Leder fra LaRouchePAC den 2. august 2018 — City of London kæmper for at beholde sin kontrol intakt over den globale derivatboble på $ 1.5 billard, under betingelser som i stigende grad indikerer dens tidlige død. Hvad der står på spil, er det Britiske Imperiums kvælertag på det transatlantiske finanssystem og dets økonomier under omstændigheder med et frembrusende alternativ i form af Bælte- og Vejinitiativet.
 
            Et umiddelbart brændpunkt er Storbritanniens Brexit, og City of Londons afpresningskrav om, at de beholder deres fremtrædende kontrol over verdenshandlen med derivater, til trods for at de formodentlig ‘træder ud’ af EU. Men det Britiske Imperiums eksistentielle problemer rækker langt, langt ud over Brexit i sig selv. De er truet af halvdelen af menneskehedens ‘udtræden’ fra deres udplyndrings-mekanismer. De er truet af præsident Trumps skridt til ‘udtræden’ af de geopolitiske konfrontationer med Rusland og Kina. De er også truet af denne uges spirende alliance mellem Trump og Conte-regeringen i Italien, en alliance som kunne vælte hele EU-strukturen indefra.
 
Og selvfølgelig er de truet af deres egen overhængende konkurs, og det dilemma at selvom de opretholder eller øger de kvantitative lempelser, vil den spekulative boble af finansielle aktiver indsnævres og falde sammen; og hvis de sænker de kvantitative lempelser og hæver renten, kunne sammenbruddet udløses øjeblikkeligt. Som administrerende direktør for JPMorgan Chase, Jamie Dimon, jamrede i går, står vi over for en truende finansiel katastrofe: “Jeg vil ikke skræmme offentligheden, men vi har aldrig før haft kvantitative lempelser. Vi har aldrig før skullet omstyre … og folk kan gå panik, når tingene ændrer sig.”
 
I betragtning af denne elefant i lokalet, advarede Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag endnu en gang imod den skingre anti-Kina-kampagne i Vesten. “Hvert skridt i retning af konfrontation er det modsatte af det nye paradigmes ‘win-win’ samarbejde, som formuleret i Lyndon LaRouches ‘Fire-magts’ forslag, hvilket er den nødvendige erstatning for det bankerotte transatlantiske finanssystem og dets fallerede, gamle geopolitiske paradigme.

I august 1971 lykkedes det endelig oligarkiet at ødelægge Bretton Woods-pengesystemet, skabt af Franklin Roosevelt, korrumperet af Harry Truman, men ikke desto mindre en basis for en stabil handel mellem nationalstater. Hvad der kom i dets kølvand var frihandelssystemet favoriseret af City of London, hvor prisen ikke har nogen relation til de faktiske produktionsomkostninger. I stedet for udvikler priserne sig, som Milton Friedman hævdede, fra det sorte marked eller narkotikamarkedet. Prisen er hvad som helst bankapparatets usynlige hånd i City of London kan trække ud. Råvarer kan så “værdisættes” ved manipulation af den offentlige mening og kultur, frem for deres rolle i at fremme og opretholde liv.

Efterhånden som verden søger at vende tilbage til den form for økonomi, som LaRouche har været talsmand for, er det nu på tide at skabe et stabilt grundlag for handel, hvor handelsvilkårene er fastsat på grundlag af LaRouches metrik for potentiel relativ befolkningstæthed – den klare implikation af den westfalske model for internationale relationer. At gøre LaRouches tredje og fjerde lov til forudsætningen for et nyt system nu, vil gøre det muligt for USA og verden at overleve overgangen fra det nu fallerede City of London/Wall Street-system, til den nye økonomiske aktivitetsplatform, med konstant progressiv forandring imod højere orden af aktivitet. Kom med os til aftenens diskussion.

Successful Belt and Road Seminar in Stockholm

On Wednesday morning, May 30th, 2018, the Schiller Institute hosted a seminar together with China’s Chamber of Commerce in Sweden,  China Eastern Airlines, supported by: Embassy of China in Sweden,  China Cultural Center and in cooperation with: China Sweden  Business Council. 

It was very successful with the Chinese Ambassador speaking,  together with the Ambassador of Pakistan, and the Chargé  d´Affaires from South Africa as well as with Stephen Brawer,  Hussein Askary and other prominent speakers. Jason Ross opened  and moderated the seminar which was attended by 83 participants  from embassies, industry, institutions including from the Foreign  Ministry. Media were represented by Chinese media and a  journalist from the largest Swedish tabloid. A number Schiller  Institute contacts participated. The title of the seminar was  “The Significance of China’s Belt and Road Initiative for World  Economic Development.” 

After the Chinese Ambassador, Stephen Brawer made a  presentation including a strong attack against geopolitics and  “the modern form of the British Empire.” The topic of his speech  was: “The Strategic Significance of the BRI: Overcoming  Geopolitics.” As the seminar also had diplomats from Pakistan and  South Africa it was made clear that the Belt & Road is not only  about China but a global perspective. 

Hussein Askary opened up the second panel with a speech  about “The Potentially Transformative Impact of the Belt and Road  on Sweden, Europe and Third Parties.” He presented the work of  the Schiller Institute to promote the New Silk Road since the  early 1990s up to now. He was followed by managers of various  companies from China and Sweden. The Deputy General Manager of  Bank of China Stockholm Branch presented the impact of the B&R  policies on today´s economy. Two Swedish consultants presented  ways and means to develop business, esp. production and  infrastructure between China and Sweden. Also the head of China  Eastern Airlines, who sponsored the seminar, presented his  expanding airline network between Europe and China/Asia. 

In the first question period Ulf Sandmark called for Sweden  to join the Belt & Road bringing up the model of Swedish Chinese  industrial cooperation experience from the Volvo Cars success  story, calling for extending this model of Swedish-Chinese  innovative industrial cooperation to the BRI projects in Africa. 

The seminar was a breakthrough from two standpoints. First  that the Chinese deliberately are taking the gloves off by  inviting the Schiller Institute to speak clearly about the  British role of geopolitics as the ideology behind the hysterical  attacks against the B&R from the Swedish establishment. Secondly  the seminar was a breakthrough for the Schiller Institute in  Sweden reaching out to very productive networks as well as  establishment institutions who were present at the seminar. 

Audience members were very open about saying they learnt  something new about the B&R, which so far for most people, and  especially institutions, has  been misunderstood as some limited  trade policy with China. The global, economic, cultural and  scientific perspective in the new paradigm of B&R had been  lacking in their understanding so far. Bringing in Africa in the  focus, as the continent with an expected more than 2 billion  population 2050 and as the coming motor of world economic growth,  helped very much to widen the perspective of the audience. 

Stephen Brawer´s speech: “The Strategic Significance of the  BRI: Overcoming Geopolitics” started off with the World  Land-Bridge map followed by a picture of Helga Zepp-LaRouche at  B&R Forum in Beijing May 2017. He quoted President Xi Jinping at  Boao Forum, April 2018: In a world aspiring for peace and  development, the cold-war and zero-sum mentality looks even more  out of place. … To promote common prosperity and development in  today’s world, we have no choice but to pursue greater  connectivity and integrated development.” Contrasting that,  Brawer presented the Halford Mackinder´s Heartland theory.  Bringing geopolitics into today with the example of Zbigniew  Brzezinski who used Mackinder´s map in his book from 1997. As an  example for Sweden Brawer pointed to another neutral European  nation, Austria, who has taken a clear stand against geopolitics  and joined the B&R. Touching upon the philosophical East-West  dialogue Brawer pointed to the deep influence of Confucius on the  founder of the American republic: Benjamin Franklin. After a  quote from President Xi Jinping speech at the UN, January 2017  “Towards a Community of Shared Future for Mankind,” Brawer ended  with the quotes from Krafft Ericke from the book the  {Extraterrestrial imperative: From Closed to Open World}, 1971,  about the limitless development potential of space. 

In his speech the Pakistani Ambassador praised the  development corridor China is building in Pakistan from the  Chinese border to the Indian Ocean port of Gwadar. It will open  up the landlocked neighbor countries in Central Asia and also  provide a shortcut into China for the Maritime Silk Road, he  explained. 

The Chargé d´Affairs of South Africa rose to the occasion as  a member of BRICS and took a global perspective and not just  African. He brought up the whole historical colonial past by  referring to the Bandung conference defining the relations  between Asia and Africa. 

In the Q&A of first panel the ambassadors and Brawer  answered questions, where many of the points were sharpened. 

This seminar came at a time where a massive mobilization in  the media and think tank sector against the BRI, describing China  as a new hegemon in the world. An unprecedented number of seminar  have been and will be held around these days on the theme, and a  new state-backed think tank, New Silk Road Observatory, will be  established on June 4th, amid a lot of fanfare. The Schiller  Institute Seminar is the only one with a positive and  constructive tone. In answering questions, the Chinese Ambassador  told the audience to ask the Schiller Institute if they had  questions about the BRI, because they have the best knowledge of  it. The effect on the audience was just that, as many persons  said they wanted to invite the Schiller Institute for followups.

 

Video 1. del:

Video 2. del:

Lyd:

Blot 73 år efter Anden Verdenskrig, hvor folk responderede til denne forfærdelige katastrofe med det højtidelige løfte, »Aldrig mere«, står vi atter en gang på randen af en mulig varm krig.

Med den ene provokation efter den anden, der er mere gennemskueligt falsk end den foregående, fortsætter City of Londons imperie-oligarkers krigsparti og deres Wall Street-neokonservative/neoliberale partnere deres bestræbelser for at sabotere muligheden for det Nyt Paradigme, som vokser frem i Eurasien til, i åndeløst tempo, at blive en verdensomspændende bevægelse. Til trods for, at det nu er afsløret, at alle svindelnumrene under falsk flag, med Russiagate, Skripal-forgiftningen og de kemiske våben i Douma, har deres oprindelse i britiske efterretningskredses syge hjerner, så er de atter i gang, denne gang med Netanyahu, der hævder, han har »bevis« for, at Iran aldrig afsluttede sit atomprogram, i et forsøg på at få USA til at gå i fælden med endnu en katastrofal krig i Mellemøsten og en mulig atomar konfrontation med Rusland. Mange i Vestens regeringer er nu atter trådt ud på denne glatte glidebane, som Nürnbergprocessen advarede om, gennem at overtræde folkeretten og de principper, der er fastlagt i De forenede Nationers charter.

Men deres magt svinder i takt med, at de i stigende grad er blevet tvunget til at agere i deres eget navn, og således afslører sig selv. Deres evne til at bevare kontrollen har også været for nedadgående, pga. udfordringen fra den Nye Silkevej og det Nye Paradigme, som den repræsenterer. I løbet af de seneste uger har diplomatiske og økonomiske begivenheder og topmøder i høj grad fremmet dette Nye Paradigme. Det strategiske partnerskab mellem Rusland og Kina og integrationen af Bælte & Vej Initiativet og den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union har skabt håb for især udviklingslandene, der ser en chance for, for første gang, at overvinde fattigdom og underudvikling.

Den bedste måde at mindes tabene, lidelserne og heroismen hos de personer, der mistede livet i den Store Patriotiske Krig, er ved at skabe en ny æra for menneskeheden, der sætter konceptet om én menneskehed i første række og på denne måde skaber en ny, international orden, der for altid overvinder geopolitik. Imperialisme må besejres som et levn af et dyrisk menneskebillede og erstattes med det ædle billede af mennesket som den eneste, hidtil kendte, skabende art i universet.

Lad os fejre menneskehedens fremtidige ånd, der så smukt er udtrykt i Ode til Glæden af Friedrich Schiller og Ludwig van Beethovens 9. symfoni:

»Alle mennesker forsones … Favnet være millioner! Glædens kys til hver især! Brødre – over stjerners hær må der bo en mild forsoner.«

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 6. maj, 2018 – Den fremvoksende løsning på den længe betændte Koreakrise frembyder en positiv model: uanset, hvor umedgørlig, en situation synes at være; hvis verdens store magter kan arbejde sammen, kan ethvert problem overvindes. Donald Trump, Xi Xinping og Vladimir Putin arbejdede sammen hen mod et fælles mål, der giver alle sider, inklusive Kim Jong-un, mulighed for at have tillid til processen som helhed. Med den Nye Silkevejs udviklingsproces, der ligger bag den politiske dialog, kan win-win-resultatet klart ses af alle partier.

Hvorfor kan denne proces ikke anvendes på de andre krisepunkter? Det britiske Imperium har altid været beroende på sådanne regionale kriser, som i de fleste tilfælde oprindeligt blev skabt af briterne selv, for at tvinge de globale magter til at stille op på modsatte sider – arabere versus jøder; sunni versus shia; Øst versus Vest. Hvis USA ophørte med at spille håndhæver for disse britiskkontrollerede konflikter og i stedet gik sammen med Kina og Rusland i den Nye Silkevejsånd, kunne alle disse konflikter relativt hurtigt blive løst, som i Korea.

Trump har insisteret på, at USA må ophøre med sin rolle som »verdens politibetjent« på vegne af Imperiet – og alligevel skriger krigspartiet i USA nu på krig mod Iran, krig mod Rusland over Ukraine og på en permanent kolonialistisk besættelse og opsplitning af Syrien. USA’s flåde har netop gendannet den Anden Flåde til at afpatruljere Nordatlanten – flåden var blevet de-aktiveret i 2011 – baseret på det vanvittige forslag, at Rusland og Kina pludselig er blevet »stormagtstrusler« mod USA, som den nye Nationale Forsvarsstrategi erklærer. Det samme krigsparti giver også troværdighed til de svindelagtige påstande, som Bibi Netanyahu har præsenteret, nemlig, at Iran »stadig« fremstiller atomvåben, på trods af IAEA’s offentlige tilbagevisning af denne løgn.

Alt imens Kinas Bælte & Vej danner grundlaget for det store potentiale for et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden, baseret på udvikling og fælles fremskridt, så er det vestlige banksystems risikable system det, der danner grundlaget for briternes og deres aktiver i USA’s fremstød for krig. Økonom og historiker Nomi Prins skrev i sidste uge: »I dag står vi meget tæt – hvor tæt, ved vi endnu ikke – ved randen af en farlig, finansiel afgrund. De risici, som de største af de private banker udgør, eksisterer stadig, men nu er de endnu større, end de var i 2007-08 [henved 40 % større, -red.], og opererer nu i en arena af endnu mere gæld.« Uden en gennemførelse af det totale LaRouche-program – med en genoprettelse af et videnskabsdrevet program for fusionskraft og udforskning af rummet, skabelse af statslig bankpraksis for at skabe statslig kredit til realøkonomien, samt en Glass/Steagall-reform af det bankerotte finanssystem – er der ingen mulighed for, at denne boble ikke snart brister. Imperiets finansherrer ville foretrække krig – ikke blot en lokal krig, men en krig med Rusland og Kina, hvis samarbejde i Bælte & Vej truer deres plyndringsrettigheder i udviklingslandene.

Den største fare for Imperiet er, at Trump vil leve op til sin plan om at etablere venskabelige relationer med både Rusland og Kina og således bryde denne imperieopsplitning. Russiagate-kupforsøget mod Trump er britisk efterretnings respons til denne fare. I den forgangne uge tildelte den amerikanske føderale dommer T.S. Elliott III dette kupforsøg et slag og sagde til Muellers heksejagt-team, at de langt havde overskredet deres mandat og havde anklaget Trump-medarbejdere, der overhovedet intet som helst havde at gøre med nogen som helst forbindelse til Rusland, udelukkende for at tvinge dem til at »synge« eller »komponere« information, der »ville reflektere tilbage til hr. Trump og føre til hans retsforfølgelse eller afsættelse, eller hvad som helst«.

Retssystemet i USA er blevet undergravet, med begyndelse i George Bush’ Patriot Act, NSA’s masseudspionering af befolkningen og efterretningssamfundets korruption under både Bush og Obama. Dette korrupte system er nu selv på anklagebænken.

