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

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

Helgas fulde tale kan læses i dagens leder. 




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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet.)

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

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

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

[Captions:]
War
Famine
Wealth Gap
Economic Recession

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

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

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

[Captions:]
Policy Connectivity
Trade Connectivity
Infrastructure Connectivity

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

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

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

Se uddrag af webcast i oversættelse, her:

 

 

 




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

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

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

Engelsk udskrift:

Dear Friends of the Schiller Institute,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




I dag er Sejrsdag

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(engelsk):

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

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

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

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

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

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




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




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

DOKUMENTATION:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

   




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

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




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

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

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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)




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

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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

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

Titelbillede: Johan Sebastian Bach




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

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




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

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




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

LaRouchePAC Fredags-webcast 29. jan. 2016.

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Er skønhed en politisk nødvendighed?
Helga Zepp-LaRouche

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

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 




Kinas politik for Ét bælte, én vej er nøglen
til fred og fremgang i Eurasien og Mellemøsten

Kina er mere end rede til at investere i den form for afgørende infrastruktur, der ville opbygge det eurasiske område som en zone med fred, stabilitet og fremgang. Men Europa må rette op på sig selv, hvilket betyder at dumpe briterne, og at dumpe de britiske agenter som Schäuble, og som driver Europa hen imod en intern konflikt og imod kaos. Hvis Europa falder ned i kaos og kollaps, i særdeleshed i sammenhæng med det europæiske banksystems fallit, og Mellemøsten forvandles til en zone med permanent krig i den islamiske verden, mellem sunni og shia, mellem arabere og persere, så vil man få et masseslagteri i hele Eurasien; koncentreret i den transatlantiske del og med en forlængelse ind i Mellemøsten, og udsigten til eurasisk fremgang vil blive dræbt.

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Helga Zepp-LaRouche kræver Nyt Paradigme
på forum for forsvarsministre i USA

11. januar 2016 – På et forum, der fejrede 50-året for stiftelsen af Nationalkomiteen for Amerikansk-kinesiske Relationer, hvor 4 tidligere amerikanske forsvarsministre fremlagde et »tilbageblik« på USA-Kina-forholdet under deres embedsperiode, indgav Helga Zepp-LaRouche en dosis virkelighed i det, der var ved at blive en lovlig behagelig udveksling af synspunkter mellem kolleger i lighed med, hvad der måtte have fundet sted på dækket af Titanic, før skibet ramte isbjerget. Forsvarsministrene var Harold Brown, William Cohen, Chuck Hagel og (over video) William Perry. Alt imens spørgsmålet om atomvåben ikke var blevet bragt på bane, især af Perry, der tidligere har givet udtryk for stor bekymring over faren for atomvåbenspredning og faren for en atomar konflikt med Rusland, så manglede den fornemmelse for en nødsituation, der svarer til den virkelighed, vi i dag står overfor.

Alt imens mødelederen, formand for NCUSCR Steve Orlins, gjorde, hvad han kunne, for at finde en anden person end Helga til at stille det første spørgsmål, så lykkedes det hende at få taletid. Helga præsenterede sig som præsident for Schiller Instituttet.

»Der er mange militære eksperter på internationalt plan, der siger, at vi er nærmere en atomkrig, end vi var på højden af den Kolde Krig, af forskellige årsager«, sagde hun. »Hvis dette skulle indtræffe, ved et uheld eller på anden vis, så ville det føre til menneskehedens udslettelse. Der er mange andre destabiliserende faktorer. En af disse faktorer er, at Verdensbanken netop har sagt, at vi står foran den perfekte, politiske storm på grund af det nye finanskrak. EU står for at eksplodere over flygtningekrisen.« Vi har ISIS.

Her afbrød en temmelig utålmodig Orlins Helga, »Hvad er Deres spørgsmål?«, spurgte han.

Helga svarede: »Mit spørgsmål lyder, hvorfor kan vi ikke skabe et nyt paradigme, hvor vi besvarer præsident Xi Jinpings tilbud, som han gav til præsident Obama under APEC-mødet i 2014, og som gik ud på, at USA burde samarbejde om den Nye Silkevej i en win-win-strategi? I sin nytårstale gentog han, at vi må bygge et samfund for menneskehedens fælles bestemmelse. Hvorfor kan vi ikke bygge en international sikkerhedsarkitektur, der er baseret på fælles, økonomisk samarbejde?«

Den første til at svare var Harold Brown, der var forsvarsminister under Jimmy Carter.

»Det tror jeg, vi har gjort«, sagde han. »Jeg tror, tingene ville se meget værre ud, hvis vi ikke havde økonomisk samarbejde, men at sige, at man går ind for fred og samarbejde, er blot det allerførste skridt. Mekanikken i detaljerne betyder alt.«

