykkeligt indbefatter briterne, om hvem Craig Murray, den tidligere britiske ambassadør, sagde, at for det britiske politiske system, regering og medier, er forskellen mellem fiktion og sandhed helt udvisket; og det burde vække alvorlig bekymring hos alle, fordi den britiske rolle i at anstifte alt dette er helt afgørende.

Det viser med al ønskelig tydelighed, at vi må ændre paradigmet; at krigsfraktionen skal stoppes; at Trump må sættes i stand til at gennemføre sine intentioner om at forbedre relationerne med Rusland og Kina, som han mange gange har sagt. Det er i virkeligheden dette, som jeg beder Jer, seerne, om at hjælpe os med at kommunikere ud: Fordi jeg tænker, at faren er virkelig som den var det i 1914. Uden en dybtgående mobilisering af mennesker over hele kloden, men især i Vesten, i Europa og USA, er vi i stor fare for – som søvngængere – at gå ind i en ny krig, præcis som det skete i 1914. Så kom med i vores mobilisering for at forhindre netop dette.

Schlanger: Hvis vi går tilbage til spørgsmålet om rensning af Lyndon LaRouches navn, så var det netop under lignende omstændigheder i slutningen af 1970’erne under Carter Administration, med galninge som Brzezinski og andre, der pressede på for krig, at Lyndon LaRouche intervenerede med SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative), og operationen imod ham kom som en konsekvens af Ronald Reagans vedtagelse af hans politik. Jeg synes, at dette er en anden parallel, der er ganske slående for at få folk til at forstå, hvorfor angrebet i dag er en parallel til, hvad der blev gjort imod Lyn i 1980’erne.

Zepp-LaRouche: Den eneste måde, hvorpå man i dette sene stadium af det strategisk spil, så at sige, kan komme ud af denne situation, ville være den slags samarbejde mellem – ikke kun USA og Rusland, som min mand i sin tid foreslog det mellem USA og Sovjetunionen – men som i særdeleshed også omfatter Kina og Indien. Fordi hans argument var, at der er behov for [enighed mellem] de fire mest magtfulde lande i verden for at afslutte det britiske system af imperialistisk kontrol over verden. Dette er yderst vigtigt. Det ville dybest set betyde, at der under G20-mødet forhåbentligt vil finde et topmøde sted, som der er planer for; men vær på tæerne, for i ugen op til G20-topmødet må vi forvente en indsats for at destabilisere dette potentiale indtil sidste øjeblik; som vi netop har set det med dette aflyste angreb imod Iran. Forhåbentlig kommer det til et topmøde mellem præsident Trump og Xi Jinping, og det ville ikke alene [kunne] afslutte handelskrigen, men barsle med en omfattende aftale. skulle forhåbentlig også komme et topmøde mellem Trump og Putin. Og hvis det skulle gå rigtig godt, ville der være et topmøde mellem de fire ledere. Husk på, at efter St. Petersborgs Internationale Økonomiske Forum og SCO’s [Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisation] topmøde i Bishkek et par dage senere, mødtes de tre ledere – Putin, Xi Jinping og Modi – allerede i Bishkek; og sagde at de ville mødes igen i Osaka på G20-mødet.

Så det bedste der kunne ske ville være, at de inviterer præsident Trump til at deltage i dette topmøde, og at Trump accepterer det. Fordi medmindre der er enighed om at tage fat på det meget presserende spørgsmål om det truende sammenbrud af det finansielle system, og en overgang til en Ny Bretton Woods-aftale, som især ville tage sig af det nødvendige kreditsystem til industrialisering af udviklingslandene, samt afslutte det system med kasino-økonomi, som vi har nu, ved at etablere et nyt kreditsystem og indføre et nyt paradigme. Jeg tror vi vil diskutere spørgsmålet om et nyt paradigme lidt mere, men der er brug for en helt anden tænkning om hvordan disse strategiske spørgsmål gribes an, for hvis vi forbliver indenfor området af geopolitik, som i forestillingen om at Europa skal blive en stærk, forenet bastion mod andre stærke kræfter – USA, Rusland, Kina; og hvis USA mener, at Kina og Kinas fremgang må inddæmmes – hvis man bliver hængende i den slags tænkning, så er det kun et spørgsmål om tid, før hele denne strategiske situationen vil gå helt grassat og komme ude af kontrol. Så lad os mobilisere for at sætte spørgsmålet om en ‘fire-magts-aftale’ for G20 på dagsordenen, og hjælp os med at mobilisere for det, fordi dette kan være den sidste chance for at gøre det. Fordi det står meget klart, at vi både strategisk, militært, men også med hensyn til den økonomiske situation sidder på en krudttønde. Derfor har vi brug for en akut ændring i hele tilgangen…

Zepp-LaRouche: Folk husker muligvis Martins Niemöller ord, som lød: Først kommer de efter dine naboer, så kommer de efter sigøjnerne, og så kommer de efter jøderne. Ja, man kan blot tilføje: “De er allerede kommet efter Lyndon LaRouche; de kom efter USA’s præsident; og nu må du hellere hjælpe os med at ændre hele denne dynamik”. Så bring venligst disse videoer rundt, og studér dem. Mange mennesker har været bange for at gå ud med ideen om at LaRouche repræsenterede magtfulde begreber, som er nødvendige for at løse verdens kriser. Hele retsforfølgelsen blev gjort med kun ét formål: At forgifte brønden, at gøre folk bange. Men at overvinde frygten, lige nu, for at slutte sig til Lyndon LaRouche og den bevægelse han skabte, er hvad der gør forskellen mellem krig og fred. Så gå med i vores mobilisering ….

Mindehøjtideligheden til fejringen af Lyndon LaRouches kreative liv gjorde et overvældende indtryk på de fleste deltagere, da det fulde omfang af de utrolige bidrag som Lyn har ydet blev tydelige. Helga Zepp-LaRouche understregede, at mens de fleste er fanget i en daglig kamp for at få enderne til at hænge sammen, udfordrede Lyn dem til at tænke 50-100 år frem. Det nye paradigme, der nu dukker frem, blev forudset af Lyn for årtier siden, og han viede sit liv til at realisere sin smukke vision.

I dag identificerede Putin korrekt krisen, at de amerikanske og russiske relationer forværres time for time, selv om muligheden for at USA under præsident Trump, kan have “storartede relationer” med Rusland og Kina, stadig er mulig. Dette blev gjort klart, sagde hun, i rækken af konferencer for nylig i St. Petersborg og Biskek. Men det Britiske Imperium fortsætter med at presse på for krig, med Iran som en seriøs, umiddelbar potentiel udløser.

Hun opfordrede lyttere til at se videoen fra mindehøjtideligheden og til at sørge for, at den kommende dokumentar om LaRouche-sagen får den størst mulige udbredelse. Løsningen på krisen findes, forudsat at folk påtager sig Lyndon LaRouches mission og gør den til deres egen.

Dennis Speed: På vegne af Schiller Instituttet vil vi gerne byde velkommen til alle, der er her i dag, og byde velkommen til jer, som er samlet rundt omkring i USA og forskellige steder i verden. Vi har kaldt denne dag og denne mindehøjtidelighed for “Lyndon LaRouches Triumf”. I virkeligheden er denne historie imidlertid fortællingen om to menneskers sejr. Den 12. oktober 1988 – for over 30 år siden – på Tysklands Kempinski Hotel, et år før Berlinmuren faldt, sagde Lyndon LaRouche til et forbløffet pressekorps: “Jeg kan forsikre jer for, at det jeg nu fremlægger for Jer vedrørende udsigten til Tysklands genforening er et forslag, som vil blive studeret nøje af de relevante kredse inden for etablissementet i USA. Mange vil i dag være enige om, at tiden – under de rette omstændigheder – er inde til de indledende skridt imod genforeningen af Tyskland med en klar udsigt til, at Berlin kan genoptage sin rolle som hovedstad.” Lidt over et år senere, den 9. november 1989, faldt Berlinmuren. Den 3. oktober 1990 blev Tyskland genforenet, Berlin skulle atter blive hovedstaden. Inden for de timer der fulgte umiddelbart efter den 9. november, skitserede Lyndon LaRouche, der på daværende tidspunkt sad i fængsel, så den politik som nu går under forskellige navne i Verden, Den nye Silkevej, Bælte- og Vejinitiativet, og Schiller Instituttet ville rejse til de tidligere Warszawa Pagt-lande, og til Rusland og Kina for at tale for denne idé. Verden kom til at kende denne idé som en ny dialog mellem civilisationer, i modsætning til det der blev kaldt “civilisationernes sammenstød”. Som med personen Florestan, i Beethovens opera {Fidelio}, havde LaRouche vovet at tale sandheden, og hans belønning var at blive lænket gennem hans fængsling. Og som med Florestan og Fidelio, førte Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlæggeren og lederen af Schiller Instituttet, gennem sin utrættelige promovering af ‘Den nye Silkevej’, og hvad der nu hedder ‘Verdens-Landbroen’, gennem sin udformning af ‘dialogen mellem civilisationer’ og gennem sin hengivelse til ‘frihedspoeten’ Friedrich Schiller, den vellykkede kampagne for at befri Lyndon LaRouche fra fængsel. I dag er Lyndon LaRouches triumf mulig på grund af hende. Det er mig en ære, som altid, at introducere Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlægger af Schiller Instituttet. [stående bifald]

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Dette er et enestående øjeblik i vore liv, hvor vi samles her for at mindes og ære min elskede Lyn. Lyn ændrede livet for de fleste af os, på den mest dybtgående måde. Og hvis vi spørger os selv: “Hvor ville jeg have været, hvis ikke for det utrolige privilegium at have mødt Lyn, vor tids mest kreative tænker?” Hvis man ser rundt i vores samfund i dag, ser man så mange liv, der spenderes dårligt, mennesker, der er fortabt i materiel grådighed, jagten på penge, genstande, underholdning – nogle er meget succesfulde. De tjener mange penge, men deres sjæl har allerede længe været spist op af mere begær. Mange er ikke så succesrige. De kan ikke få enderne til at mødes. For de fleste af os åbnede Lyn døren til en sand medmenneskelighed, personligt, og i utallige diskussioner han havde med mennesker i løbet af sit lange liv bevægede han tusinder og atter tusinder af mennesker i USA, i Europa, i Afrika, i Asien og i Latinamerika. Han ændrede rent faktisk deres liv, og bevægede dem på en dybtgående måde… i de fleste lande på denne planet, på fem kontinenter. Lyn talte med mange grupper og enkeltpersoner… unge mennesker. Han oplyste fiskerne i Peru. Han fortalte skomagere i Italien om skomageri. Han talte med italienske lovgivere og lovgivere rundt om i verden. Han underviste iværksættere om fysisk økonomi. Han talte med fagforeninger, lærere, akademikere; verdens bedste musikere. Han åbnede døren til sandhed og viden for mange, mange mennesker. Og mange af dem sagde, at Lyn vidste mere om deres fagområde end dem, eksperterne selv, og at han var i stand til at ændre retningen i deres tænkning. Lyns eksistens er et mirakel. Han trodsede alle hindringer for forfægtelsen af sit mægtige intellekt. Som ung følte han sig som en “grim ælling”, som ikke ville passe ind i det banale miljø, der omgav ham. Men allerede som ung havde han den indre styrke til at afvise enhver intellektuel korruption. Lyn tilføjede imidlertid noget til det talent: Han havde en, for de fleste mennesker, ubegribelig intellektuel omhyggelighed og stringens. Han var virkelig en sandhedssøgende person, en universel tænker, der indtog og tilføjede noget til næsten alle relevante grundlæggende vidensområder: naturvidenskaben, klassisk musik, poesi, historie, og den store Norbert Brainin sagde, efter to dage med meget intensive diskussioner: “Denne mand kender så meget mere til musik, end jeg gør”. Man kunne sige det samme om Lyns viden om historie, den amerikanske historie, Sovjetunionens historie, om Afrika, om den europæiske filosofi. Og på alle disse områder, og jeg har sikkert glemt halvdelen af dem, gjorde han enestående opdagelser og tilføjede kvalitative gennembrud i dem. Ud af al denne universelle viden udviklede han sin egen videnskab om fysisk økonomi, og det blev anerkendt af mange fremragende lærde i mange lande, at hans metode var den mest dybtgående inden for økonomi som sådan. Lyns motivation for sit arbejde var – og er – kærlighed til menneskeheden. Når han arbejdede på et projekt, arbejdede han i 20 timer om dagen, og han kunne i sin bedste tider producere 60 til 80 sider med fodnoter, således at der ikke skulle ændres noget under redaktionen. Han kunne ikke fordrage tanken om at undertrykke folks potentiale, det være sig at de skulle leve i fattigdom, ligesom han ikke kunne fordrage ideen om fattigdom i udviklingslandene, og han begyndte at hade imperialisme, som den form for regering der gør netop det imod mennesker.  Men han kunne heller ikke klare undertrykkelsen gennem fejlagtige ideer om det fysiske univers love, fordi sådanne fejltagelser ville føre til selvdestruktion af kulturer og civilisationer. Jeg har aldrig set eller hørt om nogen, der var så aldeles fokuseret på de nødvendige forandringer i systemet af undertrykkelse, og så aldeles fokuseret på at erstatte det med sin egen vision om en mere menneskelig og smuk verden. Denne opfattelse gjorde det muligt for ham meget tidligt – i 60’erne – at erkende den ødelæggende fare, der lå i rock-sex-modkulturen. Og se på USA i dag med hensyn til den kultur. Hvis Lyn ville have været præsident – og det kunne han have været, fordi han var godt på vej i kampagnen i 1984, og Illinois-kampagnen i ’86 – ville det aldrig være sket. Og havde det ikke været for operationerne udført af de neoliberale og det neokonservative etablissement, ville han have bragt verden i orden. Tænk på de ændringer, han allerede påbegyndte i den retning: Udviklingen af Latinamerika gennem sit samarbejde med López Portillo. Den smukke ide om at få bugt med fattigdom i Indien gennem sit arbejde med Indira Gandhi for en 40-årig udviklingsplan for subkontinentet. Han var i færd med at overvinde NATO’s og Warszawa-pagtens militære blokke gennem sin ide om SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative –red.) , ideen om at gøre en ende på geopolitik og fortsætte med ideen om én menneskehed. Tænk over hvad der ville være sket, hvis hans opfattelse af at bruge SDI som drivkraft for videnskabelig udvikling og at bringe nye teknologier baseret på nye fysiske principper til udviklingslandene, den gigantiske teknologioverførsel, der gør det muligt for disse lande at springe fremad til de mest avancerede produktionsformer. Igennem flere årtier ville en lettelse af fattigdommen i Afrika, Asien og USA have fundet sted. Man ville have haft universel uddannelse af ethvert barn, allerede i anden generation, og af den uddannede ungdom i udviklingssektoren. I USA ville man have haft en offentlig debat om de spørgsmål, som Lyn rejste i sin smukke tale i 1988 i Chicago på konferencen ‘Food for Peace’ (Mad for fred), med henblik på at gøre de afrikanske ørkener til en frodig have der er i stand til at producere mad nok til verdensbefolkningen. Der ville være en debat i USA, ikke om “Game of Thrones”, men om Einsteins Generelle Relativitetsteori og universets love. Han ønskede af få musikere til at diskutere principperne for klassisk komposition, i traditionen der rækker fra Bach til Brahms. Han ville have fået forskere til at opnå en dyb forståelse af livets princip, hvor de ville have fundet en løsning og kur mod de fleste sygdomme. Kreativiteten i sig selv ville være den højeste værdi i samfundet, og alle ville opleve den intellektuelle glæde ved en ny international renæssance. Og vi, der arbejdede med Lyn, havde det privilegium at få en forsmag på hvad det betyder at leve i idéernes verden. Hvis Lyn var blevet præsident, ville denne renæssance-ånd være blevet den intellektuelt fremherskende magt over hele USA og i verden. USA er meget heldige at have sådan en person med et så smukt sind og en sådan profetisk vision. Lyn og jeg havde engang et møde med en biskop i Rom, og han sagde, at Lyn er en mand med forsyn, og jeg er helt enig: Fordi Lyns liv og hans livsværk er i absolut overensstemmelse med skabelsens hensigt. Det er en tragedie for befolkningen i USA og resten af verden, at nutidens onde kræfter var i stand til at afspore denne indsats, i det mindste midlertidigt. Og et gennembrud for hele menneskeheden vil være forbundet med Lyns ideer. Men Lyns vision om, at en fuldt udviklet verden bliver en realitet i form af en ‘Verdenslandbro, er nu ved at ske: En ny form for internationale relationer mellem nationer, en dialog mellem klassiske kulturer, der erstatter konfrontationen, og visionen om et internationalt samarbejde med kolonisering af Månen og en fælles mission til Mars. Hans fjender, som er menneskehedens fjender og fjender af folkets lykke, kan sejre på kort sigt. Men de er allerede hjemsøgt af Erinyerne (‘hævnens gudinder’, red.). De har muligvis kunnet dække over deres forbrydelser for en kort stund, men der er denne højere magt indenfor naturlov, som vil bringe deres forbrydelser for dagens lys. Lyn har tværtimod fortjent evigt liv. Hans liv har udspillet sig i evighedens samtidighed. Hans sind og ideer svæver over alle steder og tider. Lyn er nu i et rige, som det der er vist i Skolen i Athen (et billede af maleren Rafael –red.): Han er sammen med Sokrates og Platon, med Confucius, Kepler, Leibniz, Bach, Beethoven, Einstein og Vernadsky og alle de bedste ’hoveder’ til alle tider, og indenfor alle kulturer.