Spørgsmålet om krig eller fred vil ikke blive afgjort på baggrund af nogen af disse krisesituationer, men derimod af, om det amerikanske folk i sig finder viljen til at adressere dem alle på én gang, for at skabe det Nye Paradigme, med LaRouches Fire Love og USA’s deltagelse i den Nye Silkevej, på globalt plan. Den reviderede LaRouchePAC-brochure om denne nødvendighed, LaRouche’s Four Laws – America’s Future on the New Silk Road (LaRouches Fire Love – Amerikas Fremtid på den Nye Silkevej), er nu udgivet og tilgængelig for distribution. Gå til den som død og helvede.

Foto: Præsident Moon Jae-in og formand for Kommissionen for Statsanliggender Kim Jong-un inspicerer æresgarden under den officielle velkomstceremoni foran Fredshuset, Panmunjeom. 27. april, 2018. (Inter-Korean Summit Press Corps)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 25. april, 2018 – Hvis man troede på, at præsident Trump accepterede den franske præsident Emmanuel Macrons fantasmer for den samlede amerikanske Kongres i dag, så ville man acceptere, at Trump skulle være rede til at underkaste nationen Det britiske Imperiums kollapsende, gamle paradigme. Macron, der tydeligvis talte for Imperiet (som franskmændene plejer at gøre) opførte sig, som om Trump havde aftalt med ham, at USA skulle forblive i Syrien som en besættelsesmagt; at Trump snart ville vende USA tilbage til den fascistiske, grønne Paris-aftale om afindustrialisering af verden for at »redde planeten«[1] og at, når Trump taler om »fake news«, mener han russerne.

Pardon, Monsieur, men det britiske kupforsøg mod vores præsident er endnu ikke lykkedes; faktisk er det i store vanskeligheder, med MI6-agent Christopher Steele og hans amerikanske medskyldige i Obamas efterretningssamfund og i Obamas Udenrigsministerium, der selv står over for retsforfølgelse for kriminelle handlinger. Medlem af Repræsentanternes Hus for Californien, Devin Nunes, har, med sit formandsskab for Husets Efterretningskomites efterforskning af anklagerne bag Russiagate-fupnummeret, fastslået, at »der ikke var nogen officiel efterretning, der blev brugt til at indlede denne efterforskning«. Det var snarere alt sammen britiske løgne, der blev bragt til torvs i massemedierne som »fake news« – som Trump korrekt har fremført og gentagent fordømt.

Monsieur Macron fik, desværre, en heltemodtagelse af de korrupte medlemmer af USA’s Kongres, der stod op og applauderede og højlydt jublede, da Macron sagde, at menneskeheden var i færd med at ødelægge denne planet; at CO2 ødelagde ethvert håb for vore børnebørn; at »der er ikke nogen Planet B«, og at »vi må arbejde sammen for at gøre planeten stor igen«. Prins Philip kunne ikke have sagt det mere diabolsk.

[1] Se Introduktion til EIR’s Rapport: »Skræmmekampagne om global opvarmning er befolkningsreduktion – ikke videnskab!« Inkl. oversigt og links til de artikler, der er oversat til dansk. En forhåndsvisning som pdf er tilgængelig.

Men Trump har hidtil ikke kapituleret over for dem, der truer ham, og som forlanger, at han opgiver sine løfter til det amerikanske folk, der skaffede ham valgsejren. Trump lægger skylden for »fake news« på USA’s og UK’s pressehorer, ikke Rusland. Han hævder, at udvikling er vigtigere end klimaforandringens falske videnskab. Han insisterer på, at USA må blive venner med Rusland. Han annoncerede ligeledes tirsdag, at han sender sit økonomiske team til Kina, hvor »vi har en virkelig god mulighed for at indgå en aftale« med Xi Jinping, som er »en fantastisk fyr og én af mine venner«.

Det er præcis dette, som briterne og deres aktiver i USA, såvel som i Frankrig, er desperate for at forhindre. Der er et potentiale for, at der i USA og Europa skabes en massebevægelse imod den imperiale krigspolitik, der drives frem af britiske løgne. Folk reflekterer nu over Tony Blairs eventyr for børn om masseødelæggelsesvåben i Irak, som lancerede de seneste 15 års blodbad og ødelæggelser i hele Mellemøsten, og som atter drev skabelsen af udstrakte terroristnetværk med grobund i de befolkninger, der var mål for denne destruktion, og ligeledes var det, der drev millioner af desperate flygtninge, som således bragte kaos i Europa. En tysk, parlamentarisk komite fastslog 20. april, at det britiskanstiftede missilangreb mod Syrien var »en overtrædelse af folkeretten«, selv om den ynkelige kansler Angela Merkel kaldte det for »nødvendigt og passende«. Verden må i sandhed sige »aldrig mere« til det britiske imperie-krigsparti.

Verden må ligeledes sige »ja« til den Nye Silkevej som det eneste alternativ til diktater fra ’the lords’ fra finanscentrene i City of London og Wall Street, som ikke vil sky noget middel for at redde deres bankerotte system for storstilet spekulation og ditto svindel. De er helt villige til at løbe risikoen for en global krig for at forhindre USA i at gå sammen med Kina og 140 andre nationer, der nu ser en vej ud af nedskæringer og krig gennem det Nye Paradigme, der udtrykkes gennem Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Den indiske premierminister Narendra Modi rejser til Kina i denne uge med den hensigt at bringe Indien ind i et samarbejde med Kina og Rusland i det globale udviklingsalternativ. Hvis præsident Trump bringer USA ind i et fuldt og helt samarbejde i den Nye Silkevej, ville dette komplettere »firemagtsalliancen«, som Lyndon LaRouche længe har promoveret som den kraft, der er nødvendig for at gøre en ende på Det britiske Imperium.

Ved at forene Øst og Vest, kan vi for altid afskaffe imperiepolitikken med sin »del og hersk«, og menneskeracen kan gå fremefter med opbygningen af en fremtid for menneskehedens fælles mål. Der er intet valg, og dette er et dyrebart mulighedens øjeblik, vi ikke må forpasse.

Foto: Præsident Trump og præsident Macron fra Frankrig,. 24. april, 2018.  (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 23. april, 2018 – Med den britiske May-regerings udbrud om tvivlsomme anklager om kemiske våben og krav om krig og konfrontation med Rusland, står lederne af de nationer, der er mest afgørende for fremtidigt, menneskeligt fremskridt, over for at skulle træffe et valg.

Briterne kræver en ny Kold Krig, eller det, der er værre, med ikke alene Rusland, men også Kina. De nationer, vi længe har identificeret som nøglen til en bedre fremtid for menneskeheden, hvis de går i samarbejde – USA, Kina, Rusland og Indien – har fået det nye paradigme for dette samarbejde i form af Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, et potentielt globalt program for store projekter for ny infrastruktur.

Præsident Donald Trump er under trussel om at blive tvunget ud af embedet af angreb, oprindeligt sat i værk af britisk efterretning, pga. hvert eneste træk, han udfører hen imod samarbejde, eller blot forhandling, med præsident Vladimir Putins Rusland. Og Indiens premierminister Narendra Modi for hvert træk, han udfører, for at vende tilbage til et samarbejde med Kina.

Briterne har, tilskyndet af deres saudiske allierede og af Frankrig, været drivkraften bag hver eneste af de katastrofale og evindelige krige for »regimeskifte«, der har ødelagt Sydvestasien, fra Irak til Libyen til Syrien og Yemen. EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche udtalte efter mordet på Muammar Gaddafi i 2011, at det var briternes mål at få USA ind i en konfrontation med Rusland; og dette står nu klart for alle.

For at træffe dette valg – og for at vælge det nye paradigme for fremskridt, som Bælte & Vej repræsenterer – må disse nationers lederskab virkelig vende sig mod LaRouches forslag. Søndag sagde den yemenitiske regering i Sana’as udenrigsminister, Hisham Sharaf, »Jeg vil gerne personligt gøre honnør for fr. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, præsident for Schiller Instituttet, og som gør en stor indsats i sin kampagne for solidaritet med os her i Sana’a, og som kræver en standsning af den militære aggression, genopbygning af Yemen og at gøre Yemen til en perle i den Nye Silkevejs og Verdenslandbroens perlekæde«.

I USA udgøres LaRouches foreslåede »Fire økonomiske love for at redde nationen« af 1) en opbrydning af Wall Street-bankerne; 2) dannelse af en national kreditinstitution; 3) investering af denne kredit i den mest produktive, højteknologiske, nye infrastruktur; og 4) programmer som under »Apollo-projektet«, for at genoplive rumforskning og udvikling af fusionskraft.

Vi må vende os mod disse handlinger for at afslutte et årtis stagnation, der begyndte med G20-mødet i 2009 i London, hvor en politik for centralbankernes ubegrænsede bail-out af storbankerne i London og på Wall Street blev vedtaget af Barack Obama, arm i arm med premierminister Gordon Brown.

Dette forår har gjort det klart, at den alternative politik, som endda truer med atomkrig med Rusland og Kina, kommer fra London. Det er briterne, dumme!

Foto: Den britiske premierminister Theresa May deltog i en middag på Buckingham Palace med ’Hendes Majestæt’ dronningen. 1. april, 2018. (flickr / Number 10)

Det er ganske forbløffende, men der er flere og flere lande, regeringer og også politiske kræfter, der taler offentligt imod det faktum, at mange af disse britiske operationer var orkestreret. For blot at nævne den seneste af disse: den britiske regerings og MI6’s rolle i Russiagate er helt fremme i rampelyset; dernæst stilles der nu også spørgsmål om hele Skripal-affæren mht. hvem, det var, der virkelig udførte angrebet; og dernæst, selvfølgelig, de seneste militære angreb på baggrund af Assad-regeringens angivelige brug af kemiske våben, og som nu også falder fra hinanden. Jeg mener, der er en voksende bevidsthed om, at der i realiteten kun er ét land, der er på krigsstien imod Rusland og, på trods af ’søde’ ord, følgelig også imod Kina. Det er en meget vigtig vending i sagen.

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 22. april, 2018 – Næsten et kvart århundrede efter udgivelsen af Lyndon LaRouches artikel fra oktober 1994, »Huset Windsors forestående fald«, er den stadig den mest rungende opfordring til, at hele menneskeheden skal gribe til forsvar for at blive de sidste rester af Det britiske Imperiums oligarkismes svøbe kvit; en svøbe, der endnu i dag udgør en trussel om hellere at ødelægge hele verden snarere, end den vil løsne sit greb om planeten. LaRouche skrev denne artikel som en introduktion til en 60 sider lang EIR-Specialrapport med samme titel, som blev udarbejdet under LaRouches personlige supervision umiddelbart efter hans løsladelse fra fængsel i begyndelsen af 1994, efter fem års uretfærdig fængsling, på selvsamme Britiske Imperiums bud. I denne artikel taler LaRouche i sin egenskab af den ledende anklager på vegne af menneskeheden mod det folkemorderiske Britiske Imperium.

»Mine damer og herrer fra læserskarens internationale jury, vi har bragt jer til denne domstol for at høre anklager, der har deres oprindelse i en af de mest monstrøse forbrydelser, der nogen sinde er begået i menneskehedens kendte historie; en forbrydelse, der er begået på en enorm skala.

Vi fremlægger her for jer beviserne for, at, i de seneste fireogtredive år siden dens stiftelse i 1961, har en ond organisation, der kalder sig selv sådanne ting som Verdensnaturfonden, deltaget i overlagt folkemord mod nationerne og folkeslagene i  subsahara-områderne i Øst-, Vest- og Sydafrika. Vi vil bevise for jer, at, i hele denne periode, har lederen af denne forbryderiske sammensværgelse været prins Philip, også kendt som hertugen af Edinburgh og den regerende dronning af Det forenede Kongeriges gemal …

Disse beviser vil vise, at han er personligt ansvarlig for dette igangværende og forsøgte folkemord imod befolkningen i Afrikas subsahara-område, såvel som også andre steder på planeten. Bevismaterialet viser, at denne royale gemal er skyldig i denne forbrydelse, ikke alene som person, men også i sin egenskab af den udpegede, prinselige leder (’kingpin’) af dette rædselsfulde foretagende. Der er mange andre skyldige parter …

Listen er, som den også bør være, lige som en opsummering af forbryderne under Nürnberg-domstolens kategori af forbrydere, under rubrikken, forbrydelser mod menneskeheden …

Det er fuldt ud og rimeligt udregnet, at de politiske forholdsregler, som prinsen og hans medskyldige har vedtaget og i øjeblikket er i færd med at gennemføre i verden, ville, om dette fik lov at finde sted, reducere befolkningstallet på denne planet fra de nuværende omkring 5,3 mia. mennesker til langt under 1 mia. inden for omkring to generationer, hovedsageligt gennem den hyperbolske og selvaccelererende virkning af hungersnød og epidemiske sygdomme hos mennesker, dyr og planter. Under omstændigheder, fremkaldt som et biprodukt af et sådant koncentreret chok til alle højere livsformers immunsystem, er det på ingen måde garanteret, at der overhovedet ville eksistere mennesker ved slutningen af det forestående århundrede, hvis prinsen og hans medskyldige ikke stoppes og politikkerne omstødes, nu. Vi kan håbe på, at et sådant holocaust ikke er vist, men vi vover ikke at forlade os på dette ønske; under alle omstændigheder må prinsen, hans medskyldige og deres onde politikker stoppes nu …

Den ondskab, der gennemsyrer prinsens og hans medskyldiges forbryderiskhed, er meget gammel, lige så gammel som de svagt oplyste horisonter af den tidligste, kendte historie. Den ultimative fjende er ikke denne ulyksalige prins, men snarere den særlige kriminelle tradition, der med rette beskrives som ’oligarkisme’. Denne oligarkisme er det særlige smitsomme stof, der er ansvarligt for den moral og mentale sygdom, som den anklagede prins og hans medskyldige lider af. Ved valget af en retfærdig og klog fremgangsmåde med hensyn til de igangværende forbryderiske handlinger, der her dokumenteres, må vi hæve os over de fleste nuværende, internationale juridiske og relaterede praksissers fremherskende dekadens for at helbrede problemet, snarere end, sådan, som sejrherrerne perverterede Nürnberg-rettergangen, idet de søgte at skjule vor egen, tidligere forsømmelse bag iøjnefaldende lidelser, der blev påtvunget nogle anklagede syndebukke …

Den udfordring, der udgøres af de beviser, der fremlægges for jer, er: Kan I, juryens medlemmer, provokeres af rædslen, der ligger i det faktum, at ingen løsning på kollapset af denne civilisation eksisterer under de nuværende, alment accepterede adfærdsregler, og til at opdage de nødvendige, radikale, aksiomatiske ændringer af de politiske beslutninger; sådanne ændringer, der kunne gøre det muligt for menneskeheden at genopbygge et ødelagt samfund umiddelbart fra ruinerne af det kollapsede dynasti, uden at gennemleve en ’Ny Mørks Tidsalders’ mellemliggende mareridt?«

(Hele LaRouches artikel kan ses her: https://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1994/eirv21n43-19941028/eirv21n43-19941028_012-the_coming_fall_of_the_house_of-lar.pdf)

Sammenlign denne strategiske vurdering af Lyndon LaRouche fra 1994 med den, som blev præsenteret af Maria Zakharova, talskvinde for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium, 19. april, 2018, i det afsnit, der bærer overskriften, »The Political Crimes of the U.K.«. I dette 17 sider lange dokument præsenterede Zakharova en udstrakt gennemgang af britisk folkemord over hele planeten i århundredernes løb. »Afrika har også fået sin andel af lidelser under britiske overgreb. Henved 13 millioner afrikanere blev udskibet fra kontinentet som slaver. Antallet af afrikanere, der døde under denne periode, er tre til fire gange højere end det antal, der blev fjernet fra kontinentet. Med andre ord, så løber det totale antal ofre op i titals millioner af mennesker … Historikere mener, at Storbritannien er verdensførende, når det drejer sig om folkemord, i betragtning af de millioner af uskyldige civile, der er blevet dræbt i britiske kolonier.«

Sammenlign nu begge disse tekster med den gentagent erklærede, britiske politik for at ødelægge Donald Trumps præsidentskab, hvor denne politiks mest skamløse trussel kom i en artikel af BBC-journalist Paul Wood, udgivet i londonavisen Spectator 21. januar, 2017 – dagen efter Donald Trumps indsættelse – under hovedoverskriften, »Vil Donald Trump blive myrdet, afsat ved et kup eller simpelt hen afsat gennem en rigsretssag?«

Med alt dette, der står fuldstændig klart for jeres indre øje – og som får yderligere kraft gennem bevidstheden om, at Kina og Rusland begge har handlet for at erstatte det bankerotte Britiske Imperium med et Nyt Paradigme – opfordrer vi jer, damer og herrer i læserskarens internationale jury, til at handle i overensstemmelse hermed.