Dernæst ønskede Bill Cohen at svare. Cohen sagde, at han ønskede, at Perry skulle tale om dette spørgsmål, men at han ville kommentere det på egne vegne. »Jeg mener, at vi er blevet for slappe i vores bekymring for atomvåben«, sagde han. »Jeg går tilbage til Churchill, der sagde, at, en dag ville vi vende tilbage til Stenalderen på videnskabens lysende vinger. Jeg tror, at det, vi ser med spredningen af atomvåben – Pakistan bygger flere og flere, Nordkorea bygger flere, Iran kunne meget vel bygge flere i en ikke så fjern fremtid. Så jeg mener, at denne eksistentielle trussel, såvel som også klimaforandringen, må få os til virkeligt at tænke eller gentænke, hvordan vi skal overleve på denne planet. For jeg mener, at truslen om spredning af atomvåben er langt større i dag, fordi flere og flere personer og radikale grupper forsøger at få fingre i dem. Det ville jeg sætte i sammenhæng med en generel arkitektur, som vi må bekymre os om, måske mere end tidligere, for vi havde rationelle regeringer, der håndterede dette spørgsmål, der er ved at komme dertil, hvor der er tale om at balancere på kanten af sikkerhed og mulig udslettelse.«

Dernæst fokuserede Orlins på spørgsmålet om terrorisme og ignorerede Cohens forslag om, at Perry skulle kommentere spørgsmålet (se supplerende rapport).

Mødet brev transmitteret live på C-Span, se http://www.c-span.org/video/?402996-1%2Fformer-defense-secretaries-uschina-relations&start=4626

Titelbillede: Helga Zepp-LaRouche præsenterer det Nye Paradigme med USA’s samarbejde om den Ny Silkevej, i National Press Club, Washington, D.C., den 27. oktober 2015. 

Supplerende dokumentation:

11. januar 2016 – Alt imens tidligere forsvarsminister William Perry ikke var helt så ligefrem, som han tidligere har været i spørgsmålet om faren for atomkrig (se 30. dec., ’Stands dette forbandede atomvåbenkapløb!) under NCUSCR’s forum med deltagelse af tidligere forsvarsministre, og ikke fik lejlighed til, eller selv tog muligheden for at svare på Zepp-LaRouches afgørende spørgsmål, så indikerede han klart, at atomtruslen var nummer ét på hans dagsorden. Da mødelederen gennemgik en indkøbsliste over spørgsmål, som han anså for vigtige, spurgte han alle forsvarsministrene, om klimaforandring var en strategisk trussel!

»Ih, ja«, svarede på rad og række forsvarsministrene Brown, Cohen og Hagel. Perry understregede og brød således den »politiske korrekthed«, at han var langt mindre bekymret for noget, der muligvis ville blive et stort problem i 2030, end han var over atomtruslen, der er et spørgsmål om den yderste hastesag. Med hensyn til mulige »brændpunkter«, eller steder, hvor en opblussen af krig kunne finde sted, påpegede Perry specifikt det Sydkinesiske Hav som en mulig udløser af en konflikt.

»Kinesernes syn på det Sydkinesiske Hav er meget anderledes end vores«, sagde han og bemærkede, at de anser det for at være en del af deres territorium, hvorimod USA anser det for at være en del af de åbne (frie) have. »Dette sætter scenen for betydelige uoverensstemmelser, der kunne føre til konflikt.«

 




Løsningen på den europæiske
flygtningekrise er en Silkevejs-Marshallplan!
Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Der findes i øjeblikket kun et eneste, strategisk tiltag, der kan skabe en løsning på de forskellige kriser – den finansielle, økonomiske, flygtningerelaterede og moralske krise – og det er den kinesiske regerings tilbud om samarbejde om opbygningen af den Nye Silkevej, på basis af en win-win-strategi. Vi må omgående gøre en ende på City of Londons og Wall Streets kasinoøkonomi, til hvis undersåtter Schäuble, Spahn, Kerber og den tidligt falmende Jörg Asmussen hører, gennem den omgående vedtagelse af en bankopdelingslov i traditionen efter Franklin D. Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov. Og dernæst må vi have et kreditsystem som det, Tyskland havde med KfW (Kreditanstalt for Genopbygning) under genopbygningen efter Anden Verdenskrig. 

Titelbillede: Forsiden til Sebastian Brants satiriske skrift, ‘Narreskibet’, fra 1494.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




Menneskets overlevelse i dag
afhænger af en Ny Renæssance;
det er menneskets iboende
natur at være skabende

Ben Deniston fra LPAC’s Videnskabsteam taler om den nye brochure, »USA tilslutter sig den Nye Silkevej«, og Kinas politik for den Nye Silkevej.

»Dette er en forståelse af, at udviklingen af fundamental videnskab, i samarbejde med forskellige nationer, skaber en nettoforøgelse af den mængde rigdom og ressourcer, der er til rådighed for alle. Og vi er nået til et punkt i menneskehedens udvikling, hvor, hvis vi ikke løfter os op på et niveau med internationale relationer og globalt samarbejde, der bygger på denne forståelse, vil vi ikke være i stand til at eksistere som art på denne planet. Hvis vi fortsætter denne fremgangsmåde, med geopolitiske konflikter, vil vi ødelægge os selv; sådan, som Obama netop nu truer med at gøre.«

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Dansk SPECIAL LaRouchePAC webcast 30. dec. 2015:
Det er ét minut før midnat; vi må gennemtvinge handling nu!

Hvorfor tolererer man i Europas tilfælde fortsat eksistensen af en Eurozone, der idémæssigt var bankerot fra første dag, den blev skabt? Hvorfor tolererer man fortsat en Europæisk Kommission i Bruxelles, og en Europæisk Union, der er en rent destruktiv, bogstavelig talt satanisk institution? Hvorfor tolererer man, og går på kattepoter rundt om, den kendsgerning, at Paven, i sin encyklika om global opvarmning, accepterede en britisk politik for folkemord?