Du er udødelig, elskede Lyn. Herefter følger Helga Zepp-LaRouches afsluttende bemærkninger:

 Speed: “Et stort menneskes gerninger fortsætter med at indvirke på andre menneskers liv gennem tiderne. For det gode, som en dydig mand kan gøre, kan ikke gøres indenfor en livstid. Således lever han videre efter sin død, og virker videre som i livet. Den dydige handling, det veltalte ord kæmper videre, udødeligt, sådan som han, der var dødelig, kæmpede. Lev således også du videre igennem endeløse tider”. Denne idé er den idé, som Lyndon LaRouche levede med, og levede for. Den sidste linje i dette digt, der er dedikeret til komponisten Ludwig van Beethoven, lyder: “Glæd dig i al evighed”. For at afslutte dagens proces har vi har flere andre ting, flere stykker musik, og i øjeblikket uddeler vi et af dem til alle blandt publikum. Men hvad angår de sidste ord, som vi gerne vil sige i dag, er det mig endnu engang en ære at introducere Helga Zepp-LaRouche. [bifald]

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Jeg vil gerne give jer et citat, som William Warfield gav som bidrag til Festskrift til Lyns 80-års fødselsdag i 2002. “Ja, også for mig har Vier Ernste Gesänge (Fire Alvorlige Sange –red.) af den store Johannes Brahms været hans sidste vilje og testamente. Min ven, hvad kan være bedre end, ‘nu er der tro, håb og kærlighed, disse tre. Den største af dem alle, af disse tre, er kærlighed. ‘Die Liebe er den største af dem alle”.

“Lyn, vi elsker dig så højt, så højt – du har elsket menneskeheden på en sådan måde, at vi gør det til vores hellige engagement at udføre og realisere din vision, at bidrage med hele vores potentiale for at gøre verden til et bedre sted. Du er med os, og vi er med dig, for evigt. Og jeg siger til dig, som dine sidste ord til mig lød: Ich liebe dich (Jeg elsker dig).” [stående bifald]

I denne uges webcast diskuterer Schiller Instituttets grundlægger, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, hendes seneste rejse til Kina, hvor hun deltog i konferencen om dialog mellem asiatiske civilisationer, den 15.-16. maj i Beijing, med præsident Xi Jinping som hovedtaler. Zepp-LaRouche og vært Bill Jones diskuterer, hvad der faktisk står på spil i den såkaldte handelskrig mellem USA og Kina, og hvordan det er muligt at løse den, så begge nationer vinder ved det. Hun advarer om, at det ikke er nogen fordel for Vesten at forsøge at indeslutte en nation som Kina, der har givet så mange bidrag til den menneskelige civilisation. Den eneste vej fremad, som vil være til gensidig gavn for begge lande og deres befolkninger, er et samarbejde og en overvindelse af de vestlige neokonservatives strategi for ‘sammenstød af civilisationer’ – “Clash of Civilizations”.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche gav d. 10. maj et fortræffeligt 42 minutters video interview til GBTimes.com redaktør Asa Butcher. GBTimes.com er en multimedie hjemmeside med base i Finland, der er etableret til at fremme en dialog mellem Kina og Europa. GBTimes.coms grundlægger, direktør Zhao Yinong, sendte en skriftlig kondolence ved Lyndon LaRouches død, og underskrev erklæringen til at rense ham fra de falske anklager der ledte til hans uretmæssige fængsling (1989-1994).

Her følger interviewet på engelsk:

GBTimes: We’ll begin. I’m going to focus on the Belt and Road Initiative today, following on from the Forum in Beijing last week. If you could describe your feelings on the outcome of the Forum that concluded last week in Beijing.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Oh, I think it was very a really important progress as compared to the first Belt and Road Forum. The first Belt and Road Forum was filled with optimism and the knowledge of all the participants that we were experiencing the birth of a new system of international relations — that was already extremely important. But I think the Second Belt and Road Forum saw a consolidation of that, so you have actually a new system of international relations which is overcoming geopolitics, and I think this is one of the most important outcomes, apart from, naturally, the enormous economic development which was presented. But I think the idea that you have a system which has a win-win possibility for everybody to cooperate, is the way to overcome geopolitics, and that is the remaining danger, which after all, caused two world wars in the last century. So this is a real breakthrough for humanity.

GBTimes: There’s been a growing criticism and backlash against the BRI. Do you think this is misunderstanding, suspicion toward this new system? What are your thoughts on that?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It’s actually a temporary phenomenon, because the funny thing was, here you had the largest infrastructure program in history, ever, with enormous changes for Africa, for Latin America, for Asia, even for European countries, and the Western media and think-tanks pretended it did not exist for almost four years! And then, all of a sudden, they realized, “Oh, this is really growing so rapidly; it is including more than 100 countries.” So they started what I think was a coordinated attack, slandering the Belt and Road Initiative, with arguments which I think can all individually can be proven to be a lie. It comes from the old geopolitical effort to control the world by manipulating countries against each other, and with the Belt and Road Initiative, I think that possibility is vanishing, and that’s why they’re so angry and hysterical.

GBTimes: What could China do to reduce this demonization of the BRI?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think China is already doing a lot. For example, even {Handelsblatt}, which was very negative towards the Belt and Road Initiative in the past, they had to bring an article which brought out the fact that the whole argument that China is putting the countries of the third world into a “debt trap” is not holding. For example, the IMF just released figures that there are 17 African countries which may not be able to pay their debt, but China is only engaged in 3 of them, and all of the others have huge debts to the Paris Club and to other big Western banks — so, who’s putting whom into a debt trap?

All of these arguments will be very easy to counter-argue, and the more China makes known its beautiful culture, people will be won over. Because the beauty of Chinese painting, of Classical music, it will win over the hearts. And the most people understand what China is actually doing, the less these attacks will be possible to maintain.

GBTimes: The attacks are more on China than on the Belt and Road Initiative, you say?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, yes. They’re on China because China is the major motor behind it. And some of the attacks were that China is supposedly an autocratical dictatorship, and surveillance state and all of these things. But first of all, concerning surveillance, I think the NSA and the GCHQ have outdone anybody already. And naturally China has a system which uplifts the morality of the people: This is based on the Confucian tradition, and for some of the very liberal people in the West, that is already too much, because it disturbs their idea that everything goes, everything is allowed, and from that standpoint, any kind of emphasis on morality is too much for these people.

GBTimes: Isn’t sometimes criticism of new ideas and initiatives healthy? It’s what we understand here in the West, we don’t openly unquestionably accept new things. We do question, and we are a little bit cynical sometimes.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: It’s superfluous. It’s a waste of energy and it distracts people from accomplishing what needs to be accomplished: Namely, to overcome poverty in Africa, in Latin America, even in Europe. You know, Europe has 90 million poor people, and I have not seen a plan by the European Union to overcome poverty by 2010, which China intends to do with its own poor people.

So I think it’s a waste of energy, and it comes from what I call, when people put on geopolitical spectacles and have neocolonial headphones, then they see and hear the world quite differently from what it is, namely, they only project their own views.

GBTimes: Having been writing about China for the last 5-7 years, it has made a dramatic entrance onto the world stage, when I started writing about it many years ago. And the speed of its arrival, the size of the investments, it can scare a lot of countries — just family and friends who don’t know much about China, they want to know about my job where I’m introducing China to the West, as this bridge. There’s a lot of a misunderstandings. Do you think some of it comes from this ignorance? And how could that be changed?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I have the feeling that everybody who was in China, either as a tourist or as a business person, investing or trading, they all come back and they have a very, very positive view. People are impressed about what they see, the really incredible fast train system. Then, if you go in the region of Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Guangdong, Macao, Hong Kong, this is the powerhouse of the world economy, not just the Belt and Road Initiative.

Compare that with the decrepit infrastructure in the United States or many parts of Western Europe, for example. Less than two years ago, I was in Zhuhai at a conference, and we visited this bridge between Hong Kong and Zhuhai and Macao, linking this entire triangular: And this bridge was built, I think, in six years or eight years, including planning! Now, in Germany, we have a famous bridge between Mainz and Wiesbaden, which has been in repair for almost six to eight years, and it’s still not ready!

So, I think if people go to China, they come back and they are completely impressed, because they see that in China, people have now virtues, like industriousness, ingenuity, creativity — these are all values we used to have in the West, like when the Germany economic miracle was made in the postwar reconstruction, these values and virtues were German. But now, no longer. Now, we have all kinds of other crazy ideas, and therefore China is taking the lead.

So the people who go to China come back with a positive image, and those who have not been, naturally, they’re scared by the negative reports in the media. So the more people can actually go and form their own image, the better.

GBTimes: I have myself, I’ve seen a disconnect between China and Chinese society, and then the role of the Chinese government, the more negative side that gets covered about in the Western media. Do you think, for instance, with the BRI is just a way to legitimize the Chinese leadership in the world, and to raise it up to the same level that is given to the other countries? Do you think that’s acceptable?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, it is a challenge. Some of the Western institutions talked about that there is now a competition of the systems, meaning the Chinese state model and the Western free market model. And in one sense, it is true; the only problem is that if you have the neo-liberal system, especially after the crisis of 2008, only favoring monetarist interests — the banks, the speculators — and the gap between the rich and the poor becomes ever wider, naturally, then, if you have a country where that is not the case, namely, China having a policy which is oriented toward the common good, an increasing well-to-do middle class of 300 million people, which in 5-10 years will be 600 million people, and obviously the vector of development is upward, naturally that is regarded as a threat by the neo-liberal establishment, which only takes care of its own privileges.

So in a certain sense, the challenge does exist, but I think there is the possibility of a learning process, so one can be hopeful that even some elements of the Western elites will recognize that China is doing something right.

GBTimes: What do you think China could learn from the Western mode? And vice versa, what do you think the two could learn from one another?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think China can learn a lot from the West, but I’m afraid to say, not from the present, contemporaries, or, there is very little to learn. Naturally, ESA cooperating with the Chinese space agency, there is a lot of exchange possible. But in terms of general, cultural outlook, I think China has to go back about 200 years to find positive things in Europe, or the United States, for that matter. You know, European Classical culture can be an enormous enrichment for China, but these are composers who are Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, or great poets. But these are all things which, unfortunately are not dominating the cultural outlook of most Europeans and Americans today. So there has to be a dialogue across the centuries, and then both sides can profit from each other.

GBTimes: In a sense, you’re very pessimistic about the Western stands at the moment. Do you think China is the only option available to the West at the moment?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: No, I’m not pessimistic, I’m just saying that you see that some of the elites, or so-called elites, are hardened in their view. You have others who are absolutely recognizing that the whole mankind needs to cooperate together in new ways, for example, Switzerland. You know the President of Switzerland, who participated in the Belt and Road Forum just signed a memorandum of understanding, not only for Switzerland, but for a whole group of Central and Eastern European countries, which Switzerland is representing in the international organizations.

So there is a big motion. You have Italy signing a memorandum of understanding with China, on the development of Africa. Greece wants to be the gateway between trade from Asia, through the Suez Canal all the way into Europe. Portugal and Spain want to be the hub for the Portuguese- and Spanish-speaking people around the world.

So there is a lot of dynamics and motions, I’m just referring to some of the monetarist views and those people who talk about the “rules-based order” all the time, but what they really mean is austerity.

So, I’m not talking about the West in general. I think the West — I’m an optimist about the potential of all human beings — I’m only talking about certain parts of the establishment in the West.

GBTimes: You mentioned Italy and Switzerland. How significant is it that they signed up to the BRI now?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think this is extremely important. First of all, Italy, as you know, is the third largest economy in Europe. The north of Italy is highly industrialized and has a lot of industrial capability; many hidden champions actually are in northern Italy. So, if such a country is now, as the first G7 country, officially joining with a memorandum of understanding, this can become the model for all of Europe. And Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte who just participated in the Belt and Road Forum came back and said exactly that: That Italy plans to be the leader in bringing about a better relation between China and Europe. So I think this is extremely important.

And Switzerland, even if it may be a small country, they are independent; they are sovereign, they are not part of the European Union. And President Maurer just declared, or his spokesman, that they do not need advice from the European Union because they can make their own policy. So, I think this is all a new, healthy spirit of self-consciousness and self-assertion, which is very good, and can be indeed a sign of hope for everybody else.

GBTimes: How do you see it impacting Europe, their participation in the BRI, in the short term, and perhaps in the longer term?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, there are different learning curves: Some are quicker, others are slower. For example, the so-called four big countries — that does not include Italy — that did not send heads of state or government, but only ministers, Spain, France, Germany, and I think Great Britain, by not sending their heads of state sort of expressed their reservation. But then even the German Economic Minister Altmaier, who on the first day of the Belt and Road Forum basically said, “we have to have transparency and rules,” with the usual kind of arguments, but the next day, he said something much more positive. He said: Oh, this was much better than I expected, the Chinese are actually trying to solve problems, and I will come back in June with a large delegation of businessmen. So, I actually find this quite good. It shows that eventually, I think, I hope, reason will prevail.

GBTimes: I think some of the obstacles for Western countries, is like Turkey refusing to participate because of the Uighur problem; that there are other issues that aren’t related to the Belt and Road, that China has to overcome first.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: All of these problems will eventually be solved, because I think the key to solving of any regional, ethnic, historical cultural problem is development. If people actually see the advantage of turning non-developed countries or areas into prosperous ones, into having more youth exchange, young people understanding each other, people-to-people exchange, dialogue of cultures, bringing forth the best tradition of each culture; plus, naturally, real improvement of living standards, longevity, I think that even if not all develop with the same speed, we are at a tremendous change of an epoch of human civilization. The idea of these local and regional conflicts will eventually not be there any more.

If I just can point to the fact that now the eight radio-telescopes working together, being able to make, for the first time, images of the black hole in a galaxy which is 55 million light-years away, proving that Einstein’s theory of general relativity was actually correct — now, that, for me is the sign of the future: Because this image could not have been made by one country alone. It needed telescopes sited in Chile, in Spain, in the United States, in the Antarctic, and you needed the whole world actually working together to make such a technological breakthrough possible.

I think that that will be the kind of relationship people will have to each other in the future, and I think this is what Xi Jinping really is the kind of thing he means when he says, “a shared community for the one future of humanity.” Because the common interest will eventually come first, and then everything else will fall into place.

GBTimes: Another one of the criticisms was currently “all roads lead back to Beijing” rather than a multilateral approach to BRI, where it’s between other country, it always leads back to China at the moment. Do you think that is a problem?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I don’t know. First of all, I think Russia has a big influence, I think the African countries are becoming much more knowledgeable and confident about their own role. There are many Africans who speak that, in the future, Africa will be the new China with African characteristics. So, I think it’s all changing very quickly, and those people who complain that there is too much Chinese influence, well, then they should bring in their active, creative contribution, and define what the new platform of humanity should be.

And I think China has said many times, and I have absolutely every confidence that that is the case, that they’re not trying to export their social model, but that they’re just offering the experience of the incredible success of the last 40 years of the form in opening-up, and basically tell developing countries, “Here, if you want to have our help in accomplishing the same thing, we are willing to provide it.” And naturally, the countries of the developing sector, which had been neglected, or even treated negatively by colonialism, by the IMF conditionalities, when they now have the absolute, concrete offer to overcome poverty and underdevelopment, why should they not take it?

So, I think all these criticisms are really badly covered efforts to hide their own motives. I really think China is doing the best thing which has happened to humanity for a very long time, and I think the Belt and Road Initiative is the only long-term plan for how to transform the world into a peaceful place. And I think that should be applauded and people should have a cooperative approach.