Foto: Dronningen af Englands gemal hertugen af Edinburgh.   

 

Vært Matthew Ogden: Som I ser her på skærmen, er titlen på aftenens udsendelse »Storbritanniens forbrydelser er afsløret!«. Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche forudsagde for et par uger siden, så er, med hele litaniet af svindelnumre, der nu er afsløret som totale løgne, fra det ubekræftede og slibrige Christopher Steele-dossier, som er så centralt for Russiagate-operationen her i USA, til den angivelige Skripal-forgiftning i England og frem til Assads såkaldte angreb på sit eget syriske folk med »kemiske våben«, briterne kommet i front og centrum. Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde, »briterne er gået for vidt, og maskerne vil snart falde«. Det var, hvad hun forudsagde. Hun forudsagde, at bagslaget fra disse operationer ville være så stort, at Det britiske Imperiums perfiditet snart ville stå afsløret, for hele verden at beskue.

Vi er nu her i dag, og vi har nu nået dette punkt. Husk, at, på præcis den samme aften for Donald Trumps ukloge beslutning om at foretage luftangrebene, de missilangreb, han lancerede mod de syriske militære installationer, skrev det Russiske Udenrigsministerium kæmpe avisoverskrifter. Dette var for en uge siden sidste fredag. De hævdede offentligt, at de var i besiddelse af beviser, som viste, at det angivelige angreb med kemiske våben mod den syriske civilbefolkning fandt sted under falsk flag; at det var iscenesat og styret af britisk efterretning via deres frontorganisation, kendt som de Hvide Hjelme. Her ser vi hovedoverskriften i New York Post: »Rusland hævder, Storbritannien iscenesatte kemisk angreb i Syrien«. De gik virkelig i detaljer og hævdede, at britisk efterretning havde beordret – lagt pres på – de Hvide Hjelme til at iscenesætte disse videos og bruge dem som provokation for, som det lød, »at få Donald Trump til at gå i musefælden og gå ind i en krig i Syrien«.

Her følger resten af webcastet i engelsk udskrift:

Then, a week prior to that, the Russian Foreign Ministry had
issued a statement calling into question whether British
intelligence had actually been responsible for orchestrating the
nerve agent attack on the Skripals — the father and his daughter
— as a provocation to attempt to start a war with Russia.
Here’s what Sergey Lavrov had to say.  He said, “There are other
explanations besides those that were put forward by our Western
colleagues, who declare that it can only be the Russians who are
responsible.”  He said, “Experts say that it would be highly
advantageous to the British security services as well, who are
well known for their capacity to act with a ‘license to kill’.
It could also be advantageous to the British government, who
clearly find themselves in a difficult situation, having failed
to fulfill their promises to voters over Brexit.  In the times of
the Cold War, there were some rules.  But now, Britain and the
United States have dropped all propriety.”  Then the Russian
Foreign Ministry put out a statement demanding that the burden of
proof lay on the British, not the Russians, to prove that they,
in fact, were not responsible for poisoning the Skripals.  What
the Russian Foreign Minister said is that they demanded that
London prove that British secret intelligence agents weren’t
responsible for poisoning the Skripals.  Here’s the text of a
statement [Fig. 2] that was put out by the Russian Foreign
Ministry.  They said:
“An analysis of all the circumstances, leads us to think of
the possible involvement in the Skripal poisoning by the British
intelligence services.  If convincing evidence to the contrary is
not presented to the Russian side, we will consider that we are
dealing with an attempt on the lives of our citizens as a result
of a massive political provocation.”
So, that was March 28th.  It’s clear.  The Russians are not
pulling any punches when it comes to calling out the British and
identifying the methods that British intelligence is notorious
for using to stage provocations; what they called “massive
political provocations” intended to pull the world into a World
War.  And it has to be understood as such; there is nothing short
of that as the intended goal.  As Theresa May herself declared,
her ambition is to re-establish the British as what she called “a
global Britain”; to re-establish the global power of the British
Empire.
It’s clear that the Russians have made a decision at the
very highest levels of their government, to openly go after the
British Empire by name.  It doesn’t seem that they intend to
retreat from that strategy.
A major development occurred yesterday afternoon, where, in
an extensive press briefing, the spokeswoman for the Russian
Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, waged a full frontal attack on
the British Empire by name, and its record of genocide, coups
d’état around the world, and targeted political assassinations.
She presented a 17-page dossier that went through a litany of
British crimes and British killing.  It was a no-holds barred
presentation.  Now, because you’re guaranteed not to see coverage
of this presentation on your local cable news network, or in the
Washington Post or the New York Times, we’re going to share
with you an extensive selection from this press briefing.  Not
everything, because we definitely would not have time.  But I
just want to give you a taste of what Foreign Ministry
spokeswoman Maria Zakharova when through in this press briefing.
Under the subhead “Political Crimes Committed by the UK”,
this is what she had to say:
“And now I am asking everyone to fasten their belts. During
a briefing on the OPCW report held for the international
diplomatic community on April 13, UK Ambassador to Russia Laurie
Bristow said that ‘the Russian state has a record in
state-sponsored assassinations including in the UK.’ It is not
the first Russophobic statement made by a UK official, or, for
that matter, not the first UK statement that is an offense to
law, standards of decency or any morals. But it’s not the main
point. Let’s put aside morals and the law and talk about something
different. Maybe the UK Ambassador does not know his own country’s
history, role and involvement in processes that took place in
other countries over the past centuries. I don’t think Mr. Bristow
is to blame for absence of law in the UK. He probably just doesn’t
know his country’s history. I think now is the time to fill this
cognitive vacuum and tell the world something about Britain’s
history and its international activities and their consequences.
Let us talk about state contracts, assassinations and Britain’s
reputation.
“Let’s start with modern history. It is not a common subject,
but Britain was one of the most ruthless metropolises in terms of
the repressive actions it took in its colonies and dependent
territories. On November 22, 2017, British journalist and writer
Afua Hirsch wrote in the Guardian that ‘from the Norman
conquest of Ireland in the 12th century, the English began
imagining themselves as the new Romans, persuading themselves
they were as duty-bound to civilize “backward” tribes as they
were destined to exploit their resources, land and labour.’
“This accepted view of Britain’s history completely
overshadows some inconvenient facts. If the motive is what
matters most of all, nobody wants to know the details. But today
we will be speaking about details. The establishment of
concentration camps in the Boer War that later inspired the Nazis
death camps, the cultural annihilation of kingdoms and palaces
from Ashanti to Beijing, British army massacres in Ireland and
the devastation of Bengal, the industrial-scale exploitation of
natural resources and the slave trade. These are only the most
glaring facts.
“The impact of colonial rule in India was extremely
devastating. In 1930, American historian Will Durant published a
book about the history and life in India, The Case for India.
His study of India brought him to the following conclusion: ‘The
more I read the more I was filled with astonishment and
indignation at the apparently conscious and deliberate bleeding
of India by England throughout a hundred and fifty years. I began
to feel that I had come upon the greatest crime in all history.’
“Britain has left fault lines across the globe, which is
most acutely felt in the South Asian subcontinent, where a single
nation was forcibly split into two in 1947. Today each of these
parts is overcoming the consequences of the British colonial
‘legacy’ on its own. Member of Parliament, former UN
Under-Secretary General Shashi Tharoor, an astute statesman who
once ran for UN Secretary-General and deservedly enjoys respect
the world over has repeatedly stated that the British authorities
suffer from ‘historical amnesia’ as regards their imperial
atrocities. One has to agree.  Speaking at Oxford on July 22,
2015, he said: ‘India’s share of the world economy when Britain
arrived on its shores was 23%. By the time the British left it
was down to below 4%. Why? Simply, because India had been governed
for the benefit of Britain. Britain’s rise for 200 years was
financed by its depredations in India.’  According to Dr.
Tharoor, in fact, Britain’s industrial revolution was actually
premised upon the de-industrialization of India. Britain
repeatedly provoked famine in India, which killed between 15
million and 29 million people. The best known famine was that in
Bengal in 1943, when four million Indians died. You could think
this to be just journalistic speculations. But no. Addressing the
Speakers Research Initiative on July 24, 2015, Indian Prime
Minister Narendra Modi stressed that the discourse by Dr. Shashi
Tharoor met the aspirations of his country’s citizens. I am saying
this to you, Mr. Bristow.
“In his book Inglorious Empire released in 2017, Dr.
Tharoor cited the atrocities of the British Empire, stating that
the former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, should be
regarded as one of the cruelest dictators of the 20th century.
This is what Churchill said in a conversation with Secretary of
State for India and Burma Leopold Amery: ‘I hate Indians. They
are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was
their own fault for breeding like rabbits.’ This is not what we
are saying, nor are these our inventions. It’s a fact.
“The Russian artist Vasily Vereshchagin has a famous
picture, ‘The Devils Wind.’ This is not a symbolic comparison.
The canvas shows a type of execution invented by the British to
crush the 19th Century Sepoy Mutiny in India (1884) … A victim was tied
to a gun with his back to the muzzle and blown to pieces by a
gunshot. This was one of the most barbaric punishments in the
history of civilizations; aimed not so much at physical
extermination, but intimidation. Even without it, the British had
so many infernal instruments of torture and execution that this
option doesn’t seem so original and, honestly, was rather costly
for the Brits. But from the religious and caste point of view,
this method of putting to death is absolutely unacceptable for
Indians. Their bodies were blown to pieces and the dead were
buried together regardless of caste, which is radically at
variance with the Indian tradition.
“Yet another episode of the same kind occurred in Amritsar,
Punjab, on April 13, 1919, when 50 British troops under
Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer fired their rifles without
warning at pilgrims celebrating Baishakhi, the Punjabi harvest
and New Year festival, at the centrally located Jallianwala Bagh
public garden. The gathering was mostly made up of women and
children. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that
these British subjects were acting on direct orders of the
British authorities. According to the British government, 379
people were killed and over 1,000 wounded. The Indian National
Congress said 1,000 people were killed and 1,500 wounded.
Regrettably, millions of Indians were to fall victim to the acts
committed by the British authorities, including mass executions
by a firing squad, during at least several decades after these
sad events.
“Africa has also suffered its share of British abuses. Some
13 million Africans have been removed from the continent as
slaves. The number of Africans who died in that period is three
or four times larger than the number of those who were removed
from the continent. In other words, the overall number of victims
runs into tens of millions of people. It is notable that English
philosopher John Locke, who advanced the theory of civil society
and whose works influenced those who wrote the US Constitution,
was a major investor in Britain’s slave trade. It is a fact.
“The number of Africans who died in that period is three or
four times larger than the number of those who were removed from
the continent. In other words, the overall number of victims runs
into tens of millions of people. It is notable that English
philosopher John Locke, who advanced the theory of civil society
and whose works influenced those who wrote the US Constitution,
was a major investor in Britain’s slave trade. It is a fact.
“The British were among the first to invent concentration
camps for civilians in the Boer War of 1899-1902. These camps
were created for the civilians who were suspected of sympathizing
with the rebels or who could help them. The British torched their
farms and fields and slaughtered their cattle. Women and children
were separated from men. All this happened long before World War
II. The men were taken to outlying regions or Britain’s other
colonies, such as India or Ceylon.
“When the world learned about this horrible invention of
British military commander, Lord Kitchener, the British
government published an official statement saying that the camps
had been created to keep the peaceful population of the Boer
Republics safe from harm’s way, and the camps were renamed
‘refugee camps.’ This is remindful of the story of the White
Helmets: take militants, extremists and terrorists, put white
helmets on them with ‘Peace’ written on these helmets, and then
use them to stage provocations and present mobile phone footage
of their crimes as evidence of the plight of the civilians who
must be saved. Centuries have passed, yet nothing has changed.
Overall, 200,000 people or half of the white Boer population was
herded into the British camps, where about 30,000 of them died
from disease and hunger.
“Historians believe that Britain is the world’s leader when
it comes to genocide, given the millions of innocent civilians
that have been killed in British colonies.
“According to different estimates, between 90% and 95% of
aborigines were exterminated during the colonization of
Australia. Indigenous Australians were not only killed but also
used for experiments. The British deliberately infected them with
various diseases, primarily pox.
“Remembering the notorious Opium Wars would not come amiss.
London was poisoning Chinese people with drugs for decades.
Britain organized a supply of opium to China making fabulous
profits. The operation also pursued the military-strategic aim of
demoralizing the Chinese army and people, and depriving them of
the will to resist. In a bid to save his country, the Chinese
Emperor in 1839 launched a massive operation to confiscate and
destroy opium stocks in Canton. London retaliated by unleashing
the Opium Wars. China was defeated and had to sign a crippling
peace with Britain.
“|’As long as China remains a nation of opium-smokers there
is not the least reason to fear that she will become a military
power of any importance, as the habit saps the energies and
vitality of the nation.’ This was how Richard Hurst, the British
Consul in China, ended his speech to the Royal Opium Commission
in 1895.   It was not until 1905 that the Chinese authorities
managed to adopt and start implementing a program to gradually
ban opium.
“One more interesting fact: According to the British
national archives declassified in 2014, the British authorities
made wide use of chemical weapons to put down the Arab rebellion
in Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) in the spring of 1920. Winston
Churchill as Britain’s Secretary of State for War supported ‘the
use of gas against uncivilized tribes.’ According to archives,
Churchill ordered the use of thousands of mustard gas shells
against the rebels. The anti-British rebellion in Iraq claimed
between 6,000 and 10,000 lives, according to various sources, a
negligible number from London’s point of view compared to other
regions.
“Now let’s move on to espionage operations and pinpoint
sabotage and subversive acts. From time immemorial,
representatives of Great Britain have been avid fans of various
kinds of covert operations and targeted subversive acts against
specific individuals as a way to secure political benefits for
Great Britain. This predisposition is richly represented in their
art, things like the James Bond gold collection. This may sound
ridiculous unless you know that the author of the series, Ian
Fleming, had searched through the archives, so Agent 007 in fact
has real prototypes. This anthology of crime, artfully described
by writer and part-time naval intelligence officer Fleming is a
light version for those who are not interested in historiography
“Indeed, the Bondiana is a very symptomatic example of the
British government’s love of such things. Fleming died in 1964,
but what he described lives and thrives. New James Bond episodes
are regularly released, as everyone is used to the superhero.
Times change, the actors and sets change, but the idea remains
unchanged — a British agent, in the service of the Kingdom, gets
nothing less than license to kill. Once again I repeat, this is
not a fictional invention, but a result of work with archival
materials. What we see in the Bondiana is actually taking place
under the cover of MI5 and MI6.
“Thanks to the films, people have a basic understanding of
the license to kill concept — a term denoting the permission
granted by the official government or a state agency to a secret
agent who serves this authority to independently make a decision
on the necessity and expediency of murder to achieve a certain
goal. Once the mission is completed, the agent always returns to
the base.
“It is a pity that in normal life, things are not so
beautiful and dignified.
“And now getting back to reality. The following historical
episodes are not fiction; they are facts. Some of them are
proven, whereas others are highly likely hypotheses put forward
by historians.
“Scotland Yard historians also maintained the British
authorities’ complicity in the murder of Grigory Rasputin.
” [T]here are similar versions regarding the murder of
Russian Emperor Paul I
“Historians also write about the so-called Lockhart
Conspiracy organized in 1918 by the heads of the diplomatic
missions of Britain, France and the USA to Soviet Russia in order
to overthrow the Bolsheviks.
“In 2013, information was made public indicating that the
MI6 intelligence service was the mastermind of the assassination
of Patrice Lumumba, the first democratically elected prime
minister of Congo.
“As time went by, official London and its diplomatic
missions continued to actively meddle in the domestic affairs of
other states and to influence their political regimes. Suffice it
to recall 20th Century events when British secret services ‘took
part’ in staging a coup d’état in Iran in 1953.
“British diplomats working in Moscow are probably listening
and recording all this. They will have to send their report to
London today. I have done my best, and this statement is 17 pages
long. I have one question: Are you proud of your history? Then
you need to make a choice: either you advocate human rights,
international law and democracy, or you are proud of what you did
in the past and continue to do today.
“In August 1953, the CIA and the British Secret Intelligence
Service staged their joint Operation Ajax to overthrow the
government of Mossadegh.
“Although we were members of the Anti-Hitler Coalition, the
UKs behavior during World War II can also hardly be called
equivocal, due to a number of factors. Some historical episodes
give rise to major questions about the essence of the UKs
policies on the international scene. This includes, for example,
Rudolf Hess mysterious flight to the UK on the eve of the German
invasion of the Soviet Union. The history of every country has
some unpleasant facts, for which future generations will have to
pay the price and assume moral responsibility. But the British
secret services have classified all the documents on this case
for 100 years, and this deadline is being extended.
“Another example of subversive operations can be found in
Kim Philby’s book My Silent War, which contains some interesting
evidence. In April 1951, London hosted a meeting of
representatives of the British and US intelligence services
regarding both countries use of Ukrainian nationalist
organizations. Again, everything ties up.  By that time, the
secret services had supported Stepan Bandera’s Organization of
Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) for many years and used them to
recruit agents and obtain intelligence on the USSR. Cooperation
between OUN and the Intelligence Service grew steadily. In 1949
and 1950, several OUN saboteur squads were para-dropped to
Ukraine. In the early hours of May 15, 1951, British secret
services para-dropped three reconnaissance-saboteur squads.
Everyone knows about the atrocities committed by Banderas
supporters, including mass executions of civilians, hundreds of
thousands of men and women, old people and children, Russians,
Ukrainians, Belarusians, Jews, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and
Yugoslavs, the Volhynia massacre, the murder of Polish
professors, the Katyn tragedy, punitive operations in Slovakia,
Warsaw, and Prague.
“The British authorities actively recruited professional
criminals during their subversive operations. Remember, they told
us that Russia is a criminal state with which there should be no
cooperation? But the British authorities cooperate nicely with
criminals. We are not even talking about White Helmets and people
recruited into this organization who are supported all the same.
Lets talk about ‘mundane’ things. In 1973, Her Majesty’s
Government officially admitted that Kenneth Littlejohn and his
brother Keith had robbed banks in the Republic of Ireland for
over 12 months in order to discredit the Official Irish
Republican Army (IRA). This amounts to classic tactics. Kenneth
Littlejohn claims that he was instructed to kill Sean Mac
Stíofáin, the former chief of staff of the IRA.
“And here is another example: Howard Marx, an Oxford
graduate who became a drug dealer, was recruited for the purpose
of obtaining information about the IRAs weapons supply chain. In
return, the authorities promised not to prosecute him for
drug-related crimes. These are isolated examples.
“By the way, the British government is known to have created
comfortable conditions in the UK for criminals from other
countries. According to the UK Home Offices information for a
period between 2005 and 2012, there were over 700 war crime
perpetrators living in Britain.
“The British authorities also like to use prohibited methods
for treating prisoners, especially when they need to get
information from them. And, of course, nobody has called off the
license to kill.
“We also remember how Qaddafi was removed and that London
applauded the execution of the head of a sovereign state.
“God knows in how many other such cases the UK government is
involved.
“In conclusion, I will provide the ‘deadly list’ of the
prominent and talented people who died a strange death in the UK
in the early 21st Century.”
And among many others, she includes the following case:
“July 2003: a UK authority on biological warfare, David
Kelly, was found dead in Oxfordshire. The inquiry concluded that
he had committed suicide. I would like to remind you that David
Kelly criticized the Tony Blair government and claimed that the
invasion of Iraq in 2003 was based on falsified data. A decade
later, the UK government admitted that the data was indeed
falsified.”
So, in the immortal words of Hans Christian Andersen: “The
Emperor, indeed, has no clothes.”  The crimes of Britain stand
exposed, and, as Helga Zepp-LaRouche said, they have completely
over-extended themselves.  Now, it is up to us to just rip the
mask away, and let the truth stand on its own.  I guarantee you,
just as the American people have never forgiven Tony Blair and
George W Bush for dragging us into war in Iraq on the basis of
damned British lies and a British intelligence hoax, future
civilization will never forgive us for allowing ourselves to be
duped again; this time into starting World War III on the basis
of these same British lies.  It’s time for all of us to, once and
for all, reject the agenda of the failed British Empire, and to
instead embrace the vision of a New Paradigm of great powers’
relationship for the planet, built as Franklin Roosevelt
intended, following the defeat of Hitler in World War II; that
this partnership would be built on the pillars of a relationship
of the United States, Russia, and China.  That this partnership,
this alliance of great powers, would have the power to end the
reign of the British Empire once and for all, by bringing peace
through economic development, and great projects such as the New
Silk Road to the entire planet.
This is the subject of this pamphlet [holds up Four Laws
pamphlet]; this has been in circulation now for almost a year.
This is “America’s Future on the New Silk Road”.  It goes
extensively into the physical economic principles which could be
applied to bring about this kind of great projects, international
development perspective and finally end the legacy of British
colonialism, enforced backwardness, and genocide. This pamphlet
is now going into a second updated printing.  It is incumbent
upon all of us to use this window of opportunity to go into a
mobilization like we never have before.  It’s clear that there is
still a war waging for the soul of this Presidency in the United
States.  Indications are very clear that President Trump himself
is very reluctant to abandon his inclination towards just such a
great powers relationship; a relationship between the United
States and Russia, and the United States and China, to create a
new strategic economic order for the planet.  Despite the
ill-advised attacks under the influence of war-mongers and
neo-cons and British intelligence fellow travelers inside his own
administration, since then he has made it very clear — despite
Nikki Haley’s declaration that there will be another round of
sanctions on Russia.  Trump has contradicted that, and despite
Nikki Haley’s declaration that no, in fact, we will not be
withdrawing our troops from Syria; Trump has contradicted that,
and accused Nikki Haley of being “confused”.
There is a war waging for the soul of this Presidency, and
the stakes could never be higher.  It is our role here in the
United States to make very clear what the positive vision of the
future can be, now that these British lies stand exposed.
What I would like, is to conclude with a clip from a webcast
which Helga Zepp-LaRouche broadcast yesterday, where she
documents exactly this exposure of British crimes, British
hoaxes, and British lies.  She says that now is the time to act
to usher in a New Paradigm for civilization.  So, here’s Helga
Zepp-LaRouche:

  HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, there is right now, in
certain European political layers, a big debate:  Has the “deep
state” in the United States won already, or is there still some
options that Trump could stick to his announced policies?
Well, obviously the “deep state” is, or what people call the
“deep state,” which is this what President Eisenhower already
pointed to as the “military industrial complex” combined with the
intelligence services belonging to the British Empire faction —
obviously, they’re still very strong.
But on the other side, I think they have never been so
exposed, and at a time when ordinary people have the feeling that
everything is falling apart, — the trust in government is
collapsing, pensions are not seen as secure, there is fear of a
new financial crisis much worse than 2008 — people have a sense
that there really is no institution, I mean, in the West, people
have the sense there is no place they can turn to in terms of
trust.  And in such a moment, when people realize who are the
war-mongers, and that they’re pushing war against Russia using
lies, I think this can completely backfire and once these lies
are being dismantled and ostracized; and the people pushing the
lies are being ostracized, I think there can be a real return to
an international relation among nations, not only reviving the UN
Charter, reviving international law.  But also, I think sometimes
you need a shock like this present experience, to move to a New
Paradigm of international relations.  And I think that is
absolutely something on the horizon.
I mean, you see a dynamic where more and more countries are
not going along any more.  The East European countries, the
Central European countries, the Balkans, the South European
countries, Switzerland, Austria — they all want to have a
different kind of relation, and the more countries have that kind
of determination, and the more countries which are not yet there,
like Germany, France, Great Britain, the more people mobilize and
speak out to stick to the truth — you know, there are many
people in motion right now, there are many appeals being
circulated among people who say “we have to return to reason”; we
have to have to have a good relationship with Russia and China.
Without these two countries, no problem on this planet can be
solved.
And the more people start to engage in such a discourse and
get active; I’m in one sense a Leibnizian, believing that a great
evil always generates the potential for an even greater good,
because that’s the laws of the universe.  I think the universe is
made in such a way that there is this tremendous ability to
improve, to become better; to have higher forms of existence.
And it does require the individual action — it’s not a
dialectical materialism, or historical materialism, which goes by
itself. But there is such a thing as the combination of
objective conditions and subjective intervention. And the
objective conditions do exist.  They exist in the form of a New
Paradigm promoted by all the countries participating in the Belt
and Road Initiative; and if you add to that the subjective
factor, which is the courage of the world-historical individual
acting on the basis of his or her knowledge, I think there is all
the chances that we can move humanity into a more safe historical
period.
So therefore, I can only appeal to you:  Join us.  That’s
the best thing you can do.

  OGDEN:  So, as Helga LaRouche said, with these British
crimes now exposed for the world to see, now is the time to move
decisively into a New Paradigm for civilization.  So, with that
call to action, we conclude tonight’s broadcast.  Please stay
tuned to larouchepac.com; the world is changing rapidly, and we
have a lot of work to do.  Thank you very much.    

19. april, 2018 – »Gør jer klar«, lød det fra talskvinde for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium og topdiplomat Maria Zacharova til journalister på hendes ugentlige briefing torsdag. Lad os tale om statsordrer til massemord; lad os tale om Storbritanniens historie som en af de værste kolonimagter til alle tider. Britiske diplomater synes ikke at kende deres egen historie, og det er på høje tid at udfylde dette erkendelsesvakuum, her fra dette podie, sagde hun.

Zacharova fortsatte i den næste time med at gennemgå det ene tilfælde efter det andet af Det britiske Imperiums historie for massemord, forgiftninger, plyndring og løgne imod folkeslag i hele verden og citerede dokumentation, i visse tilfælde fra Storbritanniens egne arkiver, om Det britiske Imperiums afskyelige »moralske præstationer«.

Briefingen blev udsendt live med en grov oversættelse og kan høres her:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM2nuYXRN6Y,

hvor sagen imod Det britiske Imperium begynder 1 time 12 min. inde. Vi opsummerer her hendes præsentation af hovedtilfældene, for alle patrioter i alle nationer i verden (inklusive i UK selv), der også forstår, at menneskelig civilisation kræver en fjernelse af Det britiske Imperium, én gang for alle.

Zacharova tog først Indiens tilfælde op. I 1930 skrev den amerikanske historiker Will Durant, at Storbritanniens overlagte tortur af Indien i over 150 år kan anses for at være verdenshistoriens mest forfærdelige forbrydelse, bemærkede hun. Indiens Shashi Tharoor, forfatter af Infamous Empire, samlede dokumentation om denne forbrydelse, som premierminister Narendra Modi den 24. juli 2015 sagde, reflekterer, hvad enhver patriot i Indien ved, tilføjede Zacharova. Tharoor beretter om Storbritanniens afindustrialisering og plyndring af Indien, inkl. 15-29 millioner mennesker død ved hungersnød, 4 millioner i Bengalen alene på ét år, under en af de mest grusomme premierministre i det 20. århundrede, Winston Churchill. Zacharova citerede Churchills udtalelse, »Jeg hader indere. De er et væmmeligt folkefærd med en væmmelig religion«; hun fortalte om briternes henrettelser af indere ved at skyde dem ud af kanoner; den berygtede massakre den 13. april, 1919, hvor 50 soldater åbnede ild mod en ubevæbnet civil folkemængde i centrum af Amritsar og måske dræbte henved 1.000 mennesker.

Dernæst fulgte Afrika. Tretten millioner mennesker blev bortført fra kontinentet som slaver, men det vides, at 3-4gange så mange afrikanere blev dræbt med det totale antal ofre oppe på 50-52 millioner mennesker.

Zacharova mindede journalister om, at den britiske filosof John Locke udviklede forfatningen for Amerikas sydstats-slavestater (Confederate States of America) og investerede alle sine penge i slaveri.

Briterne oprettede koncentrationslejre under Boerkrigen i Afrika for alle, der mentes at kunne være sympatisk indstillet over for oprørerne imod britisk herredømme. Deres hjem blev nedbrændt og deres husdyrhold og afgrøder ødelagt, og dernæst blev mændene adskilt fra kvinder og børn og udskibet til Ceylon (nu Sri Lanka) og Indien. Da nyheden om lejrene slap ud, hævdede Lord Kitchener, at lejrene var skabt for at yde »sikkerhed« til civilbefolkningen og kaldte dem redningssteder, rapporterede Zacharova.

Er det ikke det samme som de Hvide Hjelme i dag? spurgte hun. De finder terrorister, kalder dem ’Hvide Hjelme’ og bruger dem til provokationer »for at redde befolkningen«. Der er gået mange år, men intet har forandret sig.

I Australien dræbte briterne 90-95 % af den oprindelige befolkning, aboriginerne, under besættelsen. Det er ikke vores vurdering; engelske besættere fik kompensation for hver dræbt person, sagde hun.

Så vendte hun tilbage til Afrika: i 1870 udførte briterne folkemord mod zuluerne i Capekolonien, og i 1954-1961 imod kikuyu-folket i Kenya, »hvor, som gengældelse for drabet på 32 hvide kolonister, de britiske myndigheder udslettede 300.000 medlemmer af kikuyu-folket og drev andre 1,5 million ind i koncentrationslejre«.

Vi bør huske de berømte Opiumkrige, hvor London forgiftede det kinesiske folk gennem opium.

Når London kalder sig selv for repræsentanter for humanitære sager, kan man huske på dets handlinger imod folkene i Mellemøsten. Se blot på kortet over den grænsedragning, de gennemførte, som opdelte folk på måder, der har følger den dag i dag.

Så er der de britiske arkivers hemmelige dokumenter om, hvordan de britiske myndigheder beordrede brugen af kemiske våben i foråret 1920 i Mesopotamien – igen, Churchill – og 6.000 til 10.000 indfødte i det, der i dag er Irak, blev dræbt. Det er måske ikke så meget, for London, sagde Zacharova.

Hun nævner sager, der involverer grækerne, libyerne, sudaneserne, eritreanerne og andre, før hun gik bort fra direkte folkemord og over til Det britiske Imperiums forkærlighed for spionoperationer og lokaliserede undergravende operationer. James Bond-film er ikke fiktion, påpegede hun; Ian Flemming arbejdede ud fra arkivdokumenter. Britiske spioner har virkelig en »license to kill«.

Zacharova nævnte nogle af de kendte politiske mord og kup, som britisk efterretning kørte. Seniorcontroller i MI6, baronesse Daphne Parks indrømmelse af, at hun organiserede det politiske mord på Congos første, valgte premierminister, Patrice Lumumba, i 1961; kuppet i 1953 mod Irans Mossadeq, der var til fordel for britiske olieinteresser; dets myrderi i Nordirland; tilbagesendingen af Stepan Bandera-støttende, fascistiske mordere til Ukraine i begyndelsen af 1950’erne; osv.