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Nødudsendelse fra LaRouchePAC
23. december 2015:
Til en nation (USA) på randen af en finanskatastrofe.
Dansk udskrift.

Vi er nu ved et punkt, hvor konsekvenserne af at tolerere disse handlinger og denne politik og disse politiske personer udgør USA’s undergang, såvel som også hele det transatlantiske områdes undergang og muligvis også verdens undergang, hvis vi degenererer til omstændigheder med atomkrig. Så dette er et ekstraordinært øjeblik; og det er noget, der kræver handling fra ledende borgere i denne republik. Jeres folkevalgte repræsentanter, og først og fremmest USA’s præsident, har opført sig som britiske forrædere, og ikke som de patriotiske personer, der skal forestille at gøre tjeneste i landets højeste embeder.

Blot få timer før denne udsendelse blev der udsendt en nøderklæring, der blev udlagt på LaRouchePAC’s website, og som cirkuleres via de sociale medier og som et flyveblad på Manhattans gader og andre steder i hele USA. Teksten (findes som selvstændigt Flyveblad her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=10843) lyder som følger (oplæst af Matthew Ogden):

Julebudskab: Den 1. januar 2016 er dommedag! Kun et initiativ som Franklin Roosevelts kan redde os

(23. december 2015): Præsident Barack Obama og hele den Amerikanske Kongres har forrådt jer, det amerikanske folk, ved af fejhed at nægte at tage skridt til de nødvendige nødbetingede initiativer for at forhindre det største finansielle og økonomiske krak – langt værre end dem i 1929 og 2008 – i at ske i de umiddelbart forestående dage og uger. Med mindre I, det amerikanske folk, rejser jer og kræver omgåede handling, vil nationen og en stor del af menneskeheden blive konfronteret med en katastrofe i begyndelsen af det nye år.

Hele det transatlantiske finanssystem står for at nedsmelte. Blot i løbet af de seneste uger er junk investment grade-obligationer til 15 mia. dollar blevet udslettet. Dette er blot et forvarsel om et umiddelbart forestående, totalt sammenbrud af den transatlantiske boble. Fra og med 1. januar 2016 er en gældsboble på 72 mia. dollar indstillet til at eksplodere i Puerto Rico. Kongressen havde muligheden for at tage initiativ til at forhindre dette, før de forlod byen, men tog ingen skridt til handling.

En gæld på skønsmæssigt 5 billion dollar, der er knyttet til USA’s nationale, kollapsende sektor for skiferolie og -gas, er i færd med at nedsmelte. I det vestlige Canada er denne boble allerede bristet og har udløst tabet af 100.000 arbejdspladser i 2015 – svarende til 750.000 arbejdspladser i USA – samt et kollaps i ejendomsmarkedet og et samfundsmæssigt sammenbrud. Denne samme krise er på vej i USA i accelererende tempo, men på en langt større skala.

I Europa træder der nye love i kraft fra den 1. januar 2016, som fjerner enhver beskyttelse af bankindskydere, der vil få deres sparepenge stjålet under »bail-in«-regler (ekspropriering), sådan, som det allerede er sket på Cypern. I Italien fik flere end 10.000 indskydere – bankkunder – deres opsparing eksproprieret under en delvis bail-in under fire bankers kollaps i denne måned. De samme forholdsregler findes inkluderet i Dodd/Frank-loven her i USA. Hvis ens bank kollapser, kan man få sin livsopsparing stjålet for at redde banken. Det kan og vil ske her, takket være fejhed og korruption hos jeres valgte regeringsfolk, der har holdt jer hen i uvidenhed og overtrådt den ed, de har aflagt i deres embede.

Kongressen havde, før den tog på ferie, mulighed for at forhindre denne nu fremstormende krise. De blev advaret. De kunne have vedtaget love, der allerede var blevet fremstillet i begge Kongressens huse, til genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, den af Franklin Roosevelt indførte lov, der opdelte Depressionens for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-banker, ved at adskille kommerciel bankvirksomhed fra alle hasardspilsaktiviteterne. Men Kongressen var købt af Wall Street og svigtede jer. Præsident Obama er totalt ejet af Wall Street og [City of] London, som har skabt ham. Wall Street er håbløst bankerot, og de har til hensigt at klamre sig til magten ved at stjæle jeres penge og fjerne jeres sundhedssystem samt lukke ned, hvad der måtte være tilbage af realøkonomien, den fysiske økonomi. Inden for et tidsrum af blot få dage eller uger kunne I blive konfronteret med fødevaremangel, hyperinflation og et totalt sammenbrud af alt, hvad I ellers anser for at være normale tilstande.

Præsident Obama fremprovokerer også, på vegne af Wall Street og London, en konfrontation med Rusland, der driver verden frem mod global krig, en krig, som nogle amerikanske og russiske militære topkommandører advarer om kunne blive en termonuklear udslettelseskrig.

Den 1. januar 2016 vil Ukraine, med USA’s og IMF’s godkendelse, gå i betalingsstandsning mht. sin gæld på 3 mia. dollar til Rusland, en åbenlyst provokerende handling fra Vestens side mod Moskva, der kommer oveni de allerede eksisterende sanktioner, NATO’s udvidelse mod øst og andre, direkte provokerende militære handlinger.