GBTimes: My next question was going to be, how confident are you that the BRI will pay off for China, but I get the sense that you’re very confident.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Oh, I think it already paying off! First of all, it makes it more easy for China to develop its own western and internal regions, because they are now sort of integrated into the Belt and Road transport routes to Europe, to Central Asia, integrating the Belt and Road Initiative with the Eurasian Economic Union, and hopefully eventually also the European Union. So I think it is already bringing benefits to China.

And from an economic standpoint, the more a country exports high technology goods and technologies, the more than becomes a motor to develop one’s own industry even to high levels. So it’s like a self-inspiration, so to speak, and that is already paying off. That’s what any country should do.

GBTimes: You mentioned technology: It’s also the digital Silk Road, Digital Belt and Road. Of course, China has a lot of control over its internet, on the Great Firewall: How much of a barrier do you think that will be for countries to build relationships via the Belt and Road Initiative?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: You mean the G5 question and Huawei?

GBTimes: Well, partly that, too, but also the control of the internet inside of China, which is difficult for Western companies to do business, to establish themselves, as there are a lot of controls there. Do you think that could be a barrier, as part of the digital Belt and Road, that’s also being discussed.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think there can be ways of making arrangements which are satisfying to everybody. This whole question of “digital control” and so forth, is highly exaggerated, because, if you look at who is controlling the internet, you have the big firms, Apple, Google, Facebook, and they are very linked with the Western government’s. You know, in a certain sense, after the scandal of the NSA listening into everybody’s discussions, which erupted a couple of years ago and which was never changed or remedied or anything, we are living in a world where that already happening. And I think China is not doing anything more than the NSA or the already mentioned GCHQ doing that in the West.

So I think the fact that China has a competitive system, to this Western system is what causes all of this debate. Because the people who had the control of the internet first, they should like to keep it that way, and they regard China as a competitor, which they don’t like, but that’s a fact of reality now.

GBTimes: One question I have is why do you think the Belt and Road Initiative is needed, when there’s the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, now? Do you think the two are mutually exclusive, or do they work together?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: No, I think the Belt and Road Initiative has many financing mechanisms. You have the AIIB, you have the New Silk Road Fund, you have a lot of the Chinese banks themselves which are doing the investment. I have been advocating for a very long time, that the West should modify its own credit institutions to work on a similar principle. Now, that would be actually very possible, because the American System of economy as it was developed by Alexander Hamilton, who created the first National Bank as an institution for issuing credit, that is actually very close to what China is doing. As a matter of fact, I would even go so far as to say, that the Chinese economic model is much closer to the American System, as it was developed by Alexander Hamilton, and then revived by Lincoln, by Henry C. Carey, by Franklin D. Roosevelt; so if the United States would say, we create our own national bank; and Germany, for example, would say, we go back to the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, the Credit Institution for Reconstruction, which was used for the reconstruction of Germany in the postwar period, which was also a state bank, — or it still is a state bank — then you could have a new credit system, whereby each country would have their own national bank; you would have clearing houses in between them to compensate for duration of investment, or the differences between small and large countries with lots of raw materials, or not so much — you need these clearinghouses. But you could create a new credit system, a New Bretton Woods system with fixed exchange rates, having a stability in the system which the Western system presently does not have.

So, I think that the more countries go to these kinds of credit financing of projects the more stable this new system will become.

GBTimes: Do you think the United States will ever become part of the Belt and Road Initiative, under the Presidency of Donald Trump, or perhaps whoever is voted in next

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: That’s actually the big question, you know: Will the rise of China be answered by the United States, either with a war, the Thucydides trap which some people have mentioned as a danger? There were in history twelve cases where a rising power overtook the dominant power up to that point, and it led to war; and there were four cases where it happened in a peaceful way. Now, China, first of all, has offered that neither of these two options should occur, but they have offered a special great power special relationship model, based on the acceptance of the other social model’s sovereignty, non-interference. And I think Trump with his America, First policy is more inclined to respond to such a model than the previous administrations of Obama and Bush, who had these interventionist wars in the Middle East and everywhere else for exporting their system of so-called “democracy” and human rights.

So I think President Trump has said very clearly that he wants to have a good relationship with China. He calls President Xi Jinping his friend all the time. And I think the present trade negotiations actually, in my view, demonstrate that the United States would suffer tremendously, if they would try to decouple from the Chinese economy. They probably would suffer more than China, because China is much more capable, in my view, to compensate for the loss of the relationship with the United States.

But I think that the hopefully reasonable way would be to say, “OK, let’s use the foreign exchange reserves of China which they have in terms of U.S. Treasuries; let’s invest them through an infrastructure bank in the United States, to help to modernize American infrastructure.” And that would be an urgent need, because if you look at the U.S. infrastructure, it’s really in a terrible condition, and President Trump, who is talking today, I think, with the leading Democrats Pelosi and Schumer on a new infrastructure legislation; the sums which are discussed here, from what I have heard so far, are so small! First of all, the Republicans don’t want to have Federal spending; the Democrats are talking only about “repair,” and small issues.

So, what is lacking in these discussions is a grand design, where you would take the approach China has taken for the modernization of its infrastructure: To have fast train systems among all the major cities, to have slow-speed maglev trains for intra-urban transport. Now, you could take that same approach and modernize the entire infrastructure of the United States. And if China would, in turn, off that U.S. companies would integrate more into the projects of the Belt and Road around the world, it would be beneficial for both. Some American companies are already doing that, like Caterpillar, General Electric, Honeywell, but that could be a real incentive for the United States to go in tis direction.

Hopefully it will happen that way, because if not, I think a clash between the two largest economies would be a catastrophe for the whole world: So, let’s hope that the forces of good will all work together to get to this positive end.

GBTimes: Let’s talk about the Schiller Institute itself as a think tank. What is your day-to-day role in the promotion of the Belt and Road Initiative? How do you work to support it?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Oh, you know, this all goes back to the life’s work of my husband, who died recently: Mr. Lyndon LaRouche; who spent, actually, the last 50 years, to work on very concrete development projects. The first such project we presented in ’76 in Paris. This was a comprehensive plan for the infrastructure development of all of Africa. Then we worked together with the President of Mexico José López Portillo on a Latin American development plan — this was ’82. We worked with Indira Gandhi on a 40-year development plan, and also in the beginning of the ’80s, we developed a 50-year development plan for the Pacific Basin. And then, when the Berlin Wall came down, and the Soviet Union disintegrated, we proposed to connect the European and Asian population and industrial centers through development corridors, and we called that the Eurasian Land-Bridge.

So we have been engaged in these kinds of big projects for the transformation of the world economy for the last decades, and naturally, we proposed it to China in the beginning of the ’90s. I attended a big conference in ’96 in Beijing, which had the title, “The Development of the Regions along the Eurasian Land-Bridge.” And China, at that time, declared the building of the Eurasian Land-Bridge the long-term strategic aim of China by 2010. Then, naturally, came the Asia crisis in ’97, so the whole thing go interrupted.

We were very happy when Xi Jinping announced the New Silk Road in 2013, because, in the meantime, we had kept working for this. We had {many} conferences, actually hundreds of conferences and seminars all over the world. So this is has been one major point of what the Schiller Institute has been doing for the last decades. So naturally, we are very happy that now, what was only planning on our side is now being realized by the second largest economy in the world, and therefore, it becomes reality: And that makes quite happy.

GBTimes: Is there anything else you’d like to add? I’ve asked my questions and a lot more. Is there anything we haven’t touched upon, you’d like to talk about?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: We could talk a little bit more about the culture of the New Silk Road.

GBTimes: Please — in what way?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think that the New Silk Road, or the Belt and Road Initiative, it’s not just about economics and infrastructure. But I think equally important, if not more important, in my view, is the cultural side of it: That it could lead and will hopefully lead to an exchange of the best traditions of all cultures of this world. And by reviving the best traditions, like Confucianism in China, Beethoven in Germany, and Schiller; Verdi in Italy, and so forth and so on, it will ennoble the souls of the people, and I think that that is the most important question right now, because I agree with Friedrich Schiller, according to whom this institute is named: That any improvement in the political realm can only come from the moral improvement of the people. And therefore, I think it’s also very interesting to me that President Xi Jinping has emphasized the aesthetical education as extremely important, because the goal of this is the beautiful mind of the pupil, of the student.

Now, that is exactly what Friedrich Schiller said, who in the response to the Jacobin Terror in the French Revolution, wrote his {Aesthetical Letters} in which he develops his aesthetical theory, which I find is in great cohesion with what Xi Jinping is saying; and that has also to do with the fact that the first education minister of the Chinese Republic studied in Germany, and he studied Schiller and Humboldt; his name was Cai Yuanpei — I’m probably pronouncing it wrong again — but he was the first president of the Beijing University, and I think there is a great affinity, a much greater affinity between the thinking of the aesthetical education as it is discussed by Xi Jinping and as it does exist in the Schiller-Humboldt tradition in Germany, in particular. I would just hope that that kind of a dialogue could be intensified, because then I think a lot of the prejudices and insecurities about the other culture would disappear, and you would bring back and bring forth the best of all sides.

GBTimes: How could this be accomplished, do you think? What sort of forms?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: You can organize conferences, you can more consciously make the poetry known — I think poetry is very, very important, which is naturally not so easy, because as Schiller said, you have to be a poet in two languages to do justice to the poetry of one language. You could have more conscious theater performances, not just as an entertainment but involving students, children, adults, and make more exhibitions, make more deep-level understanding of the other culture.

I think China is doing an enormous amount of that, but I would have still some suggestions to make it more than entertainment, because many people go to these things, and they don’t quite “get it” what it’s all about; and then, it was nice, but the deeper philosophical, poetical, musical meaning could be made more pedagogically intelligible, and I think that would be a way of opening the hearts of more people, because they would recognize what treasures are there to be discovered.

GBTimes: Do you have any closing words on the Belt and Road you’d like to share with our readers?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think we are probably the generation on whom later generations will look back to, and say, “Oh! This was really a fascinating time, because it was a change from an epoch to another one.” And I have an image of that, which is, this change that we are experiencing right now, is probably going to be bigger than the change in Europe between the Middle Ages and modern times. In the Middle Ages you had people believing in a whole bunch of axioms, the scholastics, Aristotelianism, witchcraft — all kinds of strange beliefs — and then, because of the influx of such thinkers as Nicholas of Cusa, or the Italian Renaissance, the modern image of man, of science and technology, of the sovereign nation-state, all these changes happened, and they created a completely different view of the image of man and of nature, and the universe, and everything we call “modern society” was the result of this change.

Now, I think we are in front, or the middle of such an epochal change, where the next era of mankind will be much, much more creative than the present one, and that’s something to look forward to, because we can actually shape it, and we can bring our own creative input into it. And there are not many periods in history when that is the case: So we are actually lucky.

Se interviewet på GBTimes.coms hjemmeside her. 

Den seneste afsløring fra en aktindsigt (FOIA – Freedom Of Information Act) om Christopher Steeles beskidte handlinger er endnu en ‘bombe’ der viser, at man skal holde briterne ansvarlige for det farlige kupforsøg mod præsident Trump. Og i takt med at der dagligt dukker flere beviser op på den britiske rolle, i direkte koordinering med Obamas efterretningsteam, hvor skal USA’s udenrigsminister Pompeo gå hen for at piske en anti-russisk, anti-kinesisk stemning op? Til London, selvfølgelig, hvor han proklamerede, at ‘det særlige forhold’ (Special Relationship) mellem USA og U.K. blomstrede!

I denne uges webcast gennemgår Helga Zepp LaRouche optrapningen af ‘brændpunkterne’, af især Pompeo og Bolton, der agerer i modstrid med præsident Trumps ofte gentagne ønske om at have gode samarbejdsrelationer med de to nationer. Idet hun betegner de rablende anti-kinesiske beskyldninger fra efterretningsfolk, kongresmedlemmer og medier som et ‘raserianfald mod den gule fare’, understreger hun betydningen af at få handelsforhandlingerne mellem USA og Kina tilbage på sporet, som et skridt i retning af USA’s deltagelse i Bælte- og Vejinitiativet.

Det 90 minutters lange opkald mellem præsident Trump og Putin blev hilst velkommen af Helga Zepp LaRouche som “en rigtig god nyhed”, da hun gennemgik de omfattende strategiske konsekvenser af den nye situation, der er opstået efter Russiagate.

Disse omfatter:

• Betydningen af Trump-Putin-diskussionen om økonomisk og strategisk samarbejde, herunder at afhjælpe situationerne i Venezuela, Ukraine og Nordkorea;
• Det positive potentiale for samarbejde mellem USA og Kina, med endnu et møde om handelsforhandlinger planlagt – dette foregår på trods af de britisk dirigerede neokonservatives bestræbelser på at sabotere det;
• En bredere anerkendelse af det attraktive ved at samarbejde med BVI efter det andet BVI-forum, som det fremgår i flere aktuelle rapporter, der er udgivet i Tyskland;
• Betydningen af mødet om infrastrukturen mellem Trump og de Demokratiske ledere af Kongressen, der fremhæver splittelsen blandt Demokraterne mellem de vanvittige, som stadig er fokuserede på en rigsretssag og Green New Deal, og Pelosi og hendes netværk, der erkender behovet for at opnå noget positivt;
• Voksende erkendelse af den britiske rolle i iscenesættelsen af Russiagate.

Kampen for at frifinde Lyndon LaRouche udgør den bedste køreplan for at forstå hvem der styrede Russiagate og de strategiske årsager hertil. LaRouches rolle viser den enkeltes evne til at ændre historien og bør være en kilde til optimisme, et afgørende behov for at vinde kampen for det nye paradigme.

En person kan ændre historien, og den mest magtfulde kraft i historien er ikke våben, penge eller hære: det er ideer. Lyndon LaRouche udnyttede denne indsigt og brugte den til at ændre verden. I dag ses frugterne af hans årtier lange organisering, sammen med mange kolleger og hans kone (læreren i denne klasse) i potentialet for internationalt samarbejde, som eksemplificeret af det kinesiske Bælte- og Vejinitiativ. For at undgå den truende mørke tidsalder, som atomkonflikten mellem USA og Rusland udgør, er det vigtigt med et begreb om den nødvendige renæssance.

Idet hun erklærede det netop afsluttede Bælte- og Vejforum i Beijing for en stor succes, rapporterede Helga Zepp LaRouche om den globale deltagelse i arrangementet og det udvidede omfang af BVI-aftaler. Hun betegnede den aktive inddragelse af en række europæiske ledere som “meget interessant”. Med henvisning til hendes LaRouchePAC-studiekreds aftenen før, opfordrede hun seerne til at se det klip hun brugte med Lyndon LaRouches tale fra 1997, hvor han insisterede på at USA måtte tage del i den Eurasiske Landbro – og med henblik på hvad der lige er sket i Beijing, sagde hun, at man igen ser, hvor profetisk han var med hensyn til at imødekomme menneskehedens fremtidige behov.

Nu, hvor Trump åbenlyst identificerer Russiagate som et “kup”, der er udtænkt til at drive ham ud af embedet – hvilket medierne, hvor utroligt det end måtte være, praktisk talt har ignoreret, – er det klart, at den britiske rolle i organiseringen af kuppet vil komme ud, sammen med deres rolle i at angribe BVI. Hun understregede, at i betragtning af at de der står bag kuppet kommer fra de samme netværk, som engagerede sig i de massive bagvaskelser af Lyndon LaRouche, er kampen for hans frifindelse afgørende for USA’s overlevelse.

Ligesom Cusas genoplivelse af Platons værker var afgørende for at skabe Den italienske Renæssance, er en fordybelse i LaRouches videnskabelige og filosofiske værker ligeledes afgørende for at sikre succesen for det nye paradigme i dag. Den ekstraordinære internationale indsats der var involveret i de fantastiske fotografier taget af et “sort hul” er en anden demonstration af dette princip: at det er vigtigt at udfordre alle aksiomerne fra et højere synspunkt. Internationalt samarbejde i rummet er afgørende for at inspirere dagens ungdom til at favne ægte videnskab for at skabe en bedre fremtid.

Schiller Instituttets internationale webcast den 28. marts, 2019 med Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Frigivelsen af den særlige anklager Muellers rapport, hvori han blev tvunget til at indrømme, at der ikke var tegn på at præsident Trump eller hans kampagnestab samarbejdede med Rusland, og intet bevis for at anklage ham for obstruktion fører til spørgsmålet, hvem stod bag det, og hvorfor? Dette må forfølges, som rep. Nunes meddelte, at han planlægger at gøre, og som Trump selv i sine tweets i sidste uge har gjort klart skal gøres; Trumps tweets identificerede den britiske rolle i lanceringen af Russiagate for at forhindre et bedre forhold mellem USA og Rusland og Kina. Frigivelsen af rapporten har åbnet op for ‘regnskabets time’.