Og hun udelukkede ikke af sin mønstring af kendsgerningerne den række af mærkelige dødsfald, som overgik russiske og britiske videnskabsfolk på UK’s jord mellem 2001 og 2014, mange, der var centreret omkring Porton Down, inkl. i 2003 Porton Downs David Kellys »selvmord«; Kelly, der, sammen med Lyndon LaRouche, var en ledende person i afsløringen af britisk efterretnings »udmajede« løgne for at retfærdiggøre invasionen af Irak i 2003.

Sluttelig påpegede Zacharova de britiske myndigheders favorittaktik, som Rusland i øjeblikket er målet for, nemlig med at sværte mål med »sort reklame«, som der er skrevet enorme bind om. Det er ikke overraskende, at nogle mennesker ved dette, konkluderede Zacharova. Det, der er overraskende, er, at nogle mennesker ikke gør.

Se også: 3 EIR-Temaartikler, pdf, dansk, om Befolkningsreduktion: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=7227

»Den britiske kongefamilies plan om at skrue verden tilbage til stenalderen«; »Hvordan den britiske krone reducerede Irlands ’bæredygtighed’ til 6 mio. sjæle«; og »Britiske koloniherrer sultede flere end 60 mio. indere ihjel, men hvorfor?«

Foto: Talskvinde for det Russiske Udenrigsministerium Maria Zacharova under sin pressebriefing, torsdag, 19. april, 2018. 

Lederartikel; Flyveblad, fra LaRouchePAC, 16. april, 2018 – Mandag, den 16. april, portrætterer Washington Post præsident Donald Trump som værende omgivet af et forræderisk udenrigspolitisk team, der konstant og konsekvent lyver for ham om Rusland og om skridt, dette team har taget i præsidentens, og i jeres, navn, imod Rusland og Kina. WP forsøger at hævde, at Trumps nationale sikkerhedsstab iscenesatte et paladskup imod ham med hensyn til Rusland og Syrien, og at Trump tabte denne kamp. 

Men præsidenten handlede omgående imod forræderne omkring ham. Han forkastede udnævnelsen af Nikki Haleys assistent, aldrig-Trumperen Jon Lemer, til en national sikkerhedspost, for Mike Pence. Det Hvide Hus annoncerede, at nye sanktioner mod Rusland, baseret på Ruslands støtte til Syrien, og som Nikki Haley promoverede blot i går, blev kaldt tilbage. Det blev offentligt meddelt, at præsident Trump stadig ønsker at mødes med Vladimir Putin, men en dato er endnu ikke fastlagt.

Samtidig pralede den franske præsident over for hele verden med, at det var ham, der narrede præsident Trump til at udføre et missilangreb mod Syrien, som herved genoplivede selve Hillary Clinton/Obama-doktrinerne for regimeskifte, som det amerikanske folk, helt rigtigt, afviste i valgene i 2016. Dette sætter blot scenen for et voldsomt, politisk bagslag for Frankrigs præsident.

Med tågen fra sidste uges handlinger, der nu letter, bliver flere aspekter af vores nuværende situation meget, meget klarere. Alt imens angloamerikanerne er ved at falde over deres egne fødder for på tåbelig vis at erklære, at de har fået Trump manøvreret ind i et bur, så står det meget klart, at deres proklamerede sejr er en Pyrrhussejr, som udgør arrogante vrangforestillinger og kun er midlertidige. De opførte sig ansvarsløst, og muligheden for et bagslag er enormt og revolutionerende for verden, hvis det amerikanske folk nu går sammen med Lyndon LaRouches krav om at »annullere Det britiske Imperium«. På intet tidspunkt, siden Franklin Roosevelt erklærede sin plan om at gøre en ende på britisk kolonialisme, har det anglo-hollandske imperium været så sårbart og eksponeret. Her er de relevante træk af vores nuværende situation:

1. Svindelnummeret med det kemiske angreb i Syrien; svindelnummeret med Skripal-forgiftningen i Storbritannien, samt det britiskinspirerede kup mod vores præsident, er alle en del af én og samme, britiske, strategiske pakke. Storbritannien er nu, sammen med sin mangeårige puddel Frankrig, ude efter at anføre den vestlige verden i at udfordre Rusland og Kina, der påstås at praktisere noget, der skulle hedde »totalitær kapitalisme«. Her er, hvordan den britiske imperieskriverkarl Allister Heath beskrev det britiske motiv for forgiftnings-svindelnumrene i Salisbury og i Syrien, i londonavisen Sunday Telegraph den 14. marts:

»Vi har brug for en ny verdensorden, der kan gå op imod totalitære kapitalister i Rusland og Kina … En sådan alliance … ville på dramatisk vis ændre den globale magtbalance og gøre det muligt for de liberale demokratier, endelig at kæmpe tilbage. Det ville give verden den form for robuste institutioner, der kræves for at holde Rusland og Kina tilbage … Storbritannien må have en ny rolle i verden: at opbygge et sådant netværk ville være vores perfekte mission.«

På den anden side af vandpytten, som de siger, udkom der, nøjagtig samtidigt, en tilsvarende, stiftende erklæring fra 68 tidligere embedsmænd i Obama-administrationen, der har dannet en gruppe ved navn National Security Action, og som tilsigter at sikre Donald Trumps afsættelse og angreb mod Rusland og Kina.

2. Russerne siger nu, at de har uigendrivelige beviser for, at de Hvide Hjelme, en hjælpeorganisation, der er associeret til al-Qaeda og modtager finansiel støtte i millionklassen af den britiske regering og U.S. AID, iscenesatte det kemiske angreb i Douma, Syrien, på direkte tilskyndelse fra London. Beviserne omfatter fotografier og aflytninger. Samtidig har et uafhængigt, schweizisk laboratorium, der samarbejder med OPCW, fastslået, at den gift, der blev brugt på Skripal og datter, var noget, der hedder BZ, et stof, der aldrig blev udviklet i Rusland, men som i stedet har hjemme i både USA’s og UK’s programmer for kemiske våben. Disse påstande er helt i overensstemmelse med uafhængige analyser, som LaRouchePAC har fremskaffet i løbet af de seneste 10 dage. (Se: ’Der var intet kemisk angreb i Syrien’  og ’Assads kemiske våben: Endnu et britisk eventyr for børn’ ).
3. Der er allerede i Storbritannien en enorm, folkelig reaktion, som kommer fra Labour-partiet og Brexit-bevægelsen, mod disse løgne. De sammenligner meget passende de »klassificerede« beviser for forgiftningssvindelnumrene med de løgne, der førte til den katastrofale Irakkrig. På samme måde gik de glemte amerikanere her i USA, der valgte Trump til at afslutte dette nonsens, sammen med LaRouchePAC og protesterede højlydt imod det syriske angreb hele sidste uge. Denne protest trak efter alt at dømme verden væk fra en balanceren og poseren på kanten af atomkrig, anstiftet af Storbritannien, Frankrig og deres kolleger i det Demokratiske Parti og blandt de neokonservative i USA.
4. En hoveddrivkraft bag denne situation er det forestående finanskollaps af finanscentrene på Wall Street og i City of London. Langt fra at praktisere ’totalitær kapitalisme’ er Kina, sammen med Rusland, midt i et projekt for massivt byggeri af infrastruktur og økonomisk udvikling, der har vundet tilslutning fra over 100 andre nationer i verden. Det udgør det største infrastrukturbyggeprojekt, menneskeheden nogensinde har påtaget sig, og det har det udtrykkelige formål at gøre en ende på fattigdom og hæve levestandarden på hele planeten. Kina og Rusland afsætter også betydelige andele af deres budget til rumforskning og fundamentale, videnskabelige opdagelser. Dette er den form for »at tænke stort«, som vi i USA plejede at praktisere. Det giver genlyd af det Amerikanske System for Politisk Økonomi. »Totalitær kapitalisme« er det ikke. Hvis præsident Trump accepterer Kinas invitation til at slutte USA til Bælte & Vej Initiativet, vil det snarere blive det Anglo-hollandske Imperium, og ikke Donald Trump, der henvises til historiens skraldespand.
5. Situationen er fortsat fuld af farer. Nikki Haley og John Bolton har forpligtet USA over for en militær respons, når som helst, en terrorist i Syrien kan iscenesætte endnu et falsk kemisk angreb. Ukraine er et andet muligt trigger point, der kunne bruges af dem, der er involveret i forræderi mod vort land og vor præsident. Det står nu ligeledes klart, at en desperat Robert Mueller er ude på at gøre Donald Trumps advokat til statens bevis imod hans egen klient, en taktik, den beskidte Mueller gentagne gange har anvendt. Muellers taktik har måske denne gang fjernet det Sjette Tillæg til den Amerikanske Forfatning. Mueller er desperat, fordi Russiagate er sprængt i stykker, Comey er en fiasko og hele afdelinger af Obamas Justitsministerium nu konkurrerer om at afsløre hinandens forbrydelser.

Så med tågen, der letter, finder vi faktisk os selv på randen af en sejr. Spørgsmålet vil blive afgjort af den amerikanske befolknings mod til at kræve, og handle for, en afslutning af dette kup, en afsløring af de perfide, britiske løgne og en insisteren på at komme videre med genopbygningen af landet, og af planeten. Lyndon LaRouche har gentagne gange advaret imod pragmatisme i netop denne situation. Med et citat af apostlen Paulus, minder LaRouche os om, at »Thi for os står kampen ikke mod kød og blod, men mod myndigheder og magter, mod verdensherskerne i dette mørke, mod ondskabens åndemagter i himmelrummet.«[1] (Paulus’ brev til efeserne, kap. 6, v. 12.) Vær en kraft for retfærdigheden og det gode.

(Det engelske Flyveblad kan downloades her)

Foto: Den syriske præsident Assad og den russiske præsident Putin i Syrien, december, 2017. Photo: Kremlin.ru

[1] Den danske oversættelse iflg. Bibelselskabet.

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 9. april, 2018 – Vi befinder os i en situation med rød alarm, i betragtning af mønstret for provokationer fra den britiske, geopolitiske floks side, for at optrappe konfrontationen til et punkt, hvor det udløser generel krig. Mandagens tre timer lange møde i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd reflekterer faren. Det var et frontalt sammenstød mellem UK, USA og Frankrig på den ene side, og hvis talspersoner udspyede løgne, fornærmelser og spydigheder, og Rusland og Kina på den anden. Kina talte for en diplomatisk og politisk løsning. Rusland havde anmodet om mødet, der havde titlen, »Trusler mod international fred og sikkerhed«, og truslerne lå i de vilde anklager fra ambassadørerne Karen Pierce (UK), Nikki Haley (USA) og François DeLattre (Frankrig).

Det umiddelbart foreliggende spørgsmål er den falske påstand om den syriske regerings brug af kemiske våben i Douma, 7. april. Der eksisterer ingen beviser; iscenesatte videoer, udsendt af de berygtede aktører for britisk efterretning De Hvide Hjelme, kører konstant på de store medier. På mødet i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd fordømte Haley Syrien som et »monster« for at udføre dette (fantom)-angreb med kemiske våben; hun fordømte Rusland som et »regime, der ikke kan føle skam«.

Præsident Donald Trump, der er mål for alt dette, talte til sit kabinet her til morgen og sagde, at angrebet i Douma var »grusomt«, og »hvis de [Syrien, Rusland] er uskyldige«, hvorfor vil de så ikke give folk lov til at gå ind og bevise det«. Faktisk sagde både den russiske og den syriske ambassadør til Sikkerhedsrådet: send efterforskningsteams ind omgående. Lige med det samme. Kom i morgen.

Men, som i Skripal-sagen, og som med tidligere, ubegrundede anklager imod den syriske regering om kemisk krigsførelse, så er sandheden irrelevant for dem, der anklager.

Det er pointen. Dette aktuelle svindelnummer er ikke nogen separat begivenhed, men er en begivenhed i et mønster af provokationer i en sindssyg, igangværende strategi for konfrontation, der sætter hele planeten i fare. Er tankegangen den, at det ville være bedre at føre krig nu, snarere end senere, fordi det ville være mindre »kostbart«? Der har for ikke længe siden været en RAND-undersøgelse, som præcist hævdede dette vanvid. Der er galninge, der er tilbøjelige til at tænke på denne måde, især efter den russiske præsident Putins annoncering den 1. marts af nye våbentyper, og som, i stedet for at blive set som begrundelse for nødvendigheden af ægte forhandlinger om international sikkerhed, ses som en slutspilsmanøvre.

Den russiske ambassadør Vasilij Nebenzia talte strengt til sine modparter i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, »Jeg vil stille det retoriske spørgsmål: Forstår I den farlige tærskel, I bringer verden til?«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche opsummerede det mandag: vi sidder på en krudttønde. Hvis Trump går i fælden og går med i dette her, og, f.eks., en russisk soldat i Syrien bliver dræbt på en eller anden måde, befinder verden sig i akut fare for en generel krig.

Tidlig mandag morgen affyrede to israelske kampfly otte missiler mod et mål i Syrien, en flyvebase i Homs, som indtil for nylig blev brugt af russiske styrker. Det syriske luftforsvar skød fem missiler ned, men tre ramte målet og dræbte 14 mennesker, inkl. tre iranere. Ingen russere blev ramt. Israel gav ikke Rusland noget forhåndsvarsel; Israel informerede imidlertid Det Hvide Hus. Hvad sker der nu?

Præsident Trump, der mandag nat skulle mødes med militærrådgivere, gentog om morgenen, at han er 24 til 48 timer fra at beslutte, hvad han vil gøre mht. anklagerne om syrisk giftgas. Han og den franske præsident Emmanuel Macron talte i telefon søndag og sagde, de ville koordinere deres respons, sammenholdt med det, der sker i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd mandag, og udstede deres handleplaner dagen efter, eller kort tid derefter.

Samtidig med, at alt dette finder sted, rykkede FBI mandag ud med endnu et træk mod Trump, på vegne af den britiske Trumpgate-operation, med et raid om morgenen mod Michael Cohens kontor i New York City; Michael Cohen, der er mangeårig personlig advokat for præsident Trump.

I USA kommer der nu nogle responser, inkl. et åbent brev i dag til forsvarsminister James Mattis fra pensionerede oberst i hæren, Pat Lang, der kræver en kompetent efterforskning af, hvad det var, der skete i Douma, med det formål, ikke at blive offer for »et omhyggelig konstrueret propaganda-svindelnummer«. Blandt kongresmedlemmer advarede Thomas Massie (R-KY) om, at kun Kongressen har retten til at beslutte en militæraktion, såsom i Syrien. Han angreb hårdt ideen om »evindelig krig«.

Vær i højeste alarmberedskab; rød alarm. Dette er meget alvorligt. Kontakt alle med sandheden.

Se den nye Erklæring fra LaRouchePAC: »Nu er det Nok!«  

9. april, 2018 – Vi, De forenede Stater, står over for at lancere et angreb mod Syrien, med de russiske styrker, der er til stede dér, baseret på perfide, britiske løgne; baseret på det, der kunne vise sig at være historiens endegyldige og sorteste efterretningssvindel, den, der gjorde det af med den menneskelige race. Samtidig blev præsident Trumps personlige advokats kontor i dag, 9. april, 2018, udsat for et raid, baseret på en henvisning fra den særlige anklager Robert Mueller. Spørgsmålet skulle angiveligt dreje sig om beskyldninger i forbindelse med, at præsidenten skulle have haft en årelang affære med den løgnagtige og afskyelige pornostjerne, Stormy Daniels. Dette anses af Mueller og vores korrupte FBI for at være så alvorligt, at det Sjette Tillæg til USA’s Forfatning også blot kan kastes til side. Disse to uhyrlige begivenheder er fuldstændig relateret. Med mindre I nu rejser jer sammen med os for at stoppe det, er dette land i alvorlig, alvorlig fare. Det kategoriske forsøg på at afpresse denne præsident ind i den krig, han blev valgt til at stoppe, er nu blevet optrappet ud over enhver forstand.