Alt dette er dødsens alvorligt. Verden befinder sig på spidsen af et krak værre end under den Store Depression, og en ny verdenskrig. I må nu tage skridt til handling, for jeres valgte regeringsfolk, kongresmedlemmer osv., har overgivet jer, på grund af deres egen fejhed og fordærv. De har, sammen med præsident Obama, gjort sig fortjent til jeres foragt og vrede pga. deres feje opførsel.

Der er løsninger forhånden. Wall Street må omgående lukkes. Der skal ikke betales en øre mere for at redde disse forbrydere! Kongressen må fjerne Wall Street-marionetten Barack Obama fra embedet, gennem en rigsretssag eller ved at påkalde det 25. forfatningstillæg, der fastsætter bestemmelser for fjernelsen af en præsident fra embedet, når denne præsident er mentalt uskikket til at fortsætte sit hverv. Glass-Steagall må omgående genindføres og en række initiativer må tages, der alle er modelleret efter det, som den store, amerikanske præsident Franklin Roosevelt gjorde i løbet af de allerførste måneder af sin embedsperiode, for at skabe millioner af produktive jobs, genopbygge nationens kollapsede infrastruktur og genrejse nationens værdighed.

Kongressen kan i løbet af få timer tage skridt til disse handlinger, men de vil kun handle i tide, hvis I vågner op og kræver det.

Alternativet er Helvede på Jord, fra og med det nye år. Er I, jeres venner, jeres naboer, i besiddelse af det moralske beredskab, der skal til for at overleve? Det er det spørgsmål, der er på bordet her, denne Juleaften, 2015.

Matthew Ogden: Lad mig nu introducere Jeff Steinberg fra Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), der i større detaljer vil gennemgå diskussionen med hr. LaRouche her til morgen.

Jeffrey Steinberg: Tak, Matt. Der er et par andre [kan ikke høres; 09:33] for jeg tror, at billedet af det finansielle [kan ikke høres; 09.39] er tydeligt. Mange mennesker derude har allerede fået færten af det; men det vigtigste er, at det er en umiddelbart forestående situation. Det er en situation, der vil eksplodere på ethvert givent tidspunkt, når vi først kommer over den 1. januar; en dato, hvor vi netop har meddelt nogle af de særlige begivenheder, der vil finde sted i de første dage af det nye år. Når alt er medregnet er der en spillegæld på mere en 1,5 billiard dollar, der er akkumuleret siden vi havde krisen i 2008; og det hele er en tidsindstillet bombe. Eksplosionens epicenter er USA og Vesteuropa.

Der er yderligere et par elementer, der må med i billedet, for at I, det amerikanske folk, kan få en komplet vurdering af, hvor kritisk det øjeblik er, som vi er nået til. For det første må man stille det spørgsmål, om Islamisk Stats angreb i Paris den 13. november, og senere i San Bernardino, Californien, repræsenterer en Rigsdagsbrand-begivenhed i det tidlige 21. århundrede. Vi ved, at disse jihadistiske netværk er blevet skabt og promoveret af førende nationer i denne vestlige kombination; startende med briterne og med Saudi Arabien. Der er fraktioner her i USA, der har været udtrykkeligt indblandet – al-Qaeda, Nusra Front, Islamisk Stat – alle på vegne af et engagement for, blandt andet, at vælte Assad-regeringen i Syrien. Så det, vi i realiteten ser på, er en kapacitet, der er blevet udløst i Europa og USA under visse vestlige kredses kontrol; og hvis hensigt det er at skabe de omstændigheder, under hvilke den form for politistat kan etableres, som vil være nødvendig for at takle det sociale kaos og for at gøre fremstød for en global konfrontation, der er umiddelbart forestående.

For det andet, så afslørede de andre begivenheder omkring COP21-konferencen om global opvarmning, at Pavestolen, selve Paven, var blevet kapret af en person, som kun kan beskrives som en satanisk person – John Schellnhüber; en ridder af Det britiske Imperium, hvis politik, der nu er blevet vedtaget af Paven, ønsker at se det store flertal af menneskeheden elimineret gennem en række [kan ikke høres: 12:37] i kombination med faren for krig og i kombination med de økonomiske katastrofer, som allerede er i gang med indgangen til denne nedsmeltnings-periode, lige efter den 1. januar.

Pointen er, at man har løjet for jer, det amerikanske folk; jeres folkevalgte regeringsfolk har svigtet jer ynkeligt. Og nettoresultatet er, at der, ét minut i midnat, ikke foreligger nogen forpligtelse over for jer til at tage skridt til den form for afgørende handlinger, der nu kræves som en bydende nødvendighed. Kongressen kan vende tilbage til Washington [fra juleferie, -red.], men vil kun gøre det, hvis I skræmmer livet af dem; hvis I rejser jer i denne juleferie og kræver, at de tager skridt til at foretage den form for nødhandlinger, som er det eneste handlingsforløb i dette øjeblik, der kan afværge denne absolut katastrofale situation, der potentielt blot ligger timer eller dage ud i fremtiden. Kongressen kan vende tilbage til Washington og nægte at betale Wall Streets gæld. Der er intet at være bange for på Wall Street, for de er håbløst og uafvendeligt bankerot. Det er frygten for det ukendte, der får medlemmer af Kongressen til at kapitulere og tillade Obamas præsidentskab, som er en hån mod nationen, at fortsætte; og til at tillade Wall Street fortsat at diktere betingelserne i Washington.