Det fremgår klart af anti-Trump-styrkernes reaktion, at de ikke vil stoppe. Helga Zepp-LaRouche pegede på optrapningen mod Venezuelas regering som ‘en fortsættelse af kuppet mod Trump i ‘en ny forklædning’.

Reorganiseringen af den geopolitiske institution, Komitéen om den Nuværende Fare – Kina, er et andet eksempel på samme hensigt.

Men hun tilføjede, at dette ikke vil stoppe fremkomsten af det nye paradigme, som den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings tur til Europa i denne uge viser. Italienerne trodsede de bankerotte diktatorer ‘in spe” i EU, og Macron, der underskrev talrige aftaler med Xi, og Merkel blev tvunget til at erkende, at momentum er på Kinas side.

Hun konkluderede med at sige, at eftersom Lyndon LaRouches livsværk bliver realiseret i og med fremgangen for det nye paradigme, ville hans frifindelse give et afgørende skub til at bringe USA ind i mobiliseringen for at virkeliggøre menneskehedens fælles interesser.

Her er begyndelsen af Helga Zepp-LaRouches webcast:

HARLEY SCHLANGER: Goddag, jeg er Harley Schlanger fra Schiller Instituttet. Velkommen til vores ugentlige webcast med Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Schiller Instituttets grundlægger og præsident. I dag skriver vi den 15. marts, »idus martiae.« Der sker meget i Italien og der tales om »idus martiae« og Julius Cæsar. Italienerne satser stærkt på at arbejde med Kina. Helga, du deltog i denne uge i en meget betydningsfuld konference med repræsentation fra den kommercielle sektor i Italien, men også fra regeringen. Jeg synes vi skal starte der, fordi dette har givet anledning til en fortsat panik blandt unilaterale, geopolitiske kræfter i Den Europæiske Union, der forsøger at holde Kina ude. Så hvad laver italienerne? Hvad er det, der foregår?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Som du måske ved, kommer præsident Xi Jinping på officielt besøg i Italien den 22. og 23., altså i næste uge. Det er kommet frem, at italienerne og kineserne i anledning af dette besøg vil underskrive en hensigtserklæring (MoU) om at samarbejde omkring Bælte og Vej Initiativet (BRI). Dette har forårsaget stor uro; Financial Times flippede ud, Garrett Marcus – som på en eller anden måde står [USA’s nationale sikkerhedsrådgiver John] Bolton nær i Det Hvide Hus – sagde i hovedtræk, at italienerne absolut ingen gavn vil have af dette, og at det vil ødelægge deres image i verden i meget lang tid fremover. Så det kom temmelig rettidigt, at vi havde denne begivenhed i Milano, som var en begivenhed arrangeret i fællesskab mellem Movisol, som er Movimento Solidarita – LaRouchebevægelsens italienske søsterorganisation, ledt an af Liliana Gorini – og regionen Lombardiet. Emnet var netop Italiens samarbejde med Bælte og Vej Initiativet. Arrangementet havde længe været planlagt, så det er helt tilfældigt, at det fandt sted lige før Xi Jinpings statsbesøg.

Den første taler ved denne begivenhed var Michele Geraci, som er ministersekretær i ministeriet for økonomisk udvikling, og han er en person, der ved meget om Kina, hvor han i ti år virkede som professor. Han er nu leder af den italienske regerings ekspertgruppe angående Kina. Han gav en præsentation, hvor han nedtonede postyret omkring denne hensigtserklæring ved at gøre opmærksom på, at den ikke vil ændre noget; den vil ikke ændre Italiens alliance med NATO eller EU. Den betyder blot, at Italien vil få øgede eksportmuligheder på det hurtigst voksende økonomiske marked i verden, som udgøres af Kina. Italien prøver udelukkende at indhente det forsømte i forhold til andre europæiske lande, som Tyskland og Frankrig, der allerede har meget mere handel med Kina. Så han gav et meget roligt og optimistisk billede af, hvordan dette vil gavne udviklingen af havnene Trieste, Genova, Palermo – samt udviklingen af anden infrastruktur. Han sagde, at det ikke betyder, at Italien opgiver andre projekter, fordi disse alle er nye investeringer. Kineserne vil bygge nye kajpladser i nogle af disse havne, så kineserne investerer i ny-etableringer, som vil øge den italienske økonomis produktivitet; der er altså ingen grund til at være bekymret. Så efter min mening var det meget informativt.

Efterfølgende holdt jeg en tale, hvor jeg i hovedtræk sagde, at alt dette foregår i en større sammenhæng, fordi det, der sker, tydeligvis er, at den kinesiske regering forsøger at skabe et nyt paradigme, som Xi Jinping altid kalder »et samfund med en fælles fremtid for menneskeheden« eller »menneskeheds skæbnefællesskab« (人类命运共同体 – red.). Og de forsøger at opbygge et nyt sæt internationale relationer, som vil overvinde geopolitik. Jeg nævnte det faktum, at der historisk findes 16 tilfælde, hvor en sekundær magt ville overtage den hidtidigt dominerende magts rolle, at det i 12 tilfælde førte til krig, og at det i 4 tilfælde betød, at den anden magt trådte i stedet for den første magt og overgik den uden krig. Jeg understregede det faktum, at den kinesiske regering og især Xi Jinping har gjort det klart adskillige gange, at det ikke er intentionen at erstatte USA’s dominerende rolle i verden, og at de naturligvis heller ikke vil have en krig; men at de tilbyder en helt ny måde at relatere til hinanden på, som grunder på hensyntagen til den andens suveræniteten, på hensyntagen til forskellen mellem de sociale systemer, og på simpelthen at samarbejde på win-win basis.

Jeg udpegede følgende bemærkelsesværdige fænomen; efter Xi Jinping for omkring fire år siden annoncerede Bælte og Vej Initiativet i september 2013 i Kasakhstan, har dette historiens største infrastrukturprogram udviklet sig meget hurtigt. Nu er der 112 lande, der har forskellige grader af samarbejde og yderligere 30-40 internationale institutioner. I omkring fire år skrev de vestlige medier og de store tænketanke nærmest intet derom; de forbigik det eller lod som om, at dette historiens største infrastrukturprojekt ikke var til. Derefter, efter omkring fire år, begyndte alle medier og alle tænketanke på en tydeligvis koordineret måde pludselig et angreb mod Kina, hvor det udlagde BRI som ren kinesisk imperialisme: kineserne forsøger bare at få landene ind i gældsfælden; det er et autoritært system. I en vis forstand er det meget klart, at dette er en geopolitiske refleks, der er udløst af, at verden er i hastig forandring, og at magtcentret allerede er flyttet til Asien, idet Kina har påtaget sig lederskabsrollen i denne udvikling.

Så jeg synes, at den indlysende løsning på denne krise – og en stor beskyldning er naturligvis også, at Kina splitter EU, opdeler EU. Der er faktisk allerede 13 EU-lande, som har underskrevet MoU’er med Kina, og Italien bliver det første G7 land. Det er derfor, at de er så rystende nervøse over det. Det er klart, da det er den tredjestørste økonomi på kontinentet. Jeg understregede kraftigt, at de ikke behøvede Kina til at opdele EU; Den Europæiske Union er opdelt helt af sig selv. Se på splittelsen mellem nord og syd på grund af EU-Kommissions brutale nedskæringspolitik, som helt forarmede Grækenland, Italien, Spanien og Portugal. Der er en åbenlys kløft på dette punkt og en anden omkring problemet med immigration, som Øst- og Vesteuropa er helt uenige om. Faktisk har Kina mange gange argumentet for – og jeg er helt enig – at et samarbejde omkring Bælte og Vej Initiativet faktisk er måden, hvorpå Europa kan forenes, forudsat at f.eks. Frankrig og Tyskland ville anerkende, at det også er ensbetydende med en enorm forretningsmulighed for dem at deltage.

Hvis alle disse europæiske lande kort sagt ville sige, at det er i vores bedste interesse at samarbejde, ikke kun i multilaterale handels- og investeringsaftaler på det eurasiske kontinent, men især om at udvikle Afrika sammen, som er den eneste menneskelige måde at håndtere flygtningekrisen på – det kunne føre til en meget god udvikling. Men EU vil holde et topmøde om dette emne den 21. marts, og man har allerede udarbejdet en 10-punkts handlingsplan; det er klart en indsats for at imødegå denne indflydelse fra Kina. Så vil man holde et topmøde mellem EU og Kina i begyndelsen af april, og det er meget klart, at EU-Kommissionen er på en helt anden kurs end Italien. Men lad os nu se. Jeg tror, at Xi Jinpings besøget vil lykkes, og det på ny vil vise enhver, hvordan et samarbejde er i alles bedste interesse….

Se mere i videoen ovenover.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche hilste det entusiastisk velkommen: Italiens beslutning om at underskrive en hensigtserklæring (MOU, Memoranda Of Understanding) med Kina om at deltage i Bælte- og Vejinitiativet (BVI), da dette viser, at City of Londons geopolitiske netværk har mistet deres evne til at diktere politikken i Europa. Den italienske beslutning vil fremskyndes af Xi Jinpings kommende besøg i Italien. Og mens forfatterne af falske nyheder hos Financial Times og andre medier ser dette som en trussel og citerer ledende neokonservative, der autoritativt kræver at dette stoppes, er der tolv andre EU-medlemmer, som har underskrevet aftaler med Kina, og dermed sluttet sig til mere end 150 andre nationer. Den unipolære verdens dage er overstået!

Det er stadig en farlig verden, som det fremgår af skvalderen fra den amerikanske øverstbefalende for NATO i Europa, Gen. Scaparrotti, der advarede Senatet om, at der skal gøres mere for at imødegå “russisk aggression”. De samme netværk, der presser på med strategiske provokationer mod Rusland og Kina, er blevet mere åbne omkring, hvordan de har til hensigt at bruge den “Grønne New Deal” til dramatisk at reducere befolkningen, og de optrapper deres planer om at vælte Donald Trump, da hans strategiske orientering er en hindring for disse planer.

Geopolitikerne og deres unipolære verdensbillede må og skal afgørende besejres. Dette kan mest effektivt gennemføres ved at bringe USA ind i det nye paradigme gennem en afvisning af geopolitik. En stor flanke, der kan fremskynde denne proces, er Lyndon LaRouche, som har været den førende modstander af de britiske imperialistiske kræfter i det sidste halve århundrede. Vores opgave er at opfylde LaRouches mission om at besejre dette imperium, og bringe USA ind i fællesskabet for en fælles fremtid.

Det underliggende tema for Helga Zepp-LaRouches strategiske præsentation i denne uges webcast fra Schiller Instituttet er, at i takt med at sammenstødet mellem det gamle og nye paradigme bliver mere og mere åbenbart, er det alene den kvalitet af tænkning, der karakteriserer menneskelig kreativitet, som kan bringe verden til at virkeliggøre de fælles mål for menneskeheden, som det nye paradigme repræsenterer.

Ingen steder var dette mere åbenlyst end i kontrasten mellem begivenhederne i Hanoi, hvor præsident Trump mødtes med Nordkoreas præsident Kim og det ubehagelige cirkus i Washington DC med den beskidte advokat Michael Cohen og de dumme demokrater, der savlede i håbet om at Cohens løgne vil bane vej for en rigsretssag mod Trump. Trump agerede i sine samtaler i Hanoi eksplicit ud fra en samarbejdsvillig strategisk alliance med Rusland og Kina, samt med Sydkorea og Japan, mens pro-kup-styrkerne i Washington gjorde det Britiske Imperiums beskidte arbejde med at holde menneskeheden som gidsler for deres døende system.

Helga præsenterede hvad der kræves for at flytte menneskeheden, ikke blot for at undgå atomkrig, men for at skabe en fremtid der er drevet af den mest spændende udforskning af universet. Med henvisning til de smukke ideer om at lade fremtiden forme nutiden, som hendes mand diskuterede i sin bog, “Der er ingen grænser for vækst”, udstedte hun en passioneret opfordring til mobilisering for at vinde denne kamp.erliggende tema for Helga Zepp-LaRouches strategiske præsentation i denne uges webcast fra Schiller Instituttet er, at i takt med at sammenstødet mellem det gamle og nye paradigme bliver mere og mere åbenbart, er det alene den kvalitet af tænkning, der karakteriserer menneskelig kreativitet, som kan bringe verden til at virkeliggøre de fælles mål for menneskeheden, som det nye paradigme repræsenterer.

Læs begyndelsen af Helga Zepp-LaRouches webcast nedenfor.

Bekæmp det morderiske Britiske Imperium – opløft menneskeheden til et nyt niveau af kreativ tænkning

HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hej, jeg er Harley Schlanger fra Schiller Instituttet. Velkommen til vores internationale strategiske webcast i dag, den 1. marts 2019. Grundlægger og præsident for Schiller Instituttet, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, vil slutte sig til os.

Disse sidste dage skiller sig ud ved dybden af det politiske rænkespil, forskydninger i alle facetter af det strategiske billede, og på en måde ser vi sammenstødet mellem de to paradigmer i et meget skarpt relief. Jeg tror at det rigtige sted at begynde, er hvad der skete i Hanoi, topmødet mellem præsident Trump og Nordkoreas formand Kim Jong-un. Helga, hvad er din udlægning af hvad der skete der?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Jeg synes det var et skridt fremad. Jeg mener, at både vurderingen fra Trump og også fra den nordkoreanske side er, at de to sider er kommet tættere på hinanden end de var før topmødet. Klart nok opnåede de ikke at få det mulige forventede gennembrud, men i et komplekst spørgsmål som Nordkorea og Sydkorea, som involverer alle de andre strategiske spillere – USA, Kina, Rusland – er dette ikke nødvendigvis en katastrofe, og vel ikke helt uventet at man ikke opnår et gennembrud af den størrelsesorden i løbet af et eller to møder. Så jeg synes, at det er interessant at se, at begge sider – Trump og Kim Jong-un – udtrykte ønske om at fortsætte forhandlingerne. Hvis man ser på kontrasten, hvor absolut hysterisk de vestlige medier er, så sagde de: “Åh, man ser at dette var en fuldstændig fiasko for Trump. Han troede selvfølgelig, at han bare kunne forhandle en forretningsaftale, og han ved bare ikke, hvordan man gør disse ting.”

Der var en helt anderledes reaktion fra Rusland, fra Kina, fra Sydkorea, fra Japan; som alle udtrykte den absolutte overbevisning om, at dette er det rette spor, og at det skal fortsætte. Jeg tror absolut, at det er tilfældet. Jeg mener, at de helt utrolige omstændigheder, som viser hvor modbydeligt og absolut ondskabsfuldt det gamle paradigme forsøger at bekæmpe muligheden for, at Trump kan få en aftale om atomafvæbning af Nordkorea med Kim Jong-un, var den Senatshøring med den tidligere Trump-advokat Michael Cohen, der var planlagt til at finde sted præcist samme dag. Hvis man så ser på hvordan dette blev orkestreret, at denne fuldstændige slimede original, Michael Cohen, brugte alle slags ord mod Trump fra plattenslager til racistisk og værre endnu. Helt absurd blev dette, naturligvis af de internationale vestlige mainstream-medier, fremstillet som om at Trump kun holdt Nordkorea-mødet for at aflede opmærksomheden fra det meget vigtigere spørgsmål om Michael Cohens høring; lige nøjagtig det modsatte var tilfældet. De besluttede at bruge Michael Cohen-historien til at skabe det mest ugunstige miljø for et så vigtigt møde at finde sted.

Denne hændelse alene burde sige folk hvad der virkelig foregår, fordi der førhen var en uudtalt – eller måske endda udtalt – regel om, at når en præsident eller et statsoverhoved fører vigtige diplomatiske forhandlinger i udlandet, blev det respekteret, og intet ville blive gjort som kunne forstyrre det. Denne hændelse viser virkelig, hvor nedbrudt enhver adfærdskodeks, enhver civiliseret adfærd hos Trumps modstandere er, eller snarere modstanderne af det nye paradigme, og ideen om at man rent faktisk kan have en verden, hvor konflikter bliver overvundet gennem forhandlinger. Jeg synes det viser os hvor barbarisk tonen er blevet, og jeg mener, at det bør falde tilbage på de mennesker, der har udført det. Så med hensyn til situationen omkring Nordkorea som sådan, tror jeg ikke det er en katastrofe. Jeg tror, at processen vil fortsætte, og den russiske talsmand for Vladimir Putin, Peskov, sagde faktisk, at denne diplomatiske situation mellem de to lande igen er et bevis for, at man ikke opnår fremskridt på en trinvis måde. Det er faktisk det der er tilfældet, fordi verdenssituationen er så kompleks, at man er nødt til at finde løsninger, der tager højde for alle problemerne, ellers gør man ikke fremskridt nogen steder.