I 2016 stemte millioner af amerikanere for Donald Trump, fordi han sagde, han ville afslutte unyttige, evindelige krige på vegne af et intellektuelt dødt og finansielt bankerot, angloamerikansk system, dette imperium, der går tilbage til tiden umiddelbart efter Anden Verdenskrig. Dette system, centreret omkring Wall Street og City of London, har snydt of bedraget sig til verdens værdier og ødelagt den engang storslåede amerikanske nationaløkonomi, en kendsgerning, der blev fuldstændig indlysende for tænkende mennesker, da systemet krakkede i 2008. Donald Trump søgte bedre relationer med Kina, der nu vokser frem som verdens mægtigste økonomi, samt med Putins Rusland. Trump faste beslutning om at etablere anstændige relationer med Rusland og Kina, og udelukkende kun denne faste beslutning, igangsatte det djævelske kup mod præsidenten, under anførelse af briterne og de mange nyttige idioter blandt vores elite, der er i trældom for briterne.

Dette kup, hvis manifestationer var det falske »beskidte dossier« om Donald Trump, forfattet af MI6’s Christopher Steele og betalt af Hillary Clinton, sang på sidste vers, da Storbritannien indledte sin nuværende offensiv. Senatorerne Charles Grassley og Lindsay Graham havde henvist Christopher Steele til USA’s Justitsministerium, til retsforfølgelse for kriminelle handlinger, og patrioter i Kongressen forfulgte en reel bestræbelse på at identificere og retsforfølge dem, der er ansvarlige for kuppet mod vores præsident. Så, den 4. marts, 2018, blev en russisk spion, der spionerede for Storbritannien, Sergei Skripal, samt hans datter, angiveligt forgiftet i Salisbury, England. Skripal færdes i de samme britiske spionkredse, som Christopher Steele er knyttet til. Premierminister Theresa May proklamerede omgående for hele verden, at Rusland stod bag angrebet, men har aldrig nogensinde fremlagt noget som helst bevis for nogen af sine krigsgale erklæringer. Præsident Trump blev af sine forræderiske rådgivere, inklusive H.R. McMaster, der i hele sin militære karriere var en fange af Storbritanniens Internationale Institut for Strategiske Affærer, hastigt puffet til at støtte Storbritanniens totalt ubegrundede påstande. Budskabet til præsidenten fra vore forrædere er klart: gå med i vores march mod krig og måske; måske, vil vi slække på kuppet.

Sluttelig nægtede Storbritanniens egne eksperter i kemiske våben i Porton Down at sige, at det kemiske stof, der blev brugt mod Skripal og hans datter, var fremstillet i Rusland, på trods af Theresa Mays og hendes vanvittige udenrigsminister Boris Johnsons påstande, uden beviser. Åbenlys tvivl var allerede blevet udtalt af flere europæiske lande, som afholdt sig fra at gå med i dette Storbritanniens opråb til krig. Blandt de kendsgerninger, der står til overvejelse: Den dødbringende nervegift, som Theresa May beskriver, ville omgående have dræbt Skripal og hans datter. Alligevel er de begge i live og ikke længere i kritisk tilstand. Redegørelser for, hvor giften blev givet, har varieret; den seneste lyder, at det blev smurt ud på hoveddøren til Skripals hjem. Alligevel lykkedes det på en eller anden måde for Skripal at forlade huset et par timer og spadsere rundt i landsbyen, spise og drikke på restauranter, indtil han pludselig blev syg. Formlen for den angiveligt anvendte gift var blevet offentliggjort vidt og bredt af dens russiske opfinder, en dissident, der nu bor i USA. Med dette svindelnummer, der nu er i færd med at falde fra hinanden, får vi at vide, at Skripal og hans datter, samt alle tilgængelige beviser, er i færd med at ’blive forsvundet’. Ifølge britisk presse vil Skripal og hans datter komme ind i et vidnebeskyttelsesprogram fra CIA. Deres hus, og alle påståede lokaliteter, der er involveret i dette svindelnummer, bliver nu bulldozet ned og ødelagt. Ingen mulighed for en reel efterforskning af dette svindelnummer må lades åben.

På trods af, at Donald Trump udtalte støtte til Theresa May, søgte han stadig at honorere sit løfte til det amerikanske folk. Han lykønskede Putin med valgsejren og inviterede ham til et snarligt møde i Det Hvide Hus til forhandlinger og nævnte det eskalerende og farlige våbenkapløb mellem USA og Rusland. Briterne og deres amerikanske venner gik, som respons hertil, amok. Man måtte lade en hammer falde på denne præsident, der nu oven i købet talte om at trække amerikanske styrker ud af Syrien og genopbygge USA.

Ind på scenen kommer så endnu et af briterne opfundet forgiftnings-svindelnummer, nu i Syrien, hvor russere, iranere og syrere ikke alene assisterede i besejringen af Isis, men nu var i færd med at feje de sidste tilbageværende jihadister bort, såsom Jaish al-Islam, en omdøbt, salafistisk jihadistisk gruppering, der kontrolleres af saudierne, samt al-Nusra-front, eller al-Qaeda. De endegyldige militære operationer, som konsoliderede sejren, er i løbet af de seneste dage blev afsluttet i Gouta, en forstad til Damaskus. Og efter således at have opnået sejr, lancerede Assad – sådan lyder den narrativ, som vore krigsmagere til medier vil have os til at tro på – et angreb med kemiske våben for at fejre denne sejr, vel vidende, at han således ville udløse helvede over sig selv fra Vesten.

Fotos af døende børn, som præsident Trump reagerede så følelsesmæssigt på for et år siden, da han lancerede missilangreb mod Syrien, er atter blevet præsenteret for ham. Der er al mulig grund til at tro, de er falske. Rusland og Syrien havde netop advaret om et sådant angreb under falsk flag, og som ville involvere kloringas, i over en måned, hvor de kom nærmere til den endelige sejr i Gouta. Den eneste information, der hævder, at et sådant angreb fandt sted, kommer fra De Hvide Hjelme, en nødhjælpsorganisation grundlagt af briterne, og som er involveret i at være involveret militært med al-Qaeda og er dybt involveret i tidligere svindelnumre omkring Assads angivelige anvendelse af kemiske våben. Sy Hersh dokumenterede denne historie fuldt og helt i London Review of Books, med hensyn til de falske nyheder om, at Assad brugte saringas i august, 2013. https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

MIT’s Ted Postal og andre har vist, at det angivelige angreb med saringas, som præsident Trump responderede på med militære midler for et år siden, ligeledes var et britisk svindelnummer. Se Robert Parry, https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/07/a-new-hole-in-syria-sarin-certainty/

og James Carden, https://www.thenation.com/article/the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria-is-there-a-place-for-skepticism/.

De Hvide Hjelme finansieres i fællesskab af britiske og amerikanske efterretningselementer, der er dedikeret til regimeskifte i Syrien. De har modtaget millioner og atter millioner af dollar til dette formål. De udgør afgørende komponenter i den interventionistiske udenrigspolitik for regimeskifte, som Donald Trump blev valgt til at udrydde.

I 2013, da Obama truede med krig mod Rusland over Syrien, intervenerede det amerikanske folk, løftede taget på Kongressen og stoppede det. Det er, hvad vi nu igen har brug for. Rusland ser, at der fra briterne og deres naive tåber i USA kommer en ubønhørlig offensiv for informationskrig. De ser dette, korrekt, som de første skridt mod krig. Vi må vende dette, med omgående start nu. Ring til din repræsentant i Kongressen eller din senator og sig til dem, at de skal stoppe dette fremstød for krig og lukke Robert Mueller ned, nu. Omstillingsbordet på Capitol Hill har nummer 202-224-3121.

Foto: Den amerikanske præsident Donald J. Trump, vicepræsident Michael R. Pence og deres hustruer byder tidligere præsident Barack Obama farvel under afskedsceremonien efter den 58. præsidentielle indsættelse i Washington, D.C., 20. jan., 2017.  (DoD photo)

Introduktion: Den hysteriske og bidende retorik mod Rusland, der kommer fra Storbritanniens imperiale oligarker og deres efterretningstjenester og kanaliseres gennem Theresa May og Boris ’BoJo’ Johnson, narrer ingen. Alt imens nogle regeringer underdanigt er gået med i de farlige provokationer, så er andre, inklusive USA, blot kommet med symbolske handlinger. Mange nationer synes at ligge mere på linje med tankegangen hos den russiske udenrigsminister Lavrov, der om May-regeringens ubegrundede beskyldninger i Skripal-affæren sagde, at det er »kun alt for åbenlyst, at vore britiske kolleger har mistet deres realitetssans«.

De ledere, som derimod ikke har mistet deres realitetssans, har i stedet været engageret i et imponerende opbud af diplomatisk og økonomisk aktivitet og har indgået aftaler om at deltage i Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ (BVI). Parallelt med disse bestræbelser er et russisk initiativ for at bringe fred i Syrien og arbejde sammen med Syriens naboer. De britiskdirigerede geopolitikere har uden tvivl bemærket, at, i takt med, at dette initiativ går fremad, har præsident Trump gentaget sit kampagneløfte om at afslutte al amerikansk militær involvering i Syrien og har gentaget sit ønske om et topmøde med Putin i den nærmeste fremtid.

Det, der ligger bag de britiske angreb mod Putin og Rusland, er ikke den svindelagtige påstand, at Putin beordrede forgiftningen af en tidligere russisk efterretningsofficer, lige så vel som at Mueller-efterforskningen intet har at gøre med »russisk indblanding« i det amerikanske valg. Målet for disse provokationer er det Nye Paradigme, der er knyttet til BVI, som City of London og dets Wall Street allierede korrekt har identificeret som efterfølgeren til deres fallerede system. Hvis USA tilsluttede sig Rusland, Kina og Indien sådan, som Lyndon LaRouche opfordrede det til i kølvandet på krakket i 2008, ville det være umuligt at forhindre fremvæksten af det Nye Paradigme.

 Her følger engelsk udskrift:

 

 

HARLEY SCHLANGER:  Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger

from the Schiller Institute. Welcome to this week’s Schiller Institute

webcast for April 5, 2018, featuring our founder and President

Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

In the last couple of weeks, Helga has spoken about the

potential for a backfire as a result of the Skripal affair, that

Theresa May and her somewhat unhinged Foreign Secretary Boris

Johnson have been using as a way of attacking both Russia and the

United States.  Now, we’ve seen this play out in a very big way

in the last couple of days:  The fact that they came out in their

own name, and the name of their intelligence services and their

government, to attack Russia, has in fact, put “egg on their

faces” as some have said.  So, Helga, why don’t you catch us up

on what’s happened in the last days, because this is quite

significant, in terms of shaping the strategic relationships?

 

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  I think it is incredibly

serious, because now you have a situation where I think the whole

group of nations which committed themselves to sort of

unprincipled solidarity with May and Johnson, they really have to

reflect on what has actually happened.  Just to mention some of

the recent developments:  The head of the research lab Porton

Down, Gary Aitkenhead, came out actually and said they could not

find any proof that the origin of this nerve agent was Russia;

that they could establish that it was Novichok, or belonging to

the group of Novichoks, but that they could not say that it came

from Russia.

This has led to quite a series of events.  One was that the

Foreign Office removed the tweet in which they had said very

clearly that there was no doubt that the origin was Russia, and I

think they even mentioned that the scientists of the Porton Down

lab had said so.  So, they were obliged to remove the tweet,

because that also is evidence that Boris Johnson was lying,

because he had said that he had heard from the scientists that

there was absolutely unrefutable proof that this came from

Russia.  This is the first thing.

Then the London {Times} had a comment about this, where they

say that the statement by Aitkenhead is threatening to bring down

the international coalition against Russia.  Well, that’s indeed

the case, because now naturally everybody is reviewing this, and

I think in the case of the German government, for example, they

gave a  press conference afterwards, in which journalists were

asking, did this statement mean that you’ve changed your

perspective?  And they basically refused to do so, which shows

you really the absolute grip in which these people are in, namely

the grip of the British Empire.

So, I think this is now backfiring very clearly.  The role

of the British government and the British Empire, for that

matter, is completely exposed, but they are not stopping the

confrontation with Russia, so that some of the Russian responses,

for example, people speaking at the Seventh Moscow Conference on

International Security which is now taking place in Moscow,

[Sergei] Naryshkin, who is the head of Russia’s foreign

intelligence [SVR], he said that this is basically as serious as

the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.  Others were saying, this time

these idiots went way beyond any line, and that is clearly the

case.  But you also have a whole series of people who are saying,

look, we cannot continue like that, we have to resume a dialogue

with Russia; we have to go back to straighten out the relations.

And I want to really point to the fact that, despite the

fact that naturally the United States expelled 60 Russian

diplomats, which is clearly part of this escalation, that

President Trump himself, who did not at any point use this

incident to attack Russia as the origin.  And I think this stands

clearly out.  And people who are always totally freaked out about

Trump, they should really review this and ask if their

perspective and their optical approach actually the correct one?

Because in many cases, it turns out that Trump is actually the

one who is not going for confrontation, and some of the people

who are so much for “democracy and human rights” that they can’t

even walk straight, because they’re so heavily burdened with

their responsibilities, that they are the actual warmongers.  So

I think this is really something to reflect about.

But I think the kind of procedure that NATO, however, the

European Union, the German and French government, they were all

immediately jumping on this, without evidence, condemning Russia.

And I think if you look at this, when the dust settles down, it

{is} a blow to the whole Western system, because if there is not

an establishment of scientific fact, first, and the condemnation

first so that basically Russia is declared guilty, and then maybe

you find the evidence sometime down the road, or not, I think

this does big damage to the Western system, because if you play

with these things lightly, it is contributing to the

discreditation of the governments that did that, and that is not

a good thing.

 

SCHLANGER:  Well, minimally, we could say this is a rush to

judgment, but more importantly, this is part of an established

pattern of British intelligence.  We’ve seen it with the repeated

charges, without evidence, that the Assad government was using

chemical weapons against his population; and of course, the

famous case of Tony Blair and Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction,

which turned out to be another fabrication of the highest levels

of British intelligence.

But there’s another aspect of this which I think you may

want to comment on, which is the case of David Kelly, because

this also hits at home, where there was opposition from within

the scientific community in the United Kingdom against the

actions of the government and the intelligence community.

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah.  This is clearly a pattern.  And

before the statement by the head of the Porton Down lab came out,

the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, had

actually said that he had from high-level sources in the

intelligence community or the science community, that the

scientists would not basically produce the evidence — and they

didn’t.  And [Porton Down weapons inspector] David Kelly, at the

time of the Iraq war, had basically blown the whistle, saying

there were no weapons of mass destruction, and then he found an

early death under extremely dubious circumstances which were said

to be a suicide, but nobody really believes that.

So, I think this is really something — if you think the

Iraq War was based on lies, and I think Willy Wimmer, the former

vice president of the OSCE and former state secretary to the

minister of defense, pointed to the fact that the Iraq war, after

all, has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths in Europe, in the

Middle East, in North Africa, and that the Chilcot Commission,

which from our standpoint was a relative cover-up, but

nevertheless, pointed to the fact that Tony Blair had willfully,

intentionally exaggerated the danger coming from Iraq and Saddam

Hussein at the time. And then [Bush Secretary of State] Colin

Powell used the MI6 “dodgy dossier” [on Iraq’s alleged WMD] from

that period, to argue in the UN for the U.S. joining the Iraq

War.