Vi er nu ved et punkt, hvor konsekvenserne af at tolerere disse handlinger og denne politik og disse politiske personer udgør USA’s undergang, såvel som også hele det transatlantiske områdes undergang og muligvis også verdens undergang, hvis vi degenererer til omstændigheder med atomkrig. Så dette er et ekstraordinært øjeblik; og det er noget, der kræver handling fra ledende borgere i denne republik. Jeres folkevalgte repræsentanter, og først og fremmest USA’s præsident, har opført sig som britiske forrædere, og ikke som de patriotiske personer, der skal forestille at gøre tjeneste i landets højeste embeder.

Det påhviler således os at tage skridt til de handlinger, der i dette øjeblik kan synes at være højst upraktiske; men som i virkeligheden er de eneste praktiske forholdsregler, hvis vi ønsker at overleve og få fremgang i dette nye år, vi har for os. Løsninger ligger parat; erklær Wall Street bankerot – det er allerede gået nedenom og hjem. Lancer den form for lovgivningsmæssige initiativer; vi så, hvor effektivt det var fra Franklin Roosevelt-præsidentskabets allerførste øjeblikke. Politikken dengang tilbyder os retningslinjer for handlinger, der bør udføres i dag! Af sig selv vil Kongressen ikke gøre det; det har de vist ved at flygte ud af Washington i sidste uge. Jeg vil blot afslutte med at sige, at den dag, Washington (regeringen, Kongressen) forlod byen, var jeg i D.C. på Capitol Hill; jeg talte personligt med mindst 40 individuelle medlemmer af Kongressen. I hvert eneste tilfælde var de fuldt ud klar over nedsmeltningen af junk-obligationerne; af de andre økonomiske katastrofer; af den umiddelbart forestående nedsmeltning af sektren for skiferolie og -gas; og dog tog de benene på nakken. De ignorerede og undveg det ansvar, der påhvilede dem. Det påhviler derfor nu os, og jer, at konfrontere virkeligheden direkte; og tage skridt til den form for nødhandlinger, der kan redde dagen, selv på dette fremskredne tidspunkt.

Matthew Ogden: Mange tak, Jeff. Hvis man tager fortilfældet fra 1933 og ser på den kendsgerning, at med det, som var det hidtil største finanskrak i den transatlantiske verdens historie, og fascisme fejede hen over Europa. Og i det vakuum, der ville have eksisteret, hvis ikke Franklin Roosevelt havde været præsident og havde gennemført de nødforanstaltninger på dette tidspunkt for at lukke Wall Street og mobilisere det amerikanske folks produktive evne, kunne fascisme meget vel også være kommet til Amerika. Så med studiet af dette fortilfælde bør vi tage meget alvorligt det, som hr. LaRouche har gjort i løbet af det seneste års tid for at mobilisere det, der udgør en lederskabskerne det sted, han kalder et gearingspunkt eller et omdrejningspunkt for den mobilisering, der er nødvendig for at ændre politikken, og det sted er på Manhattan i New York City.

De af jer, der havde lejlighed til at lytte til LaRouche Policy Committee sidste mandag, vil vide, at hr. LaRouche lagde meget stor vægt på en række musikalske opførelser, der fandt sted i New York City i sidste weekend. Det var to opførelser af Händels Messias, der blev sponsoreret af Schiller Instituttet og medsponsoreret af Fonden til Genoplivelse af Klassisk Kultur. Dette vi Diane [Sare] sige mere om. Dette var programmet. Den første opførelse blev afholdt om lørdagen i Sacred Heart Kirken i Brooklyn; og den anden blev afholdt om søndagen i Manhattans Upper West Side i All Souls Unitarian Kirken. Jeg vil derfor gerne introducere Diane Sare, som vil sige noget mere om betydningen af disse begivenheder, og hvad implikationerne af det, der i øjeblikket sker på Manhattan, er for fremtiden.

Diane Sare: Hej. Jeg kan sige, at disse to musikbegivenheder var fuldstændigt ekstraordinære med hensyn til kvalitet og effekt. Denne effekt er, at hr. Larouche for lidt over et år siden, i oktober 2014, besluttede at genoplive vores organisation i New York City. Dette er meget vigtigt i USA’s historie, for det var med New York City som udgangspunkt, at Alexander Hamilton førte en afgørende kamp for at forene De forende Stater imod forkæmpere, som Thomas Jefferson og andre, for delstaternes rettigheder; sidstnævnte, som i dag er blevet nedarvet i form af Wall Street og Det britiske Imperium. Der er derfor en afgørende rolle, der skal besættes; og dette kan man se i befolkningen i New York City – Jeg kom til at tænke på det, som Jeff netop henviste til, med ISIS osv. – og man har disse 11. september-terrorangreb. Det var meningen, at det amerikanske folk skulle jages ind i regimeskift og krig med Irak, Libyen, krig overalt; og befolkningen i New York City afholdt en af de største demonstrationer i landet imod en invasion af Irak, i 2003, under Bushregeringen.