SCHLANGER: Lad mig for et øjeblik vende tilbage til denne sammenstilling mellem Trump, der udfører diplomati på højt niveau, og Demokraterne i Kongressen, der bruger Michael Cohen – ikke bare til at distrahere fra hvad Trump gør – men for at afsætte ham fra embedet. Trump pointerede på pressekonferencen bagefter, og også i sine diskussioner der førte op til mødet, at han arbejder sammen med Rusland, arbejder sammen med Kina, med Japan og Sydkorea. Efterfølgende talte han med lederne fra disse lande, så det er klart, at der er et løbende samarbejde på højeste niveau blandt de vigtigste nationer i verden. Dette er ikke alene noget som modstanderne af Trump, – ‘Never Trumpers’ – ignorerer, men noget de forsøger at stoppe. Det synes jeg virkelig, som du siger, står i skarpt kontrast til den måde, som dette har udspillet sig på i løbet af de sidste par dage.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Undskyld; jeg fik ikke fat i din pointe.

SCHLANGER: Altså, min pointe er, at det demonstrerer kuppets natur. Det handler ikke om noget, som Trump gjorde i relation til Rusland; det handler om, hvad Trump forsøger at gøre med hensyn til at forandre det strategiske paradigme.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja, vi har diskuteret dette mange gange. Det er hele Russia-gates natur. I det øjeblik Trump i valgkampen i 2016 indikerede, at han gik ind for at forbedre forholdet til Rusland, og hvad han efterfølgende gjorde for at forbedre forholdet til Kina i startfasen af hans administration; dette er faktisk det absolut værste mareridt for den geopolitiske fraktion på begge sider af Atlanten. Fordi, når først man har en konstellation med USA-Rusland-Kina – og muligvis Indien og andre nationer – hvis de samarbejder, går hele det britiske rænkespil i vasken. Jeg synes, at Trump under disse omstændighederne gør et fantastisk job, hvis man tager i betragtning de kræfter, som han er oppe imod….

Se resten på videoen.

Regimeskifte-kuppet mod præsident Trump er blevet mere synligt, i takt med at positive udviklinger baseret på hans initiativer har tvunget kupmagerne ud i det åbne. Se på de folk i efterretningstjenesterne, der præsenterede den ‘Verdensomspændende Trusselsvurdering’ (Worldwide Threat Assessment) til Senatets ‘efterretningsudvalg’ (Select Committee for Intelligence) den 30. januar. På næsten hvert eneste punkt modsagde de der fremlagde rapporten – direktør for den nationale efterretningstjeneste, Coats, CIA-direktør Haspel og FBI-direktør Wry – præsidentens strategiske politik. I sit svar til dem kaldte Trump dem “naive”, og udtrykte optimisme i forhold til at hans diplomatiske initiativer har været effektive.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche gav en kortfattet rapport om disse modsætninger, om Nordkorea, Syrien, relationerne med Rusland og Kina osv. Det gamle paradigme, den neoliberale britiske imperialistiske model, har fejlet, sagde hun, og meget af verden har bevæget sig ind i et nyt paradigme, baseret på win-win samarbejde. Typisk for dette gamle paradigme er George Soros, der i sin tale i Davos angreb Kina som værende den største trussel mod hans ‘åbne samfund’ (“Open Society”). Dette er sandt, sagde Zepp LaRouche, idet hans ‘åbne samfund’ ikke er andet og mere end det kollapsende britiske neoliberale system.

De samme regimeskifte-kræfter, der står bag Russiagate, presser nu på for et regimeskifte i Venezuela med potentielt farlige konsekvenser. Hun spurgte: Hvordan kan vi, der bekæmper dette kup, undgå at føle, at vi befinder os på en rutsjebane, der går op og ned? Det er et spørgsmål om at forstå princippet om det ‘fælles gode’ (“common good”). Studér Lyndon LaRouches værker for at blive sande repræsentanter for det ‘fælles gode’. Og kæmp for hans frifindelse, eftersom de der satte ham i fængsel for tredive år siden, er de samme som står bag kupforsøg rundt om i verden, og i USA i dag.

Hvis man lytter til de vestlige nyhedsmedier, skulle man tro, at verden er helt kaotisk og uden noget ordnende princip overhovedet. Ved imidlertid at træde to skridt tilbage og sætte amerikanske og europæiske “aktuelle begivenheder” i sammenhæng med det der sker i resten af verden, er det lettere at se, at hvad der foregår i Vesten er etablissementets reaktion på de positive kræfter for forandring, der er på spil over hele kloden. Samtalerne mellem Xi og Kim bevæger sig fremad, og foregriber et muligt andet topmøde mellem Trump og Kim; potentielle fremskridt i samhandelsdrøftelserne mellem USA og Kina; Trumps beslutning om at trække USA ud af Syrien i forbindelse med Astana-processen; Kinas succesfulde landing af Chang’e 4-fartøjet på den fjerne side af månen, og meget mere. Hør med når Schiller Instituttets grundlægger, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, og Harley Schlanger diskuterer alt det, som medierne forsøger at skjule for dig!

(Vi er i gang med at oversætte talen til dansk.)

Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed the seminar via video conference from Germany. In addition EIR Economics Editor Paul Gallagher by pre-recorded video from Virginia, and Hussein Askary in person addressed the seminar in Copenhagen. Diplomats from nine countries attended the seminar, as well as members and contacts of The Schiller Institute.

TOM GILLESBERG: Helga Zepp-LaRouche was very beautifully introduced, I think, by Hussein Askary, in his presentation going through the fantastic road. She as the founder of the Schiller Institute has taken upon herself as the “Silk Road Lady” in bringing about this Belt and Road policy, the New Silk Road policy. So we are very proud and very happy to be able to have her on here live to discuss what is in the situation the world is in right now, after the U.S. midterm elections, and here, the day before we’ll have the G20 summit taking place in Buenos Aires.

So, Helga, thank you for being here with us. The word is yours.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I want to say hello to you and I’m very happy to be able to speak to you, even if it’s only via video. Obviously, we have reached a very important point in history, and for once, I have to agree with President Macron of France, who just said that the upcoming G20 meeting better produce some real results, or else, such a gathering of the heads of state would be even counterproductive.

Now, I agree with that.

We have made a campaign for the last several weeks and actually months, that basically what should be the outcome of this G20 meeting. Given the fact that we have both war danger, as was demonstrated very acutely again in the case of the incident in near the Kerch Bridge in the Black Sea, and the general situation between the major nuclear powers is not exactly a calm one, so we have the danger of nuclear war, potentially. Then, we have the immediate danger of a repetition of the financial crash of 2008, except this time, it could be much, much worse, because all the parameters are much worse than in 2008.

In light of these two existential crises, we have defined what should be the outcome of either the G20 meeting or, at least, of those heads of state where one can expect they can go in the direction of establishing a new paradigm: And that refers to President Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, Prime Minister Modi, and possibly others, Prime Minister Abe, and maybe some other heads of state and government. And what we defined as the absolutely necessary outcome, is that they establish a New Bretton Woods system to replace the presently completely bankrupt financial system, with a New Bretton Woods, which would be in the position of the old Bretton Woods system, however it would include the added features which Franklin D. Roosevelt originally wanted, namely, to end colonialism for the developing sector, which then, unfortunately was not implemented, because Roosevelt died, and the Bretton Woods was established by Truman and Churchill, at least under their political guidance.

And obviously, a New Bretton Woods would only function if it is accompanied by Four Laws which were defined by Lyndon LaRouche already in 2014, as the absolutely necessary changes in the financial and economic system, being: first, the implementation of Glass-Steagall banking separation; secondly to go to a national bank, to bring the power of credit generation back under the control sovereign powers, under the sovereign control of governments; and thirdly, to create an international credit system; and fourthly, to increase the productivity of the world economy by going for a crash program for a fusion economy and establish more close international space cooperation to get the necessary increase in the productivity of the world economy.

Given the fact that it cannot be expected that all countries of the G20 will agree with that — I can easily imagine that those which are absolutely tied to the City of London and the opposition to Trump coming from Wall Street, that there will be some countries that will absolutely oppose such a solution. And therefore, we have proposed that it can only be the cooperation of those countries which are powerful enough to resist the power of these financial centers, London and Wall Street, and that can only be: President Trump, President Xi Jinping, President Putin, and prime Minister Modi, the four powers together, which represent both the largest nuclear powers, the largest economies, the largest populations, that they have to work together.

Obviously, that potential exists. And since President Trump has again and again reiterated, in the election campaign and again after he became President, that he wants to improve the relationship with Russia, and the entire Russiagate was launched in order to prevent that from happening. Now, Russiagate, by now, is pretty much discredited, and despite the tensions with China on the trade issue, there are positive signs that both China and the United States may be willing to find an agreement to overcome the present war of tariffs.

That potential clearly exists, and it is very obvious, that on that hangs the question, will mankind be able, in light of existential dangers, be able to give itself a governance, structure of government, which allows the long-term sustainability of the world population. And that that is a very acute question you could see, for example, by the fact that the present Chinese ambassador to the United States Cui Tiankai just yesterday issued a very clear warning that the world must learn the lessons of the Great Depression of the 1930s, resulting in World War II, and he warns that the inability to resolve the present tensions could lead to a new world war, and a new financial crisis worse than the Depression of ’30s.

The same Ambassador Cui, already in a speech about a year ago in New York, had basically posed the question: What is going to be the relation between the United States and China? He said that in history, there were 16 cases where the dominant power was replaced by a rising power — referring obviously to the present situation between the United States and China — and that in 12 cases, this led to a big war; in 4 cases, it led to a situation where the rising power simply replaced the up to that point dominant power, and it did not lead to war. And he emphasized that China does not want, at all, either, naturally the situation of war, but it also does not attempt to replace the United States as a dominant power in the world, but that the policy of China is propose a completely new set of international relations of a win-win cooperation between sovereign powers and respect for the sovereignty of the other, respect for the different social system of the other country without interfering into the internal affairs, and simply have a cooperation for the mutual benefit of all participating in this new system.

And that is, in my view, what we have seen in reality in the last five years, since President Xi Jinping proposed the New Silk Road in Kazakhstan in September 2013. And we have seen the enormous development of the New Silk Road in the meantime, including more than 100 countries and having completely transformed the spirit in Africa, which has been caught by the Spirit of the New Silk Road due to massive investments in infrastructure, industrial parks, energy projects and similar things. The same is true for almost all of Latin America, many countries in Asia and even some Europe countries which are absolutely seeing the advantages of cooperating with this new system.

Now, it took the West, or better, Western think tanks and media, almost four years before they even admitted that this was going on. I mean, this was going a spectacle: Because here you have the largest infrastructure project in history, ever, already now about 30 times as big as the Marshall Plan, and the Western media would not take note of it! Then, about a year ago, they realized this was absolutely unstoppable, so they started a whole barrage of slanders and attacks on this New Silk Road, and quite telling, was that the channel of the Anglo-American establishment, the New York Times, over the last weekend and the weekend before, had I think altogether some 10 or 12 articles on the New Silk Road, in which they admit, basically, well, it’s unstoppable, it’s here, the West was completely wrong by thinking that if you offer to China to be a member of the WTO and join the free trade system, that eventually China would take over the Western liberal system, Western democracy, or, if they would refuse that, they would simply collapse under the burden of an autocratic leadership.

And the New York Times begrudgingly admits that this was a wrong estimate, that China had not adopted the Western democracy model, and it for sure has not collapsed. But it has the astounding recording of 40 years of uninterrupted economic growth rates, which have completely transformed not only China, but also much of the world economy, and that China now has a middle-class, well-to-do part of the population of 400 million, and this will be doubled in the next 10 years. And basically, the Chinese model is attractive to many countries in the world.

They basically say, as a conclusion, that the only way to deal with that is the effort to contain China, and if need be, confrontation and even war. And some American general has already said a couple of weeks ago that a war between the United States and China is more likely in the next 50 years, than not.

So this is obviously the famous “Thucydides trap”: This refers to the situation in ancient Greece, the rivalry between Athens and Sparta, which led to the Peloponnesian War, and as a consequence — which people don’t usually mention, when they talk about the “Thucydides trap” — the demise and collapse of ancient Greece.

That is the obvious question: Can the West relate to the fact that China is rising, that there is nothing you can do about it, because, first of all, China was a country which was the leading economic and cultural power over many centuries for the last millennia, with only a very short interruption. And it is deciding to go back, not to replace other countries, but to take a leading role on the world stage. And since the Chinese government has a policy which allows it to do that, mainly by putting the emphasis on continuous innovation, of leapfrogging to the most advanced technologies, of putting a lot of emphasis — they have the most advanced fusion power research program; they have a very, very advanced space exploration program; and they are putting a lot of emphasis on education, excellence in education for the young people, combined with Xi Jinping emphasizing the need to have especially an aesthetical education of the youth, and also the older people. Because aesthetical education goes in the direction of the beauty of the mind and the beauty of the soul.

And given the fact that China has a population of 1.4 billion people, the idea of the West that it would be possible to contain this without war is ludicrous. And if it comes to war, it should be noted that there are many military experts who make the point that once you start to use only one nuclear weapon, it is the logic of nuclear weapons, in complete contrast to traditional, conventional weaponry, that all weapons will be used. And that would obviously would mean the annihilation of human civilization.

So, this paradox obviously exists, and it is the view of the Schiller Institute that it can only be overcome by winning the West, winning countries of the world over to join in the new paradigm in a win-win cooperation.

Now, that the danger of war is very real, we just saw in the incident involving provocation by Ukrainian warships in the Black Sea, close to the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Bridge. And some people in Ukraine already having proposed some weeks ago, that the newly built bridge between Russia and Crimea, should be blown up. This was obviously an incident a couple of days ago [Nov. 25], whereby Ukrainian warships did not follow the rules which are otherwise established between Russia and Ukraine, to announce their intention to pass through the Kerch Strait; so they will held up by the Russian military; the crews were basically arrested and interrogated, and in the meantime, written material has been found with this crew, which instructs them not to announce themselves, to go to this point of the Kerch Strait in secrecy, clearly indicating a provocation.

What happened, was, immediately, the war-hawks, like NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg, immediately said NATO fully on the side of Ukraine; and some other hawks, immediately, like representatives of the Integrity Initiative — about which I will same something in a second — immediately said that NATO should send a whole flotilla into the Sea of Azov.

Now, this was absolutely denounced by President Putin yesterday, who waited a couple of days, and then basically said this was a clearly preplanned provocation, and the big fault lies with the nations of the West, who, without thinking immediately take the side of Ukraine. And in his typical Putin humor, even said, if Ukraine would demand to eat babies for breakfast, the West would immediately agree.

And this was also strongly denounced by the former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, who had also been the Chief of Staff of the German military before that, Gen. Harald Kujat, who denounced Stoltenberg, and said he made a grave mistake: That in an incident like that, it is of the utmost importance that it be investigated and the other nations should not beat it up, but try to deescalate the whole situation. Fortunately, most of the West European governments did, because they obviously realized that a war between Ukraine and Russia could completely go out of control in no time and lead to a World War III.

So I think that this incident, in which the danger is not yet over because Poroshenko announced martial law in parts of Ukraine, and our dear friend Natalia Vitrenko, a Ukrainian politician, warned that this means Poroshenko is actually establishing a dictatorship in Ukraine — martial law, eliminating all kinds of civil rights, being an extremely hot situation.

Now, who is the instigator of this whole provocation? If you look at the fact that just recently, a couple of days ago, it was revealed that there is this thing called “Integrity Initiative.” This is a very strange institution. It’s basically run out of British embassies all over the world, and it is actually a subdivision of British intelligence. One of their spokesmen, Edward Lucas came out in the context of this Ukraine crisis, and immediately said: This is completely like Nazi Germany attacking Poland in 1939, and demanding an immediate escalation, sending warships into the Black Sea, in a clear provocation.