I mean, the fact that governments can do these things which

cost — really — if you look at the totality of these wars,

millions of people’s lives, and then, it just goes by and there

is no accountability.  And it’s a complete hypocrisy and

duplicity, when the people who are saying that they are the

defenders of human rights and democracy, then go around and make

these interventions into sovereign countries, which have these

horrible results.  And then they are self-righteous and pretend

that they are the good ones, and the Russians and the Chinese are

the bad ones.

I think we need to have, really, a review of this, because

this cannot continue.  It is very dangerous to world peace.

 

SCHLANGER:  And another aspect of this is that this was a

major feature of President Trump’s election campaign in 2016,

where he, at a very important debate in South Carolina, openly

accused George W. Bush of lying to create the Iraq War, and he

said that his administration would oppose these kinds of wars.

Now, this week the President announced that he’s preparing

to remove U.S. troops from Syria, despite demands from some in

the military, and the CIA, that the U.S. remain in Syria.

Helga, this is a fairly significant departure from the

standard Bush/Obama policy of pursuing these wars, isn’t it?

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Oh, yes!  And, again, you can see certain

representatives of the U.S. military and others, who say, “no,

no, we still have a lot of fighting to do against ISIS,” but

Trump I think is clearly sticking to guns, and he has promised to

stop the interventionist wars, and I think he is going very far

to do so.  Especially, if you consider that in in this middle of

this whole hysteria, he telephoned President Putin, and has

reiterated that he wants to have a summit with Putin in the near

future.  And he was also meeting with the three Presidents of the

Baltic countries, who as everybody knows are extremely

anti-Russians, and he reiterated that to have a good relationship

with Russia “is a good thing and not a bad thing.”

So I think people should really review their slanders, or

their believing the slanders against both Trump, Putin and Xi

Jinping because it comes from the same circles:  it comes from

the neo-con/neo-liberal geopolitical faction who are seeing that

their system is clearly in bad shape and who are obviously

stopping short of nothing, if you look at this recent affair.

 

SCHLANGER:  You mentioned earlier the Moscow International

Security Conference.  Clearly, there’s a discussion going on

there, about something that your husband Lyndon LaRouche brought

up many, many years ago, and that you’ve been calling for, which

is the establishment of a new security architecture.  How is this

proceeding in Moscow?  Do you have some reports on what the

discussion process has been, there?

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think it’s an extremely important event.

There are 95 countries represented, 840 guests, 700 media; and

obviously, this  alone speaks to the fact that Russia is very far

from being isolated, as some people in the West are trying to

portray.

The discussions were very focussed on the need to have an

international alliance to combat terrorism.  There was a warning

by the head of the FSB [Alexander Bortnikov], that there are

signs that ISIS and al-Qaeda are merging, and he basically said

this means you will have sleepers and cells in every country

around the globe, and the only way you can defend against that,

is to work together internationally.

Now, another very important aspect of this conference, is

that the Defense Minister of China went to this conference and

made a statement that this was meant as a signal to the West that

the Russian and the Chinese military are in an extremely close

strategic partnership, and that this is meant as a signal to the

West.

So there were many warnings, as I mentioned already, that

the present confrontation is approaching the danger of a Cuban

Missile Crisis, so people are obviously extremely attuned to what

is coming there from the British and their allies.  But on the

other side, it also shows who is talking in favor of

international solidarity, cooperation;  who is addressing the

real dangers of the world:  It is clearly not the West, but it is

clearly Russia, China and the countries that are participating in

this conference.

And again, this is really something people should reflect

about, rather than believing the propaganda.  If you read

{Bildzeitung}, this morning on page 2, they have a picture of

Putin, Erdogan, and Rouhani, and they say this is the “axis of

evil.”  This is ridiculous!  These three countries [Russia,

Turkey, Iran] have collaborated to bring about a solution to the

terrible crisis in Syria, and this is a very good thing.  Now,

not all aspects of the policies of these countries I would

always subscribe to, — I mean, there’s the unresolved tensions

between the Kurds and Erdogan, between Turkey and Greece —  so

not everything is perfect.

But I think on the larger picture, if you think that the

misery of the Syrian people who have had war for seven years [is

being addressed] because of the intervention of these countries,

and not to forget the cooperation between the U.S. and Russian

military under the leadership of Trump and Putin; I think people

should not just fall for these propaganda lines.  Because there

are some people who have suffered with their lives and their

livelihoods and their happiness, as a result of these

[geopolitical] policies, and for Syria, this [intervention] is a

good thing.

 

SCHLANGER:  Especially, this should have meaning for people

in Europe, because in 2015-2016, there was the explosion of the

refugee crisis, and with all the hand-wringing and crocodile

tears that were shed, nothing was done to support the Russian

intervention to stop the war in Syria.  And the fact that the

Russians, the Iranians and the Turkish government were meeting to

discuss this, is something that should be welcomed, as opposed to

a source for criticism.

Now, on the Russia-Turkey cooperation, there was another

aspect to it, because when you deal with these problems in the

real world, there’s always an economic element, and there was

just an agreement between Putin and [Turkish President Recep

Tayyip] Erdogan to move ahead with nuclear energy development.

Helga, this is part of the broader package of the New Silk Road

and economic cooperation that you’ve been talking about, isn’t

it?

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes.  I think the remarks of President

Putin, who was at the opening ceremony of this [Akkuyu] nuclear

plant was to emphasize the extreme importance of nuclear energy,

giving a country cheap and secure energy, and leading to an

increase in the productivity of the entire economy; which is

absolutely the case.  And you have many, many projects, Russia,

China, India, having with developing countries the building of

nuclear energy in Africa, in Latin America, and in Asia.

So, soon, countries like Germany will be the only ones that

will not have nuclear energy, and if they keep this course, they

will be sidelined at the disadvantage of the population.  So, I

think this is really something we should change.

 

SCHLANGER:  The other story that’s getting a lot of coverage

internationally, and I think it’s being covered typically by the

media as a way of trying to drum up war, is this whole argument

that the discussion and the negotiations under way between the

U.S. and China on tariff policy is nothing but a trade war.  Now,

there’s a danger to this, as the Chinese have pointed out, but I

think it’s important for people to hear your perspective on this:

Because obviously, there are problems in the U.S.-China

relationship, a huge trade imbalance, but it’s not just a trade

war, there’s actually a much broader discussion under way.  How

do you see this evolving, from what you’ve seen over the last few

days?

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  There are negotiations going on, and it must

not necessarily come to the execution of these tariffs, which

both sides have now drawn up, up to the value of $60 billion in

terms of products.  One thing is that the Prime Minister Li

Keqiang has pointed out that there is another way to overcome the

trade imbalance: namely by increasing trade, by especially

investments in joint ventures in third countries, that there are

many ways how you can get rid of this trade imbalance.

And there is a renewed discussion, something which we have

brought into the discussion early on, namely, that you have the

possibility of Chinese investments in the infrastructure in the

United States.  And that would also be a way to completely change

this dynamic.  If the Chinese investment in American

infrastructure would create many, many productive jobs for

Americans, it would create the infrastructure precondition for a

real industrial revolution: for the building of new cities,

science cities, connecting all American cities with fast trains

systems.

There are so many ways of changing this dynamic for the

better, and I’m absolutely convinced that China is having this

mind.  There was a program on the Chinese TV channel CGTN,

proposing exactly that, that there should be a dialogue on

infrastructure.  Then you have some Americans, a Trump supporter

who had already made such a proposal early on, also.  So I think

there is a discussion.  And I would imagine that President Xi

Jinping, who will give a very important speech at the “Asian

Davos” as they call it, the Boao Forum for Asia, which will start

in three days, where he is expected to make a major speech on the

continuation on international reforms, and opening up.  So I

think you can expect something important to come from there.

And I think the Chinese are also extremely aware of the fact

that we are sitting on a powder keg in terms the financial

system.  Xi Jinping has defined three priorities:  One, to

overcome the risks of the financial system; to alleviate poverty;

and to get rid of air pollution.  So I think the Chinese are very

much aware of the dangers of this present Western financial

system.  And you know, you had several articles warning that with

the outbreak of a new 2008 could happen at any moment, one of the

many new aspects which were mentioned is the difference between

the LIBOR rate and the Fed rate; and that was exactly the

beginning sign of the 2008 crisis.

So that really requires that the discussion which we and our

colleagues in the United States and in Europe have formulated, to

implement the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche — Glass-Steagall,

national bank, a credit system, and then cooperation of the

Western countries, with the financial systems of the New Silk

Road, the AIIB, the New Silk Road Fund; all of these things need

to be urgently discussed.  Because one danger which is clearly

there, that if you had now a financial crash, and some people are

even speculating that the same people who are making these

provocations against Russia, could also trigger, deliberately,

such a financial crash, to pull the rug out from underneath

President Trump, to bring the neo-cons back in, and just get rid

of this phenomenon of Trump.

So anybody who thinks this is conspiracy theory, or this is

totally over the top, well, look at the Skripal case, and learn

the lesson from that, how things can be manipulated and

orchestrated.

So I think the urgency is really to draw the lesson out from

all of this, and end this system of looting, which is only for

the privilege of the very few rich; it’s destroying the middle

class, it’s making the poor, more poor.  And we need really a

return to Hamiltonian economics.  This is what is the basis of

the Chinese economic miracle, as I have said many times: The

Chinese economic miracle, or Chinese economic model, is much,

much closer to the economic policies of the young republic of the

United States than people think.  It’s no coincidence that the

distinction which Friedrich List, for example, made between the

American System and the British System, that that is exactly what

is playing out today, and we need {clearly} a return to the

American System of economy.

 

SCHLANGER:  It’s also important to keep in mind that

President Trump has repeatedly referred to his great friendship

with Xi Jinping, and the strategic importance of a China-U.S.

relationship is also clear when it comes to the question of the

collaboration to bring a peaceful solution to the Korean

Peninsula. There’s a lot of diplomacy coming up:  The Trump-Putin

meeting; Trump meeting with Prime Minister Abe of Japan; and also

the coming meeting with Kim Jong-un.  So there’s a lot more at

stake here than just the question of a few dollars off the trade

imbalance.

And Helga, just to go back to one final note on the Belt and

Road Initiative:  I’m sure you took note of the importance of the

visit recently of the Swiss government to China and also a very

large delegation heading to China from Austria.  Maybe there’s a

lesson here for Germany, huh?

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Well, one would hope so!

I mean, I’m very happy, because all the neighbors of Germany

are clearly joining the Silk Road, it increases the pressure on

those who are obviously too stupid or too arrogant to see the

potential for German industry which lies in this initiative.

Now, the Swiss Foreign Minister was just in China and he and

his Chinese counterpart, both [Foreign Minister] Wang Yi and also

[former Foreign Minister] Yang Jiechi, they declared that the

collaboration of China and Switzerland in the New Silk Road is at

the best historical level ever, and both emphasized the

importance of Xi Jinping’s visit last year to Switzerland, where

he addressed Davos as a keynote speaker, and then went to Geneva,

emphasizing the importance of Switzerland.  So they’re deepening

the relationship between China and Switzerland.

And the Austrian government, they have a huge delegation,

the largest ever:  It is President Van der Bellen, Chancellor

Sebastian Kurz; four cabinet ministers, and 170 CEOs from large

corporations, spending five days in China.  And what Kurz said

is, there is no ceiling to improve the relationship between

Austria and China on the New Silk Road.  The same, by the way, is

happening with Zimbabwe, where the new President [Emmerson

Mnangagwa] is going with a large delegation of 12 ministers and

also many, many CEOs.  So, you can see almost every day, a little

breaking development.  And as I have said many times, the Spirit

of the New Silk Road is, in my view, absolutely unstoppable,

except if we have World War III, which obviously some people are

risking.

But nevertheless, the idea of a new relationship among

nations, of respect for the sovereignty of the other nation,

respect for the difference of the social system, the ending of

internationalist wars, the idea of a win-win cooperation, this is

just a new model of international relations and a New Paradigm.

And the biggest problem is that because of the Western media

being so much in control of this geopolitical faction that most

people don’t know enough about it.

So, please, I would appeal to you:  Join the Schiller

Institute, help us to spread the knowledge about the New Silk

Road, and also the options to solve the present financial crisis

and many other crises around the world with such an approach.  I

would really appeal to you:  Don’t sit on the fence.  This is an

incredibly important historic moment, and the British have just

suffered a terrible defeat, which freaks them out, but it’s

visible for everybody and so therefore, it’s a good moment to

move forward and establish a completely different political,

social, and economic system on this planet.

 

SCHLANGER:  And we will be launching a new membership drive

for the Schiller Institute, and if you want to increase the

misery of the British intelligence establishment and the City of

London, become a member of the Schiller Institute, and help us

build the audience for these webcasts, so people have an

alternative to the lying media that otherwise is the only option

they have to allegedly find out about the world.

So Helga, I think that covers quite a bit.  Thank you for

joining us again, and we’ll see you next week.

 

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yes.  Till next week.

 

 

Tom Gillesberg: Velkommen til endnu et dramatisk kapitel i kampen om verden; kampen om, hvem der skal regere planeten Jorden og dermed også kan få mulighed for at få en betydende indflydelse på det univers, vi befinder os i, på den lange bane. Det er bare så ufattelig spændende, hvad der foregår netop nu, for på den ene side har vi jo de her absurde tosserier, den seneste af hvilke har været denne her kampagne, man har kørt de seneste par uger med den såkaldte Skripal-sag, hvor ud af det blå pludselig fra London tonede Theresa May frem på Tv-skærmene og sagde, ’Der har været et angreb med biologiske våben her på efterretningsagenter, og vi er sikre på, at det kun kan være Rusland, der har gjort det, og derfor kræver vi af resten af verden, at de nu går sammen med os om at straffe Rusland for denne uhørte, ubehagelig dåd, som de har begået’. Det har jo bl.a. ført til, at USA udviste 60 diplomater, Danmark udviste 2 osv., og vi ligesom er i et kraftigt momentum frem til, at nu skal vi have en konfrontation med Rusland.

Igen, det kommer ikke ud af det blå; det kommer efter man har haft et NATO, som har stået på og drevet på og sagt, nu skal vi mobilisere mod den russiske fare; vi skal have en brigade ovre i Baltikum for at kunne beskytte de baltiske lande mod den store russiske bjørn. Igen og igen har Stoltenberg fra NATO’s talerstol sagt, og vi ved jo godt, at vi er under angreb, og frem for alt cyberangreb; men I skal vide derude, frem for alt jer i Rusland, at vi betragter et cyberangreb på et af vore lande som et angreb, der kan udløse Artikel 5 og derfor være et angreb på hele NATO, så hele NATO må svare igen med alt, hvad de har. Og dermed har man i princippet sagt, at, hvis der er et såkaldt cyberangreb på et NATO-land, så kan det være, at vi svarer igen med atomvåben over for Rusland. Det er ligesom det, man har sagt, og det er vildt, og det er farligt! Og det er helt vanvittigt.

Men, når det så er sagt, så er det også et vanvid, der står mere og mere afsløret for hver dag, der går. Dette sidste vanvid kommer jo efter, at vi nu i over et år har haft en ny amerikansk præsident, Donald Trump, som har haft svært ved at regere, fordi der har været skandale på skandale, der har kørt i medierne mod ham; ’Trump-gate’, ’Russia-gate’ osv., med det fokus at få Trump afsat, så man kunne fortsætte den politik for konfrontation og krig, man havde før, og som Hillary havde svoret, at hun ville fortsætte. Men alle disse skandaler har det til fælles, at deres udspring er London. …

Hør hele Toms analyse:

 

 

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/britisk-pastand-imod-rusland-er-ved-at-smuldre-lnu-kan-vi-besejre-den-britiske-imperium

 

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 4. april, 2018 – De britiske, imperiale Lords befinder sig i choktilstand. Deres hektiske forsøg på at redde Imperiet brasede sammen tirsdag, da forskerne på Porton Down nægtede at lyve for Imperiet – nægtede at sige, at nervegiften i Skripal-sagen kom fra Rusland. Husk, at det var David Kelly, chefen for Afdelingen for Mikrobiologi til Forsvarsformål i Porton Down og medlem af inspektionsteamet i Irak, som afslørede Tony Blairs »udmajede« dossier, der hævdede, at Saddam Hussein havde masseødelæggelsesvåben. Som videnskabsmand nægtede han at lyve. Kelly blev »bragt til selvmord« som resultat, og den ulovlige folkemordskrig fortsatte.