Vi befinder os nu i et lignende, farefuldt øjeblik, hvor befolkningen over hele landet er tilbøjelig til at være dybt pessimistisk. Vi har haft 15 år med Bush og Obama; levestandarden er kollapset; en halv million midaldrende amerikanere er døde, unødvendigt. Man får meget ofte en pessimistisk respons; jeg er sikker på, at alle her har oplevet at tale med deres nabo, deres venner. »Vi må smide Obama ud af embedet; vi må få Glass-Steagall; vi må organisere et transkontinentalt jernbanenet i USA; fusion.« Folk siger, »Åh, det kommer aldrig til at ske. Åh, det kan man ikke gennemføre; åh, de er alt for korrupte.« Jeg ville sige, at dette meget ligner den kamp, som George Washington i 1776 stod overfor, han, der havde tabt samtlige slag fra Uafhængighedserklæringen og frem til jul. Og den daværende befolkning i USA var ikke i overvældende grad for at bryde fri af Det britiske Imperium; de fandt, at det ikke var umagen værd. New Jersey, som var det sidste sted, hvorfra han havde trukket sig tilbage for at krydse Delaware-floden, var fuldstændig under de hessenske lejesoldaters og Toriernes kontrol; hans beslutning om at krydse Delaware-floden Juledags nat (den 25.-26. december 1776, -red.) var derfor ikke alene anti-pragmatisk, men gik også imod den daværende offentlige mening. Men han vidste, at dette måtte gøres; og det lykkedes ham at fremkalde en bestemt, inspireret respons fra de lasede, forfrosne, forarmede soldater, som han anførte.

Manhattans befolkning er måske ikke så faldefærdig som George Washingtons hær dengang var; men vi har alle været underkastet en utrolig kulturel og moralsk fordærvelse, der, som hr. LaRouche har omtalt, kan ses i ungdommen osv. Så, måden, vi arrangerede disse koncerter – den i Brooklyn fandt sted i en historisk, gammel kirke, der var tæt knyttet til kredsen omkring Moder Cabrini, hvis folk er bekendt med hende; hun organiserede de italienske immigranters ankomst til USA; hun etablerede børnehaver, skoler og hospitaler og alt sådan noget. Koncerten på Manhattan fandt sted i All Souls Unitarian Kirken, der har en bestemt arv med støtte til Unionshæren, hospitaler og genopbygning; og senere, med borgerrettighedsbevægelsen. Vi gik ind i lokalsamfundet og organiserede for en opførelse af Händels Messias i den rette, videnskabelige Verdi-tone; den blev holdt sammen af et kor, der bestod af folk fra New York City og vore Schiller Institut-aktivister fra New York, New Jersey, Virginia. Matt, du spillede basun i orkesteret; men det var en del af, at befolkningen kom sammen. Mange af folkene blandt publikum var folk, der havde været rundt om koret og besluttet, at det måske ikke var noget for dem, men at de ønskede at engagere sig i dette. Så vi havde over 1.000 mennesker, der kom til koncerterne. Og responsen – for det første skabte den sænkede tone (Verdis oprindelige tonehøjde) og det arbejde, som John Sigerson har udført mht. spørgsmålet om placering, en meget tydelig forskel. Og publikums kommentarer – vi bad folk om at give os deres kontaktinformation, fortælle os, hvordan de fandt ud af, at denne begivenhed fandt sted, og tilføje deres eventuelle kommentarer. Folk sagde ting, som »Vi hørte koret på en måde, vi aldrig før har hørt; lydens egenskaber var meget varmere, end vi havde forventet. Det var professionelt.« John [Sigerson] påpegede, at vi på en måde står over det professionelle niveau, fordi vi ikke er interesseret – det er sådan lidt en antiseptisk idé – men dette er menneskelig indgriben, der samler befolkningen. Meget lig dengang Händel skrev og opførte Messias; den første opførelse fandt sted i Dublin, Irland. Og det skete for at adressere spørgsmålet om fattigdom og for at rejse penge til et børnehjem for forældreløse og lette gældsætning.

Amerikaneren Alexander Hamilton var en del af kredsen omkring Jonathan Swift og andre; og Benjamin Franklin skulle angiveligt have deltaget i en opførelse af Messias, der blev dirigeret af Händel selv. Så selve dette musikstykke, dets idé, forbindelsen mellem mennesket som Skaber, mellem menneskeslægten og universets skabelse; og en fejring af dette, er, hvad vi har presserende behov for, for at samle befolkningen. Og [vi har behov for] at skabe en kvalitet af lederskab, der på en moralsk måde kan respondere til denne krise; i modsætning til den afskyelige opførsel hos denne stinkende flok feje personer uden mod i Kongressen, der, som Jeff netop har beskrevet, vel vidende, at kollapset stormede frem, ville storme hjem for at holde juleferie snarere end at blive og tage initiativ til de nødvendige handlinger for at beskytte den amerikanske befolkning.

Så en proces en nu blevet sat i gang, som må optrappes i tempo; vi kan ikke give den lov til at udvikle sig i det nuværende tempo, som er fint, bortset fra, at hele systemet er klar til at bryde sammen den 1. eller 2. januar. Så spørgsmålet handler om at tage denne styrke og dette princip og bruge det til at samle vore styrker i hele USA, og i hele verden, for at adressere den situation, som menneskeheden i dag står overfor.