What is this Integrity Initiative? The new British Chief of General Staff Gen. Mark Carleton-Smith said Russia is a greater danger to the U.K. than ISIS or al-Qaeda, in a completely war-mongering statement. So what this Integrity Initiative outfit does, is they have defined so-called “cluster groups,” in all kinds of countries; and if you look at their website and look at the names of the people involved, it is the Cold War faction all over the world. For example, in the United States, it involves Ian Brzezinski, the son of infamous Zbigniew Brzezinski, of the {Great Chessboard} infamy, and this Ian Brzezinski is a leading member of the Atlantic Council, which can be really regarded as one of these subdivisions of the Anglo-American empire, or the British intelligence. And in Germany, it involves Gen. Klaus Naumann, who is famous for his Cold War attitudes towards Russia. So it is this apparatus which is basically sticking to the idea that you need to have a geopolitical confrontation with Russia and with China. And this is the faction which brings about the war danger in the closest fashion.

Now, we have to get over the idea that the world forever needs to be divided into geopolitical blocs, where you have one nation, or one group of nations being in complete conflict with another group of nations. And unfortunately much of the European Union thinks that way; Macron thinks that way; Mrs. Merkel in the same way. When Macron recently demanded the establishment of a European army, to be able to defend Europe against Russia, China and even the United States, he said! That is typical for this kind of thinking, which under conditions of a financial breakdown crisis and general tensions is exactly a prescription for the danger of a repetition of the two catastrophes of the 20th century.

Now, the alternative is fortunately, also very clearly there. I already mentioned the New Silk Road Spirit having transformed Africa, where people for the first time have the legitimate hope that with the help of China, and now, more and more other countries, such as India, Japan, Indonesia, Turkey and many others, having recognized that Africa, which will have 2.5 billion people by the 2050, and as Xi Jinping at the Johannesburg BRICS summit in September correctly noted, Africa having the biggest development potential of all the continents on the planet, that one can say that Africa will be the “new China with African characteristics.” That you will have a very young population, which if they are educated and provided with the necessary infrastructure investments, can really become the most productive continent on the planet.

That obviously, is a nightmare for those people who have tried to suppress the development of the developing countries, such as the IMF, with their “conditionalities,” which was the real debt trap. You know, the IMF conditionalities basically made sure that the developing countries would remain indebted, and that they were not allowed to use their income for either investment in social expenditures, education, infrastructure, but that they had to pay debt as a priority, and that was one of the main means how the development of these countries was suppressed.

And naturally, you had the very unholy role of the World Wildlife Fund, preventing infrastructure, for the sake of snails rather than human beings. And you had the whole unholy ideology of the Club of Rome that supposedly the resources on the planet were limited, and therefore development of the developing countries had to be suppressed.

When China launched the New Silk Road, all of that went out of the window, because, now, for the first time, there is the real possibility to overcome the underdevelopment of the developing countries, and that has been understood by the countries of the Global South — these are all the major organizations, such as the G77, the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), Mercosur [Mercado Común del Sur], the African Union, all of these organizations are now basically inspired by the New Silk Road idea.

And even in Europe, this is dramatically quickly changing: You had the 16+1, Eastern and Central European Countries plus China, which very happy to be hubs between Europe and Asia, in the Silk Road development. You have Greece, which is completely transformed because of Chinese investments in Piraeus and other infrastructure projects. The new Italian government had completely changed: They no longer listen to the EU in respect to China. The leading ministers, like Giovanni Tria, and the undersecretary for Economic Development Michele Geraci, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, himself, they all basically look to cooperation between China and Italy, not only for mutual investments, but especially to invest in joint projects in Africa. And one of the most glorious examples, is the agreement between China and Italy to jointly work together with the countries of the Lake Chad Basin Commission to implement the Transaqua project, which I’m sure Hussein already talked about.

But then you have also Spain, where President Xi was just there on a state visit, and having very far-reaching cooperation agreement between China and Spain, emphasizing the 2,000 years of cultural ties between the two countries. And then Xi Jinping will also go to Portugal when he comes back from the G20. And between Portugal and China there is an absolute agreement that Portugal, also, will become the hub — Spain and Portugal will not only be the hub for the Eurasian connection of the New Silk Road, but also the hub for all the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking throughout the world. So this is what the Schiller Institute emphasized in our “World Land-Bridge” report, to work on the so-called Atlantic route, and in this way, combining the Caribbean, Central America, South America, with those Portuguese- and Spanish-speaking countries and therefore Europe.

So the World Land-Bridge is coming into being. And we had just had a very interesting and hopeful even in Hamburg, between China and the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce, where, with the exception of one Greenie, who was completely beside himself, but all the other speakers were more or less very optimistic in talking about how Hamburg is the natural link not only for the land connection — and I think per week now, 23 trains are coming from China into Hamburg — but obviously, also a crucial aspect of the Maritime Silk Road, given the fact that Hamburg is the largest port in Germany.

This is all very, very interesting. Then, I should not forget to mention Switzerland, which is also onboard. Austria: Austria’s new government even has it in its coalition treaty that Austria wants to become a hub for the New Silk Road. So I think the development is actually, objectively very, very promising. But obviously, a lot more has to be done, because if you reflect on what I said in the beginning, what should become the outcome of the G20, a New Bretton Woods system and a new system in order to safeguard our nations against the danger of a new financial blowout, that has not yet been accomplished.

Otherwise, objectively, despite all the dangers I’ve referred to, I think we can be very optimistic, because a new system is within reach. And I just want to say, that economic development absolutely must be combined with a Classical Renaissance. Because, if you look at the values of the West right now, — I want to identify very briefly what I mean by that — the neo-liberal or liberal philosophy or ideology which has taken over in the West, it is correctly rejected by Russia and by China — it’s the principle “everything is allowed.” You have not two genders, but now you have about 49 genders; you have pornography without limits; children can go on the internet and see the worst-possible atrocities, the violence which is now, unfortunately having roots in the United States — you have the mass shootings in the schools almost every day. In the United States, there were already more than 300 mass shootings [this year]. You have the opioid epidemic in the United States. You have an increase of [inaudible 35:42] alcoholism, drug addiction; longevity in the United States has gone down for the first time in the last two years! If there is any parameter for a collapsing economy it is that the life expectancy goes down.

And in Europe, we are not that far behind, if you look at the violence in the schools in Germany, just to name one element. I think we are in an absolute dire need to have a Renaissance of human culture, of Classical culture, of Classical music, poetry, and other areas of art.

This has been understood in China. I mentioned already Xi Jinping’s emphasis on the need for aesthetical education, and the main Chinese speaker at this Hamburg conference yesterday, Vice Premier Liu He, who is the main economic advisor of Xi Jinping, he deviated from his written text and said that he wanted to share a story with the audience, that during the Cultural Revolution, when he was young, he had to hide in one of the hutongs in Beijing — these are the old buildings — and he had to listen in secrecy to the Violin Concerto in C-minor of Felix Mendelssohn, and that meant that he fell completely in love with Classical music and he has pursued that passion ever since.

I think this is very promising. Because as you know, we are convinced that human nature is that all human beings essentially are good, that man has the limitless capability to self-perfect, not only in terms of intellect, but also that the aesthetical education means that you can educate your emotions until you can blindly follow them because they would never tell you anything different than what reason commands. This is the Friedrich Schiller’s definition of the beautiful soul. He says, necessity and passion, free will and duty all fall in one, and this is the condition where man is truly free: Because you do with passion what is necessary, because you cannot think in any different way other than on the level of reason.

And I think that is not a utopia, but that is something which can be absolutely accomplished and is inherent in the philosophy of Confucius, who also had almost the same idea of aesthetical education as Friedrich Schiller, that is, through music, through poetry, through learning [inaudible 38:49], that you can actually transform the character of people to become beautiful characters, and to becoming wise and serve the common good.

Now, I think that if mankind is supposed to reach the New Paradigm, not only will the relations among nations be like that, that each nation will refer to the best tradition of the other and be enriched by discovering the beauty of the most advanced culture of the other nation, but that that will increasingly become the nature of relations among nations: that we will stop behaving like little four-year-old boys, kicking each other in the shins, meaning, conducting war and things like that, and we will become adult as a human species and renovate our relations, like the astronauts, who all, — all the astronauts who have been in space, who were on the ISS, they all report the same thing: That once you are in space, you recognize that you can only cooperate on the basis of reason, because otherwise you won’t exist, and that when you look at our little, blue planet from space, you recognize that there is {so} much to be discovered! First of all, there are no borders, there are no races, there is only one humanity, and you recognize that our universe is so huge! And that we as a human species have to cooperate, to be able to have a sustained existence in this universe, over the next thousands and thousands of years.

And the Hubble telescope discovered that we presently know of the existence of 2 trillion galaxies! Now, that is boggling the minds — if I try to think of the Solar System, the Milky Way, the galaxy, that is already gigantic. But the idea of 2 trillion galaxies, that shows you that we as a human species have just made the first baby steps in the direction of the perfection of our species.

Anyway, I just think we are at the change of an epoch. I think we have a very good chance to leave the epoch of geopolitics behind us, that we can really create a system of governance which makes the coexistence in peace and development possible for all of humanity. And I would encourage you to be optimistic about it, and join efforts with the Schiller Institute, because this has been our perspective for the past 40 or 50 years — in the case of my husband, 50 years — and I think we are on the verge of seeing the realization of that vision.

Thank you. [applause]

Første afsnit: oprør i Europa, fra de Gule Veste, over Brexit, til den politiske krise i Tyskland – masseoprør imod den sammenfaldende neoliberale orden fortsætter med at gære. Undtagelsen i Europa er Italien, som er den eneste stabile regering, der laver gode ting (senere tilføjede HZL Portugal og Spanien på den positive side). Befolkningen vil ikke længere acceptere den neoliberale orden – Macron, May og Merkel har alle problemer.

Post-G20:

Positive udviklinger fra samtalerne mellem Trump og Xi, USA og Kina kan fungere sammen. Det anti-russiske hysteri, der forhindrede mødet mellem Trump og Putin, er en katastrofe, men Trump kæmper tilbage: HZL uddybede ideen bag hans tweet om at arbejde med Xi og Putin for at standse våbenkapløbet, og Trumps kommentarer om hvordan USA’s militære budget er vanvittigt. I denne sammenhæng var Pompeos tale i Bruxelles et forsøg på at forsvare den gamle enpolede orden. Måske Bushs død signalerer slutningen af den orden!

Brevet fra 46 Demokrater – dette er, hvad HZL sagde der måtte ske efter midtvejsvalget, Demokraterne må afvise polarisering i forbindelse med en rigsretssag mod præsidenten og i stedet arbejde på tværpolitiske økonomiske løsninger. Nøglen til dette er Lyns 4 love.

Opsummering af udviklinger omkring den Nye Silkevej: Betydningen af at Portugal går med i den Nye Silkevej, mens andre regeringer fortsætter med at reagere på Kinas lederskab. Gå med i Schiller Instituttets arbejde for at sikre, at USA tilslutter sig det nye paradigme.

Afskrift på engelsk:

Schiller Institute New Paradigm Webcast, October 11, 2018
With Helga Zepp-LaRouche

The Stakes In the U.S. Midterm Elections: War or Peace

HARLEY SCHLANGER:  Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger with the
Schiller Institute.  Welcome to our webcast for today.  It’s Oct.
11, 2018:  Our webcast will feature, as always, Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, our founder and chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
We were just reviewing events prior to this webcast, and
there’s so much going on, as we come now with less than five
weeks to the midterm election in the United States, which is
going to be an extraordinarily important in determining whether
the American people are going to step up to the responsibility of
joining the New Paradigm, or whether they’re going to succumb to
the demoralization and the media control.
We’re also seeing things that the LaRouche movement is
famous for, which is economic forecasting.  And Helga, why don’t
we start with that:  We saw a very big drop in the stock market
yesterday, there’s jitters on Wall Street, anxiety around the
world.  What’s going on?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  The system is disintegrating, and it’s
just a question of time when this will happen.  I find it very
remarkable that the IMF is pronouncing the famous “D” word.
Remember that the “D” word was never to be mentioned, because the
market would supposedly follows the psychology of the markets,
and when you mention the word “Depression,” then that could bring
it on and so was the tale. But now the IMF meeting in Bali,
Indonesia has been warning that challenges are to be faced,
otherwise, the second Great Depression would be looming.
Now, I find this really remarkable, and I think what they’re
trying to somehow prepare the population that thing is really
coming down.  This stock market plunge of more than 800 points —
I think something like 820 — you had President Trump who
basically said the Federal Reserve is “crazy” with their interest
rate policy, which caused a complete reaction by [IMF Managing
Director Christine] Lagarde and so forth, but he kept repeating
it twice.  He said the situation is much too tense to continue
this.  Naturally, this is the reason why you have the reverse
carry trade from the emerging markets, which was mentioned by the
IMF as the biggest threat to the system, and the second biggest
threat or maybe on an equal level, being the indebtedness. Now,
Lagarde also mentioned the indebtedness of the governments, the
corporate firms, and also other categories, like student loans
and car loans and all of this, is 60% higher than it was in 2008.
Then, in addition to all of these things, you have the
collapse of the real economy, with for example home-building
peeked in the United States in January and has been in a free
fall and since about May this was also the case for copper and
timber — all of these have lost between 15 and 20% since the
beginning of the year.  So, these are all markers that this thing
is not continuing.
And then, you have, naturally, on top of that the growing
fight between the EU and Italian government.  You had the famous
letter, or infamous letter by the two EU Commissioners [Pierre]
Moscovici and [Valdis] Dombrovskis, to the Italian government
warning them that their intention not to stick to the EU-imposed
budget deficit of 2.4%, that this would not be allowed, which was
the trigger for a run on the Italian bond, and as a result, the
spread between the Italian and the German values have gone up to
300 points; and it is generally said if it goes up to 400 —
basically that means that the Italians have to pay 3% and more to
refinance their loans — and that could actually really all
contribute to a crisis.
On top of it, by the 15th of this month, that is in four
days, the Italian government will publish the details of their
budget.  And it is expecting that the rating agencies immediately
afterwards will put out some rating, in all likelihood
downgrading the Italian bonds, or downgrading Italy as a country,
which then basically, depending how they are formulating it, if
the outlook is basically neutral, people say this could just go
through; but if they put a negative outlook on it, then that
could lead to a big banking crisis — actually not only of Italy,
but of the entire Western financial system.
It is clear that some of these people in the European
Central Bank and EU Commission obviously think they can force the
Italian government to capitulate, that they can control the
consequences of this, but this is playing with fire:  Because you
have a highly, highly volatile financial system, and I can only
say, in 2008, the whole world was more or less unprepared for the
crash, because they were not listening to the warning this my
husband had already put out, very clearly, on July 25th, 2007  —
this was one week before the secondary mortgage crisis in the
United States exploded.  And he had said at that time, this
system is finished.  All you can see now, is how it comes down.
And people didn’t listen to it. So the crash occurred in 2008 and
they didn’t draw any conclusions out of their own mistakes, and
just kept pumping money — quantitative easing.  And basically
all these instruments of the Central Bank are now completely
exhausted and used up.
And contrary to 2008, when everybody was unprepared, those
people who are now trying to cause the Italian government to
capitulate and continue with the austerity, which the Italian
government was voted in, because they rejected that austerity.
So, if they push too hard, I think one should not forget that
both Italian government coalition parties, the Lega and the Five
Star Movement party, they have Glass-Steagall in not only their
party program, but also in the coalition treaty.
Now, obviously, the Italian government knows what they’re up
against.  They have seen speculators moving in on countries,
driving them into the ground, so they are relatively careful, and
they’re not saying anything terribly provocative.  But if
somebody from the outside pushes them into a crash, I would not
exclude the possibility, or I would actually say it’s quite
probable that they would implement Glass-Steagall as a
self-defense.
So it is quite different from 2008, and I think the only
lesson that one can draw out of all of this, is we need to
amplify our efforts to go for a New Bretton Woods system, which
we have a campaign on internationally, we have a petition; this
has been signed by many people in the meantime, and I would urge
you, our viewers, sign this petition, get it around, prepare
anybody you know — elected officials, mayors, parliamentarians,
congressmen — to prepare for Glass-Steagall, and not only that,
but the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche.  Because unless we
reorganize this entirely bankrupt financial system in an orderly
fashion, the danger is an uncontrolled collapse.
You need a New Bretton Woods system, you need
Glass-Steagall, we need to get rid of the casino economy; we have
to have credit for the financing of the real economy, and we have
to have a new credit system to basically finance investments on a
multinational level among all the countries of this world, to get
the world out of this danger of a depression.
So, if the IMF talks about the danger of a Great Depression,
people should take it to heart. Think about what happened in the
Great Depression in the ’30s  — in the United States it was
devastation, but in Europe it was even worse, because it led to
fascist movements and that to world wars.  So people should not
take these things lightly:  Get onboard with us.  Join the
Schiller Institute, join our campaign for New Bretton Woods,
because that’s the only answer one can give to this danger of a
looming crash.