Matthew Ogden: Mange tak. Videoen og lydbåndet fra den ene eller begge disse koncerter, der fandt sted i New York i sidste weekend, skulle være tilgængelige meget snart; og vi vil opfordre alle til, at dette må være en del af det, de foretager sig i løbet af de allernærmeste dage. En lille rettelse: Det faktum, at Benjamin Franklin skulle have været til stede under en opførelse af Messias dirigeret af Händel selv, er tilsyneladende ikke helt bekræftet; vi ved imidlertid, at han faktisk var til stede under en opførelse af Messias. Jeg mener, at Händels revolutionerende opråb til handling, »Lad os sønderbryde båndene, og kaste deres åg af os« (eng.: »Let us break the bonds asunder, and cast their yokes from upon us«), er noget, der blev aktuelt under Benjamin Franklins og George Washingtons Amerikanske Revolution. Så det er et meget passende kampråb for i dag.

Jeg vil gerne appellere til alle om at tage teksten til det flyveblad, som jeg oplæste i begyndelsen af denne udsendelse, »Nytårsbudskab: 1. januar 2016 er dommedag! Kun et initiativ som Franklin Roosevelts kan redde os« og uddele det så vidt omkring, som I kan i de kommende dage. Dette bør være samtaleemnet ved familiemiddage og andre begivenheder, der finder sted i løbet af de næste 24-48 timer. Og være en del af diskussionen, der finder sted i de næste minutter. Lige efter denne udsendelse kommer der kl. 9pm Eastern Time en live nødudsendelse af ’Fireside Chat’ med hr. LaRouche, som diskuterer med det amerikanske folk. Dette finder normalt sted torsdage, men man kan deltage, hvis man har adgangsnummeret.

Jeg mener, at vi meget klart har fremlagt billedet. Den 1. januar er i realiteten en deadline; der er betalingsstandsningen på det puertoricanske lån, der er Ukraines betalingsstandsning på deres russiske lån på 3 mia. dollar, der er blevet promoveret af IMF og USA som en direkte provokation. Og der er en deadline den 1. januar, hvor de nye bail-in-love træder i kraft i Europa; bail-in-love, der allerede har dræbt mennesker i Italien og har eksproprieret 10.000 italienske indskyderes penge i dette område. Der er sammenbruddet i sektoren for skiferolie og junk-obligationsboblerne. Der er allerede tab for hundredetusinder i Canada; dette kommer til USA. Alt dette bryder sammen nu; og de nødvendige forholdsregler og løsninger er forhånden. En omgående lukning af Wall Street, en omgående reorganisering af hele dette bankerotte finanssystem gennem Glass-Steagall; en omgående mobilisering af hele den amerikanske arbejdsstyrke, meget ligesom Franklin Roosevelt gjorde det; fjernelsen af denne krigsmager Barack Obama fra embedet, og at håndtere den kendsgerning, at hele det transatlantiske område bliver domineret af et britisk monarki, der er besat af den folkemorderiske idé, at vi må reducere verdens befolkning og kaste mennesker tilbage til en dyrisk tilstand.

Så dette er virkeligheden ved slutningen af 2015 og i de første timer af 2016. Og det påhviler jer at tage det, der er blevet fremlagt her i aften og handle på det omgående; alle redskaberne er tilgængelige for jer. Vi beder jer indtrængende om at gå direkte fra dette webcast for at deltage i live-diskussion med hr. LaRouche under ’Fireside Chat’-udsendelsen, der starter om få minutter.

Jeg vil gerne takke alle for at være med os her i aften; og jeg vil gerne takke både Jeffrey Steinberg og Diane Sare for at være vore gæster ved denne udsendelse. Bliv på kanalen og lyt til larouchepac.com i den kommende tid.

 

 




Tema: Den Islamiske Renæssance var en Dialog mellem Civilisationer

Som Lyndon LaRouche beskrev sagen med sine medarbejdere for nylig, så er et uddannet samfund et, hvor, selv om det store flertal ikke selv er genier, så har samfundet visse kvalificerende intellektuelle og moralske evner, og de ved, at de må se op til historiens og nutidens genier og vandre i deres fodspor. De største muslimer i renæssancens periode så hen til de store genier i andre kulturer, som grækerne, og lærte af dem – men frembragte i processen deres egne genier. Vi bør alle se op til dem og vandre i deres fodspor.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




EU’s nye regler for kriseramte banker dræber

15. december 2015 – En 68-årig italiensk pensionists selvmord i byen Civitavecchia, efter at han mistede hele sin opsparing gennem sin banks reduktion af gæld gennem bail-in (ekspropriering af kundernes indeståender), har rystet det italienske folk. Det har sat fokus på de brutale, nye EU-regler ved kriseramte banker, som træder i kraft i alle medlemslande den 1. januar 2016. Pensionistens bank var en af fire mindre, italienske banker, der havnede i krise og blev »rekonstrueret« af regeringen den 22. november 2015. Flere end 100.000 bankkunder mistede deres opsparing.

Italienernes ophidselse steg til kogepunktet, da det kom frem, at, mens almindelige bankkunder mistede deres livsopsparing, så fik store långivere og aktieejere forvarsel og kunne afvikle deres poster, der i visse tilfælde løb op i millioner.

Fra den 1. januar 2016 er alle EU-lande tvunget til at tilpasse sig de nye regler for bankrekonstruktion, indbefattet reduktion af bankens gæld (bail-in), for banker, der rammes af krise.

Reduktion af gæld er den bureaukratiske term for tyveri af bankkundernes midler. Men, som i filfældet med rekonstruktionen af de fire, små italienske banker, der kun delvist tog de kundeindeståender, som EU-reglementet tillader, er dette et tveægget sværd. Denne bankredningsmetode kan snarere kæntre banksystemet end hjælpe det. Det var også, hvad LaRouche-bevægelsen og mange andre sagde, da Den europæiske Centralbank (ECB) og EU-kommissionen kom med forslaget til bankrekonstruktion. Vi advarede om, at det ville give bagslag og skabe større ustabilitet, da det ville sprede panik blandt bankkunderne, der ville løbe storm på bankerne ved det mindste tegn på krise og trække deres penge ud.

I tilfældet med de fire mindre, italienske banker, Banca Etruria, Banca Marche, Carichieti (Sparekassen Chieti) og Carife (Sparekassen Ferrara), blev bankrekonstruktionen gennemført ved en regeringsbeslutning. Dette hastværk viser, at regeringen forsøgte at få det afklaret før 1. januar, for at undgå at være tvunget til at anvende EU’s nye reglement til reduktion af bankgælden. Regeringen kunne derfor gennemføre en delvis gældsreduktion. Indeståender på bankkonti blev ikke rørt, men aktier og obligationer i bankerne blev inddraget. Ca. 100.000 ejere af opprioriterede obligationer (subordinate bonds) med høj risiko, men også et højt afkast, mistede alle deres penge op til 750.000 euro. De fire banker vil blive likvideret og opdelt i fire brobanker og en ’dårlig bank’ (en ’rygsæk’ for dårlige lån). Bankredningen (bail-in) er på 3,5 mia. euro, der vil blive betalt af en bankhjælpefond, som er en indskudsgarantifond, der ejes af banksystemet.

Men denne indskudsgarantifond har ikke penge nok. Derfor skal tre storbanker, Unicredit, Intesa og UBI, stille op med penge, mod at regeringen giver de tre banker skattelettelser på i alt to mia. euro. Dette er blevet afsløret af forbrugerorganisationen Adusbef og betyder, at det er skatteborgerne og bankkunderne, der skal betale regningen.

De mennesker, der har investeret i de opprioriterede obligationer, var ikke ordentligt informeret og var ikke klar over, at deres værdipapirer var ligestillet med bankaktierne, og derfor omfattet af en gældsreduktion. Da det dernæst kom frem, at de større fisk gik fri, så vendte raseriet sig ikke alene mod bankerne, men også mod regeringen, der ledes af Matteo Renzi. Han blev endnu mere presset, da det desuden kom frem, at både hans minister Elena Maria Boschi og hans egen familie har nære bånd til ledelsen af en af de fire kriseramte banker.

Regeringen er nu blevet tvunget til at støtte oprettelsen af en parlamentarisk undersøgelse, som er velkommen, hvis den får en uvildig formand. Det, der er påkrævet, er en dristig og uræd formand som Ferdinand Pecora, New Yorker-advokaten af italiensk herkomst, der var leder af den berømte amerikanske Senatskomité i 1933, som afslørede de mægtigste banker på Wall Street og banede vejen for Franklin Roosevelts finansreformer og genopbygningsprogrammet New Deal.[1] På lignende vis skulle den italienske undersøgelse kunne afsløre, hvordan bankerne har narret deres kunder, men også, hvordan de fire kriseramte banker er blevet lavet om til kasinoer og er gået konkurs. En sådan undersøgelse bør bevirke, at der genindføres regler for god bankpraksis og indskydergaranti gennem en bankopdelingslov (Glass-Steagall). Dette spørgsmål har i mange år ligget på bordet, hvor LaRouche-bevægelsen har ført en kampagne for bankopdeling[2] og direkte og indirekte har påvirket det italienske parlament, der har to kamre, således, at der nu foreligger seks (!) forskellige indstillinger til lovforslag om at indføre en bankopdeling.

Blandt initiativtagerne til disse lovforslag har både Marco Zanni og Alessandro Di Battista fra Femstjernebevægelsen i løbet af de seneste dage udtalt sig med krav om, at bankopdelingen nu må gennemføres for at beskytte bankkunderne! Zanni, der er medlem af Europaparlamentet, sagde her den 9. december, at forslaget om at indføre »en moderne Glass/Steagall-lov med en ren og tvungen opdeling af bankerne i traditionel lånevirksomhed (kommerciel bankvirksomhed) og så spekulativ investeringsbankaktivitet« nu er nødvendig for at »undgå en ny systemkrise«.

Alessandro Di Battista, medlem af parlamentet, genlancerede spørgsmålet om en bankopdeling i et TV-interview den 10. december:

– Lad os én gang for alle, sagde han, udskille kommercielle banker fra investeringsbanker, så en medborger kan vide, at, når han sætter penge ind i en bank, så er denne bank ikke indblandet i spekulationsvirksomhed, spiller ikke på aktiemarkederne, men blot udsteder lån og bedriver normal bankvirksomhed.

Ovenstående artikel er skrevet af Ulf Sandmark, LaRouche-rörelsen i Sverige.

 

[1] Se 16. sep. 2015: »Wall Street er bankerot, og Obama gennemtvinger ved magt et termonukleart Armageddon. Foregrib! FDR’s Første 100 Dage« http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=8147 Artiklen indeholder mange henvisninger til andre artikler på dansk.

[2] Se: Lyndon LaRouche: Fire Nye Love til USA’s (og verdens) redning, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=1460