SCHLANGER:  I had a chance to read through the Executive
Summary of the IMF report, and there were two omissions — they
were there in a sense, but they didn’t really acknowledge them,
— both of which your husband was out in front of for many, many
years, in dealing with the IMF.  On the one side, it’s clear that
it’s {their} policy which has failed.  The austerity regime which
the IMF is famous for, these have never led to any economic
development.  And then, secondly, the quantitative easing, the
low-interest credit for speculation, instead of Glass-Steagall —
the IMF was promoting that.  And so, the two things they
promoted, they’re now admitting are failed. Do you have any
thoughts on that, Helga?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think the possibility that the IMF would
reform itself is probably going in the probability towards zero.
I think it requires a different kind of action.  In a certain
sense, you have right now in the whole world, already, a revolt
against these failed neo-liberal policies.  This was expressed in
the Brexit; this was expressed in the election victory of
President Trump; the new Italian government is an expression of
that; also the Austrian government.  And I think that  — in a
certain sense, national sovereignty has to be reasserted, and I
don’t think these supranational institutions which were the main
reason why these policies were imposed, which had created havoc:
Look at what happened to Greece.  The Greek economy was
diminished by one-third.  The Italian economy was destroyed.  The
fact that we have now a totally different government in Italy,
which is pro-growth for the most part, which is for the
relationship with China, for the relationship with the New Silk
Road, all of this is a response to the failure of these policies.
And there are many people in Europe who are expecting that, given
the fact that the EU is basically doing exactly the same thing in
principle, namely, sticking to the neo-liberal austerity, that
you will have an earthquake in the coming European Parliament
elections [in April] which will show that these present policies
will be absolutely out.
I think this is much too long term.  I think the crisis is
upon us now, so I can only say: The only solution is for the
package I just said before:  The IMF is really a bankrupt
organization, and that was stated by my husband in 1975, when he
proposed to replace this IMF with an International Development
Bank, which would provide large-scale, low-interest credit for
development projects in the developing sector; and if that would
have been done, we would not have a migration problem, we would
have prosperous countries around the globe; but now, with the New
Silk Road, this policy is on a good way.
So I can only say, “listen to the wise words of Lyndon
LaRouche,” belatedly, but better late than never.

SCHLANGER: And that was a very popular item, “How the
International Development Bank Works,” that Lyn wrote back in
’76, I think it was.  We used it as part of his campaign — for
his first campaign for President.
Coming up on the midterm elections, there’s a lot of turmoil
that’s been unleashed.  What’s clear is that Hillary Clinton has
not learned anything from the results of November 2016.  You have
a real civil unrest that’s being built, deliberately, because the
Mueller case, the Mueller Russiagate story, is collapsing.  This
can become a very dangerous situation.  Let’s start with what
Trump said — Trump said, the Democrats have gone crazy.  I
assume you would share that assessment, Helga?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  If calling for violence is a sign of
insanity, then I would agree with him.  And it’s funny, I was
looking at the German media, and they all portray this fight,
this very hot situation in the United States, as if it’s all just
electioneering by Trump that he would call the Democrats a “mob.”
But, it is a fact that Maxine Waters already some months ago,
called on everybody to get into the face of Trump cabinet
members, whenever you them — there were some actually violent
incidents; people were not served in restaurants; and also some
other Democrats basically called that you should be “in their
faces” of the Trump camp. And that has created a complete
hysteria, which was amplified by the Kavanaugh case, where even
Alan Dershowitz, who said that he’s a liberal Democrat, he said
that the attempt, for example, Senator Feinstein and Eric Holder,
they said that Kavanaugh should not be accepted, that this would
put into question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court!  I mean
this is really incredible. Dershowitz then correctly said, forget
it, Kavanaugh is now Supreme Court Justice and he will be there
for his lifetime; this was due process, and the Democrats should
go back to being civilized and not violate all the norms and
rules.
I mean, this is incredible:  I’m not an expert on American
constitutional questions, but it seems to me if the Senate, or
some Senators, are putting into question the legitimacy of the
Supreme Court, this is heading towards a constitutional crisis,
or some kind of a state crisis if these people are not stopped.
I think they have lost all barriers, and they have lost all
sense of limit!  This is a completely hysterical situation, and I
can only say that this is very dangerous.  And we have said many
times that Trump is being attacked, essentially,  — I mean, you
can pick on tiny points here and there — but that’s not the
point: The main reason why Trump is being attacked, is because he
tried to get the relationship with Russia on a good basis.  He
had a very successful in Helsinki with Putin.  And at least, in
the initial phase, he had an excellent relationship with China
and Xi Jinping.  And that is why the geopolitical establishment
went absolutely crazy — as a matter of fact, they’re escalating
their campaign, both against Russia and against China, in
unprecedented ways.  And it is the question of war and peace, and
people should really understand that, that the Democrats have
really gone crazy on the issue of Russia and also China, and they
should not fall into this trap, because in the consequence, this
would mean World War III.

SCHLANGER:  One of the other important points, I think is
that what we’re seeing, is again, people like George Soros
funding these rent-a-mobs.  And Soros, of course, has been
involved in this for many, many years.  And I believe, Helga, you
first identified the operation against Trump after the election,
as similar to the “color revolutions” that Soros, combined with
people like John McCain, the National Endowment for Democracy,
the Clinton State Department, to run coups and regime changes,
throughout the former Soviet bloc countries.  I think we’re now
seeing that what you said about the “color revolution,” is
totally accurate, including the danger of a Maidan Square-type
chaos being unleashed.  Sen. Rand Paul said yesterday that he
fears that there could be assassinations.
Is this pretty much what you had seen two years ago, this
color revolution scenario?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah, because whenever you have George Soros
involved in such, and he financed, according to reports, $50
million to a private group which, according to these reports,
which was called into being by a “senator,” not named, but the
individual involved was formerly an aide to Senator Feinstein, so
the speculation naturally goes in this direction.  This was an
outsourcing of the whole Steele operation to a private group,
basically using $50 million so that this could go on, after
Steele was officially fired from his liaison with the FBI.
Now, this is incredible.  I think this will all come out,
and also following the James Baker testimony, which even if it
was behind closed doors, nevertheless, what came out in various
Fox TV programs and various other revelations, that it was
Michael Sussman, the lawyer of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the
lawyer for the DNC, which was the original trigger for the whole
Russiagate affair.  I find this absolutely incredible and I can
only hope that the American voters draw their conclusion out of
it, because that means that the Hillary Clinton campaign was
involved with a foreign power, namely great Britain, against her
opponent in the election campaign, and then afterwards, basically
against an elected President.  Now, I don’t find this very
“democratic,” to say the least, to use these kinds of secret
service methods, deep state methods, to work against your own
President, who has been democratically elected.
This, in my view, is the biggest scandal, and if it is all
coming out, if all the documents are being declassified, I think
it will go down in history, as the biggest scandal in American
history.  And that is what’s at stake with this midterm election.

SCHLANGER:  I think it’s very important that Baker, who was
the legal counsel to Comey and the FBI, in his testimony before a
private Congressional hearing, that he acknowledged that Sussman
gave him the Steele report, which was then incorporated into the
original FISA warrant against [Trump campaign advisor] Carter
Page.  That just makes clear that all these Democrats who have
been protesting what Representative Nunes did in his House
Intelligence Committee, that they were wrong, they were lying;
they were trying to cover up for the connection between the
British, the Clinton campaign, and the FBI.
Now, Helga, a couple of other things we need to cover before
we finish today:  One is the very significant stopover in Beijing
by Secretary of State Pompeo.  He had just come from North Korea,
where there was what appears to be quite a successful meeting
with Kim Jong-un.  But when he got to China, it was a slightly
different environment, largely because of the moves toward trade
war.  What happened when Pompeo got to Beijing?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  This was shortly after Vice President Mike
Pence had made this absolute diatribe at the Hudson Institute,
attacking China in the {worst} possible way, and this was taken
very badly by the Chinese government and Chinese media, who
really questioned, does that mean there is a shift in the Trump
Administration, in a total hostile attitude towards China?
Basically, when then Pompeo arrived in Beijing, just a few days
afterwards, he basically reiterated that it is the policy of the
United States to have a good relationship with China, to agree to
the One-China policy, and that the United States is not trying to
stop the rise of China.  And there were several Chinese media
which noted the fact that this was an extremely important
statement to come at this moment.
There was one interesting article in the {Global Times} by
the American analyst and expert, Clifford Kiracofe, who made the
point that there is a clear difference between Pence, who sort of
speaks for the deep state, and Trump, who is trying to change the
U.S. foreign policy, but is being “hamstrung” by this crew on the
side of the deep state.  And Kiracofe basically said the U.S.
establishment is unwilling to learn the lesson from what’s going
on strategically, that the world is changing and that there is a
multipolarity already now.
Now, the significance of this is not only Kiracofe saying
that, but that the {Global Times} is publishing that, which is a
paper which is very close to the Chinese government.  So I think
it’s important that the Chinese are still, despite the trade war
and the escalation coming from ridiculous — like Elizabeth
Economy, who was already on a rampage in 2014, came out with
another major piece, accusing China of all kinds of things — I
don’t need to repeat this stuff;  and I already in 2014 said that
Elizabeth Economy obviously has an “economy-class mind” if she
says these things, and obviously, she has not improved since.
But in any case, I think it is very important that Pompeo
was there to set the record straight, because obviously, the need
to find solutions to the world does require the collaboration
among the major powers of the world.  Those people who are
pushing this insane confrontation, like Hillary Clinton did in
her speech in Oxford, where she was on an absolute rant against
Russia, I mean, these people should really not be listened to, at
all.

SCHLANGER: Another group that shouldn’t be listened to, but
unfortunately is, is the IPCC, which is in the news again, with
the so-called “manmade climate change” theories they have,
demanding that carbon dioxide be eliminated from the universe.
This goes back to the campaign you waged against the
British-backed, German figure John Schellnhuber, who has been
pushing these policies.  And now it looks as though this is going
to be aimed as dagger at the heart of the German auto industry.
And it’s a good thing that Trump pulled the United States out of
the Paris climate change agreement.  But where is this heading?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  This is report which says the climate accord
from Paris was not good enough, we need not stop 2% temperature
increase, but we should stop at 1.5% by 2050.  And obviously,
this is basically what Schellnhuber put out some years ago with
the “great transformation” as he called it, the decarbonization
of the world economy, getting rid of nuclear, getting rid of
coal, oil, gas, just go to “renewable” energy sources; and there,
it is very, very clear that what my husband has developed in
terms of the cohesion and the correlation between energy
flux-density in the production process, and the potential
relative population density, which can be maintained with that
energy flux-density, means that the goal which Schellnhuber set
forth that the Earth can only carry 1 billion people, that that
is what they now want to put back on the agenda.  It’s a
desperate effort by the forces of the Empire against Trump, who
has promised to reindustrialize the United States; especially
against the New Silk Road, against the Belt and Road Initiative,
which now is the new spirit which has captured more than 100
countries already, which work with the Belt and Road Initiative
to their benefit.  And it’s an effort to really throw a monkey
wrench into this dynamic.
But I think it’s desperate, I think it’s dangerous, but I
don’t think it will work.  I don’t think that these people will
convince China, India, Latin America, Africa, the Asian nations,
even some of the European nations, to lie down and die, because
this is what that would mean.
It’s dangerous anyhow, because you can see that it’s needing
a mass hysteria on the CO2 question.  I mean, first of all, we
have long debated that the CO2 emissions is really a minimal
factor in climate change.  Climate change is taking place,
there’s no question about it, but as we have documented many
times in the past, it has to a very large extent to do with the
position of our Solar System in the Galaxy, and it is long-term
cycles from Ice Ages to warming periods, and within that, you
have still smaller fluctuations; and this is determining the
climate.
So the whole discussion of whether the CO2 emission of man
causing these climate changes is just completely absurd.  Now,
it’s very dangerous, because, as you can see, this brainwashing
of the population  — in Europe, for example, one day after the
IPCC put out this quack report, the EU Environment Ministers met
and they decided that the CO2 emission from cars should not be
30%, like they had previously argued, but it should be 35%; and
the German government, which basically initially said 30%, and
then agreed to this compromise — it’s just crazy.
Now, what will that do?  The boss of VW, the largest German
carmaker today came out and said that if this aim is being
implemented to have 35% cut in cars’ CO2 emissions, then this
will cause, alone for VW, 100,000 jobs — and that’s just one
carmaker.  Now, you can add all the other ones, and you will end
up with millions of people going unemployed and the whole
industry collapsing!  Germany, as an economy, is already on
extremely fragile ground because of the exit from nuclear energy,
and if they now are pushing to eliminate coal altogether, this
will be the death of Germany as an industrial country.
Obviously, we will make a big campaign against that.
There is a big worry, because obviously, for example, Poland
is 90% dependent on coal in terms of its electricity production.
And if they force countries to implement that, you will have a
populist explosion in the next vote, if not earlier.
So this is all completely crazy, and it should be stated
very clearly, that with the presently existing technologies, for
a very long time, the world population cannot be maintained
without coal, and there are safe and modern coal plants which are
completely environmentally friendly; and it’s completely
motivated by, not the environment, but by an anti-population
attitude.  We had put out in 2015, a report “‘Global Warming’
Scare Is Population Reduction, not Science,” and in that report,
we had the Queen of England on the cover, because obviously,
Schellnhuber, who wants to be addressed all the time as “CBE,”
Commander of the British Empire,  — we had documented in that
report that these are British policies.  And I think what we see
with this IPCC report, and anti-coal emission campaign; and in
Berlin, they now forbid diesel cars, cars which fueled by diesel
are forbidden from driving in 11 zones in Berlin! Now, the
craftsmen’s association has said that this means that 50,000 cars
of craftsmen will not be allowed to drive in the city, and
everybody who needs the services of a craftsman, who needs a new
roof, or needs a new pump, or whatever, they will not be serviced
any more.
This has nothing to do with real issues:  This is mass
psychosis, and it’s driven by the hedge funds, by Wall Street,
because the CO2 emission trade is a quackery:  We denounced that
in the past, and now, to impose a global carbon tax, which is
also what is being pushed, would mean they have again a good
weapon against national sovereignty, because once you agree that
national economies have to submit to the policing in terms of
their carbon emission, here you go again in the direction of this
globalist eco-fascism.
It’s not scientific, I think it’s the opposite:  It’s
oligarchical and it’s an effort, really aimed, in my view
primarily against the New Silk Road, but naturally also against
Trump, also against Germany, and many other countries.  So, we
should really denounce that, and we will have a whole bunch of
articles about that on this webpage; we will have a whole section
on the Schiller page, where we will have interviews and
statements.  And we invite you, if you have some scientific
contribution to make to this subject, we will publish it on this
website and have a public debate.  Because this is really
dangerous for the future of civilization.
And we have to have the opposite approach:  We have to have
an optimism about man being able to go into fusion power, to
develop completely new scientific methods for energy, safety, for
raw materials security, space travel — I think we should not get
into this scare which is really a tool of the oligarchy to try to
stop the development of the people.

SCHLANGER:  Helga, we’ve gone on a little bit longer than
usual, but I think there’s one other thing we have to bring up,
because we teased it last week, which is endorsements for
Independent Congressional candidate Kesha Rogers in Texas.  In
case, people don’t know this, in the last couple of days, we’ve
two very prominent American Republicans and conservatives —
actually, they may not even be Republicans in the party sense —
but Roger Stone, a longtime friend of Donald Trump, a
self-proclaimed “political provocateur” issued a very strong
endorsement of Kesha Rogers.  And then, Senator Richard Black, a
Virginia state senator, who’s been very involved in exposing the
coup and also exposing the deep state operations against Syria,
he issued a statement endorsing Kesha Rogers.  Helga, do you have
any thoughts on these two endorsements?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think it’s great, and I can also add that
the French former Presidential candidate Jacques Cheminade also
endorsed Kesha Rogers, saying that even though he’s not an
American, Kesha’s campaign has international significance,
because she is the flagship against everything which is going
wrong in the United States, right now.  So I think we will have
more such statements, and I really wish all of you to come out
and support Kesha Rogers, because this is a campaign of national
importance and international importance.  [Rogers is an
Independent running in the 9th CD in Texas, against incumbent
Democrat Al Green, who promotes impeaching President Trump
regardless of whether he has committed a constitutionally defined
crime or not — ed.]

SCHLANGER: OK, I think that about does it.  Until next week,
Helga, we’ll see you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  OK, till next week.

Schiller Instituttet den 25. september – I sidste uges webcast gennemgik Helga Zepp-LaRouche betydningen af præsident Trumps ordre om at frigive hemmeligt stemplede ‘Russiagate’-dokumenter relateret til det amerikanske justitsministeriuma/FBI’s kupforsøg imod ham. Frigivelsen af disse dokumenter – kombineret med afsløringerne fra George Papadopoulos, der fortalte Fox News, at det var briterne og deres australske modparter, der udpegede ham som mål ved at plante løgnene om russernes ‘hacking’ – tilvejebringer beviser, der kan føre til ikke alene en opbrydning af det britisk-styrede kup, men også til at sende gerningsmændene fra Obamas efterretningsapparat i fængsel for indblanding i præsidentvalget.

Den hysteriske reaktion fra gerningsmændene – herunder direkte intervention fra de britiske og australske regeringer, der kræver, at der ikke frigives noget – førte til en udsættelse af udførelsen af Trumps ordre. Men præsidenten gav en forsikring for, at de vil blive frigivet. På trods af de eksplosive konsekvenser af Trumps ordre dækker de vestlige medier det ikke. De vælger i stedet at køre nonstop dækning af påståede seksuelle teenage-eskapader af højesteretskandidat Kavanaugh, sammen med den igangværende bevidst provokerende og forvirrende historie om, hvorvidt kupdeltager Rod Rosenstein – vicestatsadvokaten, der udpegede Mueller som specialundersøger, og som har foreslået at bruge den 25. forfatningstilføjelse til at fjerne Trump – har sagt op, eller vil blive fyret. En sådan dækning er designet til at desorientere læserne og seerne, i et øjeblik hvor klarhed er afgørende.

Og mens dette udfolder sig er FN’s generalforsamling trådt sammen midt i betydelige diplomatiske initiativer, som vil afgøre om det nye paradigme forbundet med Kinas Bælte- og Vejinitiativ vil afslutte æraen med geopolitiske destabiliseringer og krige.

Lyt med på fru LaRouche webcast i denne uge, hvor hun giver den nødvendige klarhed for at mobilisere med henblik på at afslutte kupforsøget, og dermed sætte en endelig stopper for imperialistisk geopolitik.

Begyndelsen af videoen:

HARLEY SCHLANGER: Hej, jeg er Harley Schlanger fra Schiller Instituttet. Velkommen til denne uges webcast med vores grundlægger og præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Der var et par afsløringer i de sidste par dage, som faktisk former et helt nyt potentiale for den strategiske situation, især at overvinde kuppet i USA, med præsident Trumps frigivelse af hemmelige dokumenter. Jeg tror det er vigtigt, at vi starter med det, fordi det er i overensstemmelse med hvad vi har opfordret til, nemlig frigivelse af hele historien om, hvem der står bag dette, og hvorfor. Kan du opdatere os på dette emne?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja. Jeg tror at dette er den vigtigste strategiske udvikling, fordi, som vi har sagt mange gange, mens lande i verden allerede er på vej mod et helt nyt sæt af internationale relationer, omkring den Nye Silkevej og et win-win samarbejde, er det også klart, at det hele afhænger af USA: Afhængig af hvordan den indre situation i USA udvikles, tror jeg, at det er et spørgsmål om krig og fred. For to uger siden nævnte vi Willy Wimmers erklæring, som jeg er enig i, hvilket er, at den eneste ting som står mellem os alle og 3. Verdenskrig er personen Trump. Og det er ikke en fuld opbakning af Trump, det er bare den virkelighed, som de mennesker der har været involveret i et kupforsøg mod ham, sammen med den britiske regering og den britiske efterretningstjeneste, disse er krigsmagere, og det er de folk der presser på for fuldstændig konfrontation med Rusland og Kina.

I denne strategiske sammenhæng er det meget vigtigt, at mindre end syv uger før midtvejsvalget, frigiver præsident Trump faktisk mange hemmeligt stemplede dokumenter vedrørende FISA-rettens garantier baseret på den svigagtige cirkulation af Steeles dossier, en rigtig efterretningsoperation, og også en masse e-mails, men også interviews med 70 individer involveret i affæren.

Selvom dette endnu ikke er offentligt, vil det blive offentligt, og nu vil det komme for Kongressen, og vi skal i grunden vente til de behandler alle disse oplysninger, og det kommer ud. Det er meget klart, fra gerningsmændenes reaktion, at Trump virkelig har ramt det absolutte ømme punkt. Der er en helt hysterisk reaktion fra lederne af det demokratiske parti, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, Mark Warner og andre, og de siger dybest set, at “under ingen omstændigheder må disse oplysninger blive frigivet. Dette risikerer kildernes liv, osv.”, sagde Pelosi, og alle de tidligere intelligenschefer er alle kommet ud med skrig og skrål. De indrømmer alle, at præsident Trump har autoritet til at gøre det, så alle disse forbrydelser vil blive offentliggjort.

Den britiske efterretningstjenestes rolle vil være helt krystalklar: At der ikke var aftalt spil med Rusland, men der var skam et kriminelt aftalt spil mellem det demokratiske partiapparat, efterretningslederne fra Obama-administrationen, og en fremmed magt, nemlig, Storbritannien. Jeg mener, at Trump har helt ret, da han sagde, at dette vil være en af de stolteste bedrifter i hans præsidentskab, fordi hele dette apparat var en form for kræft, der har skadet USA i meget lang tid. Så det er stort. Det er virkelig skandaløst, at noget, som meget vel kunne være den største skandale i USA’s historie, ikke bliver rapporteret bredt af de internationale medier. Hvis de rapporterer det, er det kringlet og har et spin, og normale mennesker, der ikke undersøger sagen i dybden, har ingen chance for at forstå betydningen af dette. Jeg ved det ikke forholder sig sådan i USA, men for eksempel de tyske medier, jeg kiggede virkelig efter, og de har næppe noget om det overhovedet, hvilket fortæller dig, at det ikke bare er fake news, som de rapporterer, det er især undertrykkelsen af virkelig væsentlige historier, som er hvordan de forsøger at manipulere befolkningen. Så det er stort.

SCHLANGER: Helga, selv i USA, efter første dag faldt dækningen drastisk, i betragtning af vigtigheden af dette. {The Hill} lavede et interview med Trump, hvor han kommenterede om den største skandale, men det er værd at nævne, at Pelosi, Schumer, Warner, Schiff-brevet, i grunden var en appel til efterretningsvæsenet, DOJ, Justitsministeriet og FBI, om at trodse Trumps ordre og skabe en potentiel forfatningsmæssig krise Den anden del af dette er LaRouche PAC’s offentliggørelse af de britiske dokumenter, e-mails, kommunikation mellem briterne og folk som Brennan og Clapper og andre: Det er de andre brikker, som stadig mangler at falde på plads.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Ja; men jeg tror, at den første brik allerede er faldet på plads, og jeg finder det ganske interessant at det var George Papadopoulos, af alle mennesker, som angiveligt var personen, der udløste hele denne undersøgelse pga. fuldskab på en bar i London. Han fortalte, at der var russisk hacking af demokraternes computere; så denne Papadopoulos gav for to dage siden et langvarigt interview på Fox TV. Jeg vil opfordre alle vore seere og lyttere til at gøre anstrengelsen og lytte til dette, fordi det er virkelig afslørende.

Grundlæggende sagde han, at han blev snydt, at han blev lokket ind i dette ved en kombination af australsk, britisk, tyrkisk og amerikansk efterretningstjeneste; at han blev fanget i dette, og nu lægger han kortene på bordet. Og han siger det er briterne, det er australierne, der forresten er mere eller mindre det samme, på grund af Five Eyes-forbindelsen blandt landene i det britiske statssamfund. Papadopoulos siger stort set, at alt dette var et setup, og at det var briterne. Dette er virkelig vigtigt, og folk burde virkelig lytte til det, fordi det var, så vidt jeg ved, en af de såkaldte forudsætninger for at hele skandalen brød ud, og nu vender han omkring og siger: Jeg blev vildledt, jeg blev lokket ind i dette. Hvis dette fortsætter, vil vi se flere ting, og samtlige kongresmedlemmer, der undersøgte dette, udtalte: hvis det amerikanske folk kendte til omfanget af denne forbrydelse, ville de blive virkelig berørte. Dette kunne blive den store forløsning i amerikansk historie.

Se resten på engelsk på videoen ovenover.



Leder fra LaRouche PAC d. 23. august (EIRNS) – Der er mange farer i Verden lige nu. Der er den verserende økonomiske krise, som er meget værre end i 2008. Der er det forværrede forhold mellem USA og Kina, toldkonflikten taget i betragtning, og det kinesiske synspunkt, at motivationen bag konflikten er at begrænse Kinas mulighed for at blive verdens ledende inden for visse højteknologiske områder inden 2025. Og der er det fortsatte britiske angreb på det amerikanske præsidentskab med Robert Muellers Trumpgate og Russiagate.

            Helga Zepp-LaRouche uddybede disse og andre farer i hendes ugentlige strategiske Schiller Institut webcast i dag, og bemærkede om de britisk skabte beskidte anti-Trump-operationer, at “den eneste gode ting er, at Trump hidtil har holdt hovedet koldt.” Men alle former for udenrigspolitiske spørgsmål går i skuddermudder, og det er naturligvis en yderst farlig situation.”

            Zepp-LaRouche opfordrede folk til at handle og fokusere på det højeste niveau af den politik, der kræves. Hun sagde: “Det store spørgsmål er, hvordan kan man tage fat på [disse farlige processer] på en sådan måde, at hele diskussionen løftes til et højere niveau? Derfor har Schiller Instituttet udsendt en appel, der opfordrer til et Nyt Bretton Woods, og især appellerer til de fire ledere i USA, Rusland, Kina og Indien – nemlig Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping og Prime Minister Modi – om, at de grundlæggende set straks enes om at løse dette problem, komme faren for et finansielt krak i forkøbet ved at gå tilbage til et Nyt Bretton Woods, fastkurssystem, og etablere et nyt kreditsystem for at formidle samarbejdet i forbindelse med det nye paradigme og samarbejdet med Bælt- og Vejinitiativet.

            “Er det så realistisk? Nuvel, jeg tror det. Fordi Rusland, Kina og Indien allerede har et meget stærkt samarbejde i denne henseende. Og Trump har med sine indledende skridt i forhold til Kina og sit venskab med Xi Jinping vist, at han er i stand til at gå i denne retning, og også hans bestræbelser på at forbedre forholdet til Rusland, og især hans møde med Putin i Helsinki, viser disse muligheder. Og det er derfor, at dette vanvid fra det politiske etablissement [for at fortrænge Trump] er så utroligt hysterisk, fordi de ser dette potentiale.”

            I diskussionen om ideen om et Nyt Bretton Woods i internationale kredse, er der allerede dem i Japan, som mener, at denne nation burde give sin fulde støtte til dette initiativ.

            Italien bevæger sig meget dramatisk i tråd med ideen om at tilslutte sig Kina for at starte fælles udviklingsarbejde. Zepp-LaRouche beskrev dette som “en meget forfriskende udvikling, fordi den nye italienske finansminister, Giovanni Tria, har en delegation i Kina. Og der er en anden delegation ledet af Michele Geraci, vicehandelsministeren, og han annoncerede dannelsen af en sådan kinesisk arbejdsstyrke, med det formål, ikke bare passivt at se på hvad der foregår, men at holde trit med forandringen af innovation og teknologi i Asien og især Kina.” Og der er også andre lande, der er i gang.

Zepp-LaRouche opsummerede: “Jeg ved ikke hvad der vil ske længere hen ad vejen, men vi organiserer for at få alle de europæiske lande og USA til at samarbejde med det nye paradigme, og vi behøver naturligvis at få mange folk til at forstå, at menneskeheden har nået et punkt, hvor civilisationens udryddelse kan være meget tæt på, hvis vi fortsætter med det geopolitiske hysteri. Så folk skal vågne op og virkelig forstå, at der ikke er nogen grund til, at verdens største magter ikke kan eller ikke bør samarbejde om at overvinde fattigdom ved at overvinde underudvikling. Når nu USA stadig har mange lommer med livsbetingelser som et uland – hvis man tager til Alabama eller Tennessee eller nogle af disse sydlige stater, finder man områder, der minder om Den tredje Verden! På samme måde hvis man tager Tyskland: Et såkaldt rigt land, som har 4,4 millioner fattige børn, og dette tal er stigende! I Grækenland har EU’s nedskæringspolitik halveret finansieringen af sundhedsudgifter, og 25.000 arbejdspladser i sundhedssektoren blev fjernet, da Trojkaen begyndte at ødelægge dette land.

Se, sammenlign nu dette med den absolut utrolige rekord for Kina, som i 1978 havde omkring 97,8 % af alle mennesker i de fattige landdistrikter; og i de sidste 40 år, eller 39 år, er lykkedes med at få 740 millioner mennesker ud af fattigdom. Den samlede fattigdomsrate i Kina for indeværende er 3,1 %, og de ønsker at udrydde fattigdommen helt og hæve levestandarden for disse mennesker inden 2020, således at der ingen fattigdom er tilbage i Kina.

Så folk burde ikke blive så absolut hysteriske, men de bør se på fakta: Måske gør Kina noget rigtigt, hvilket det neoliberale monetaristiske system gør forkert! Og Kina tilbyder nu sin egen model for økonomisk transformation og deler denne oplevelse, for eksempel med Afrika. Der kommer i starten af september en meget stor konference, der involverer Kina og, tror jeg, alle statsoverhoveder i Afrika, og det blev netop meddelt, at dette vil blive overværet af Xi Jinping. Og at han der vil bekendtgøre nye initiativer mellem Kina og Afrika; mange, mange områder af fælles videnskab, fælles uddannelse, og mange andre nye ting.

Der er to dynamikker: Den ene er udvikling og samarbejde, og den anden er konfrontation med faren for krig.”

Er der virkelig nogen der tror, at kvantitative lempelser vil løse verdens accelererende finanskrise? At skabe mere ubetalelig gæld ved at centralbankerne øger mængden af ‘funny money’, der fejer igennem systemet, vil genopbygge så meget som en enkelt bro, en kilometer jernbane eller skabe et eneste produktivt job, der betaler en løn man kan leve af? Eller at mere frihandel, privatisering og deregulering er nøglen til økonomisk velstand? Det er disse “løsninger”, som de imperialistiske eliter i London og Wall Street presser på med; det er London og Wall Street, som stadig dikterer politikken i den transatlantiske region.

          Men aksiomerne bag disse forfejlede politikker skaber kun papirprofit for de få, på bekostning af et stigende antal liv, der er mistet ved den samlede virkning af afindustrialisering og degenerering, som har ødelagt den optimisme, som ellers bør karakterisere unge menneskers livssyn; og de unge vender sig i stedet mod dødelige stoffer og selvmord. Vælgere i hele den transatlantiske verden har vist, at de ikke længere stoler på eller tror på finansoligarkerne, der klamrer sig til disse mislykkede aksiomer for at holde deres forfaldne system i live.

          Mange regeringer i sektoren af fremvoksende økonomier nærer den samme mistillid, da de i stigende grad vender sig mod Kina og dets nu globale Bælt- og Vejinitiativ, og afviser de neoliberale aksiomer for at overvinde de katastrofer, som de er blevet pålagt af de eliter, der har stået for det “post-koloniale system” med plyndring og ødelæggelse.

          Det post-koloniale system fik så godt som ukontrolleret kontrol for næsten halvtreds år siden, med beslutningen den 15. august 1971, om at bryde væk fra Franklin Roosevelts finansielle Bretton Woods-system med faste valutakurser. På det tidspunkt, og siden da, har Lyndon LaRouche og hans kone, Helga, ledet kampen for et Nyt Bretton Woods, baseret på at bringe de førende stormagter USA, Rusland, Kina og Indien sammen for at gennemføre det. Med valget af Donald Trump, der deler LaRouches modstand mod det etablissement, som kører denne orden, blev det muligt for USA at opfylde den mission, som LaRouche har skitseret siden den skæbnesvangre augustdag i 1971.

          John Brennan, en lejemorder, der arbejder for dette London-baserede system, og som har til hensigt at stoppe Trump, befinder sig nu i det varme sæde, og står over for mulig retsforfølgelse sammen med mange af hans samarbejdspartnere for deres forbrydelser, herunder at have brygget den bedrageriske Russiagate-sag sammen.

          Denne torsdag vil Helga Zepp-LaRouche rådgive om, hvad der kan gøres for at virkeliggøre et Nyt Bretton Woods og putte Brennan og hans venner hvor de hører hjemme, i fængsel. Gå ikke glip af denne mulighed!

Se programmet her. Tilgængelig fredag den 24. august 2018.