Denne gang er hverken George W. Bush eller Barack Obama til stede for at yde tilsløring af Imperiets løgne. Præsident Trump har, til de britiske og amerikanske oligarkers og pressehorers forfærdelse, nægtet at sige (eller tweete) ét ord om russernes rolle i Skripal-sagen. Han talte med Putin efter hændelsen uden at nævne den og sagde så sent som i går, at, at »komme godt ud af det med Rusland er en god ting, ikke en dårlig ting«.

Imperiet er afsløret og alvorligt såret – men endnu ikke dødt og derfor i stand til hvad som helst for at redde sit skind. I halvtreds år har Lyndon LaRouche advaret amerikanerne og andre om, at Det britiske Imperium ikke er et fænomen fra fortiden, men derimod er centrum i den finansielle udplyndring og spekulation, der har drevet det vestlige finanssystem til randen af ruin, mens det samtidigt manipulerer den »dumme kæmpe« i Washington til at udkæmpe kolonikrige på Imperiets vegne, først i Indokina og dernæst i Mellemøsten. Han har ligeledes advaret om, at Imperiet ville foretrække en global krig, selv en atomkrig, snarere end de ville se deres Imperium forsvinde.

I dag fokuserede Helga Zepp-LaRouche opmærksomheden på denne dødbringende kendsgerning. Russiagate-kampagnen kollapsede, og dens gerningsmænd i MI6 og i Obamas efterretningsteam står nu over for anklager om forbrydelser, for deres forræderiske handlinger. Dernæst lancerede Theresa Mays controllers Skripal-hændelsen og krævede, at de vestlige nationer skulle gå med i beskyldningerne mod Rusland, uden noget som helst bevis. Kun halvdelen af de europæiske nationer gik med til det, og, alt imens Trump gav sin administration lov til at udvise russiske diplomater, så lagde han ikke selv nogen skyld på russerne og annoncerede, at Moskva kunne erstatte deres diplomater.

Men nu har UK’s egne eksperter i kemiske våben afsløret de onde og farlige løgne, der kommer fra premierminister May og hendes klovn af en udenrigsminister Boris Johnson. I dag hersker der hysteri i London. Vil Imperiet ty til endnu mere desperate handlinger ved at starte en krig? Vil de bruge det forestående kollaps af den multi-billiondollar store boble i det vestlige finanssystem, som de har skabt, til at gøre dette?

LaRouches politiske platform – for en genindførsel af metoderne i det Amerikanske Økonomiske System og for videnskabeligt fremskridt i USA, og for USA’s tilslutning til den Nye Silkevej, hvor det arbejder sammen med Kina og Rusland i opbygningen af nationer i hele verden, som USA engang erklærede – må vedtages og kæmpes for nu, i dag, af alle mennesker af god vilje. Imperiet er tæt på at lide nederlag, men er farligere end nogensinde før.

Foto: Dr. David Kelly. »Begik selvmord« efter at have aflagt forklaring imod Blairs »udmajede« dossier, som førte til Irakkrigen.

Jason Ross: Ingen forstår briterne bedre end Lyndon LaRouche. Alt imens Storbritannien ikke længere hersker over havene eller verden med skibe, fly og imperiehære, så inficerer deres måde at tænke på kulturer i hele verden og former den måde, hvorpå folk analyserer og opfatter virkeligheden. Storbritannien udøver også magtfuld kontrol over verdens finanssystem gennem City of London og deres indflydelse over Wall Street. De har haft utrolig succes med at bondefange vore eliter til at være overbevist om, at amerikansk råstyrke med britisk hjerne bør kontrollere verden.

Men, hvor mange flere amerikanske liv skal ofres, og hvor mange flere ofre for unødvendige, geopolitiske krige skal dø og lide i hele verden på vegne af britiske, geopolitiske strategier, før vi udrydder dette barbariske system?

Lad os lytte til LaRouche:

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 

Xi Jinping har, i alle sine skrifter, i alle sine taler, understreget, at dette »fællesskab for menneskehedens fælles fremtid« er baseret på total respekt for det andets lands suverænitet, total respekt for den andens samfundssystem, og der kommer ingen bestræbelse på at påtvinge noget andet land den kinesiske model. Det er ganske enkelt, at Kina har tilbudt især udviklingslandene at hjælpe dem til at overvinde deres underudvikling. Det er et win-win-samarbejde, hvilket er grunden til, at 140 lande i mellemtiden samarbejder med dette, for det er naturligvis i Kinas interesse – for det er en stor befolkning, et stort land, en meget rig kultur, 5.000 års meget rig kulturtradition, så det er et af verdens store lande, og måske endda det vigtigste, i betragtning af dets befolknings størrelse.

Men de påtvinger ikke nogen det, de anser for at være »kinesiske karaktertræk« – helt forskelligt fra de neokonservative og de neoliberale, der havde regimeskifte, ’farvede revolutioner’, eksport af ’demokrati’ og det, de kalder »menneskerettigheder«. Folk bør virkelig ikke være fordomsfulde, men bør se på det med friske øjne, selv læse Xi Jinpings taler. …

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

 

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 28. marts, 2018 – Farcen med premierminister Theresa Mays krav om, at verden skal bøje sig for den britiske krone og acceptere den åbenlyse løgn, at Rusland gennemførte en »ulovlig magthandling« mod UK samtidig med, at Kongeriget nægter at fremlægge så meget som antydningen af bevis, overbeviser ikke mange borgere i USA eller Europa og stort set ingen uden for NATO. Organisatorer fra LaRouche-bevægelsen i USA, Tyskland (Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet; BüSo) og andre steder finder, at der er et dramatisk skift i befolkningens respons, siden PM May lancerede sin kampagne for krig med Rusland. De svigagtige britiske anklager mod Rusland – som minder stort set alle om Tony Blairs løgne om Iraks masseødelæggelsesvåben, og om denne løgns forfærdelige konsekvenser – er begyndt at vække et spirende had til denne imperieholdning, som udstråler fra briterne og fra de spytslikkere for briterne, som i 16 år sad på det amerikanske præsidentskab, før valget af Trump.

Lad os se på timingen i dette fupnummer:

• MI6-kampagnen for at bringe USA’s præsident til fald gennem »Russiagate« er ikke alene kollapset, men dens gerningsmænd i FBI, CIA og blandt de neokonservative i både det Republikanske og Demokratiske parti, står nu selv over for mulige anklager for kriminelle handlinger for deres løgne, læk, ulovlige brug af føderale myndigheder og mere endnu.
• Theresa Mays regering hang i en tynd tråd, alt imens Labour-partiets leder Jeremy Corbyn blev set som en sandsynlig vinder, hvis der blev udskrevet valg.
• De kombinerede britisk/Obama-bestræbelser på at vælte regeringen i Syrien og overgive landet til kaos under krigsførende terrorgrupper, ligesom i Irak og Libyen, er blevet alvorligt undermineret af præsident Trumps åbne samarbejde med Rusland omkring udslettelse af terroristerne.
• Flere europæiske nationer har afvist dæmoniseringen af Rusland, og Italien befinder sig i processen med at danne en ny regering, som sandsynligvis vil afvise europæiske sanktioner mod Rusland i det hele taget.

Så briterne forsøger at gøre det, de plejer at gøre qua deres imperienatur – opfinde en krise, der kan retfærdiggøre krig, få USA til at stå i spidsen og tyrannisere deres fordums »allierede« til underkastelse.

Men, planen virker ikke så godt. Alt imens det er sandt, at Trump-administrationen gik med i masseudvisningen af russiske diplomater, så er det imidlertid klart for briterne, at Trump ikke vil opgive sine planer om at arbejde sammen med præsident Putin. Hans telefonopringning til Putin 20. marts, hvor de diskuterede løsninger på globale problemer uden at nævne den britiske Skripal-sag med ét eneste ord, slog Dronningen og hendes britiske Lords med rædsel, såvel som også den ynkelige Theresa ’M’ May, og som alle ser skriften på væggen: Enden på selve Imperiet.

Næsten et dusin europæiske lande har nægtet at udvise nogen russiske diplomater og har krævet først at se beviser. Briterne har omdelt seks power point-slides som »bevis«, som ikke var andet end en liste over deres svigagtige anklager om russisk »aggression«. Ligesom Christopher Steele-dossieret, vil anklagerne måske narre nogle, for en tid; men briternes troværdighed er slidt ned.

Men, hvad der er meget vigtigt, så har millioner af mennesker i løbet af de seneste halvtreds år hørt Lyndon LaRouche advare om, at USA er blevet holdt for nar af briterne, med at udkæmpe deres kolonikrige siden Vietnam og med at gennemføre deres finanspolitikker med det »frie marked«, på bekostning af det Amerikanske System for dirigeret kredit til industriudvikling. Alt imens mange har fundet dette vanskeligt at tro på, så ser de pludselig de afskyelige løgne og Londons lige så afskyelige politik for anstiftelse af krige, og de reflekterer over, hvem, det var, der i alle disse år fortalte sandheden.

For en gangs skyld er briterne blevet tvunget til at stå i spidsen af deres fupnummer i deres eget navn – og det er deres sårbare punkt. Trumps plan om at arbejde sammen med Putin og med Xi Jinping og afslutte imperie-æraen for krige for regimeskifte og truslen om en atomar udslettelse, må støttes og fuldt og helt gennemføres, og det omgående.

Foto: Dronningen og Prinsen af Wales forlader parlamentet efter dronningens tale, 2017.  Copyright House of Lords 2017 / Photography by Roger Harris. This image is subject to parliamentary copyright. www.parliament.uk

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 27. marts, 2018 – For enhver, der ikke er en sinke, er den modbydelige natur af premierminister Theresa Mays og kohorters Skripal-forgiftnings- og anti-Ruslandsmobilisering en åbenlys »Great Game«-manøvre for at forhindre den potentielle realisering af en amerikansk-russisk hældning over mod »Nye Silkevejsrelationer«, for fred og for udvikling. Hele Mays anti-russiske, internationale mobilisering er blot en ny fase af det igangværende Trump-gate kupforsøg, med det formål at bringe det amerikanske præsidentskab til fald. Briterne er ligeledes i centrum for gennemførelsen af denne fase: MI6, Christopher Steele, Richard Dearlove, Sir Andrew Wood, Robert Mueller og andre håndlangere.

Der er ingen legale belæg for Theresa Mays kampagne for at anklage Rusland for forgiftningen i Salisbury den 4. marts – ingen beviser, ingen analyse, ingen juridiske standarder. May selv var politisk på vej ned og ud, inden for ganske få dage, indtil denne beskidte operation blev lanceret; og nu forventes verden at hylde hende som en »anti-Ruslands-heltinde«.

»Det er modbydeligt; det er usikkert«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag og bemærkede, at dette tydeligvis er briterne, der anstifter konfrontation. »Vi kan få det til at give bagslag«, sagde hun. Hold fast i sandheden og brug ethvert middel til at afsløre den onde hensigt og dens gerningsmænd.

Det er rent strategisk meget vigtigt, at den russiske viceudenrigsminister Sergei Ryabkov i dag gentog, at den forpligtelse stadig er aktiv, som fornylig blev indgået af den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin og præsident Donald Trump, til en dialog om stabilitet og sikkerhed. Det forholder sig således, på trods af gårsdagens amerikanske, pro-britiske ordre til udvisning af 60 russiske diplomater og lukning af det russiske konsulat i Seattle. Ryabkov sagde i dag, rapportret i Sputnik, »Vi har brug for denne dialog, præsidenterne for vore lande talte om det i en telefonsamtale for et par dage siden. Vi opgiver ikke denne dialog, vi vil bevare den.« Herudover fordømte Ryabkov USA’s udvisninger.

I løbet af de seneste 24 timer har ledere i andre lande udtalt sig imod denne briternes ’udsmidning af bumser’. Den østrigske kansler Sebastian Kurz sagde i dag, at hans nation ikke ville udvise russiske diplomater. Han sagde, at Østrig traditionelt er et neutralt land; det er en bro mellem Øst og Vest. Diplomater er velkomne og nødvendige i Østrig.

Der høres også udtalelser imod det britiske/EU-fremstød for konfrontation med Rusland internt i selv Tyskland, og ligeledes i Italien. Det rapporteres, at på EU-topmødet for statsoverhoveder i Bruxelles den 22.-23. marts, fremlagde May og den tyske kansler Angela Merkel krav om nye, skrappe sanktioner mod Rusland, men at dette blev blokeret som værende forkert af den italienske premierminister Paolo Gentiloni. Dernæst rejste han hjem, og på trods af, at han er afgående leder, udviste han to russiske diplomater og demonstrerede således det intense pres, der lægges på de europæiske ledere af briterne og deres kohorter internt i USA. Denne handling blev prompte fordømt af andre i Italien som værende forkert og som en »præmatur« dom.

Torsdag vil Trump besøge det nordøstlige Ohio for at tale om infrastruktur. Dette er i hjertet af Rustbæltet, som ville blive transformeret til et kraftcenter under betingelser, der afgøres af USA’s samarbejde med USA og Rusland og Kina under Bælte & Vej Initiativet, og med LaRouches Fire Love.

Foto: Premierminister Theresa May mødtes med præsident Trump på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum, 25. jan., 2018.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 26. marts, 2018 – Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har hen over de seneste 35 år spillet en hovedrolle i udformningen af relationer mellem nationer til det bedre: gennem LaRouches idé til præsident Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI) fra 1983, og gennem »LaRouche-doktrinen« for stormagtsrelationer, som ledsagede denne idé; og gennem deres kampagne fra 1989 for den »Eurasiske Landbro«, som sluttelig bidrog til Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, der nu udvikler mange nationer i hele verden. Hele vejen igennem var fjenderne af disse tiltag hen mod et nyt paradigme for udvikling, City of Londons finansimperium og britisk geopolitik.[1]

Denne tidligere, hyppigt skjulte virkelighed er pludselig, på dramatisk vis, blevet åbenlys. Den britiske premierminister Theresa May og udenrigsminister Boris »bondske« Johnson har tyranniseret USA og 14 europæiske nationer ind i en eskalerende konfrontation med Rusland, der tilsigter at ødelægge stormagtssamarbejde for fremskridt gennem projekterne i Bælte & Vej, og som meget hurtigt kan føre til verdenskrig.

I går understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at London har gjort dette som en reaktion på miskrediteringen af det af britisk efterretning styrede Russiagate-kupforsøg mod præsident Donald Trump. Hun sprængte den udokumenterede sag om »russisk nervegift« som værende intet andet end Russiagate fortsat, genopfundet og genoplivet. Denne sags foreløbige succes, efter at Russiagate mod Trump var slået fejl, er ekstremt farlig, sagde hun. Både Kina og Rusland vil reagere på denne ændrede, transatlantiske dagsorden.

Kina har, gennem sin præsident Xi Jinping og sine partiorganer som Global Times, indset, at Kinas fredelige opkomst, konfronteret med et sandt stormløb af britisk geopolitisk og økonomisk krigsførelse, måske ikke vil få lov at blive let eller fredelig.

Men Kina har udløst en udviklingsdynamik og hæver produktivitet og levestandarder i mange nationer, såvel som i sin egen, og bruger et nyt koncept, som Lyndon LaRouche for 30 år siden kaldte »Verdenslandbro-udviklingen«. Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ tiltrækker nu også nationer fra selv Vesteuropa. Dets lederskab vil ikke lade sig standse af toldkrig eller investeringsembargo; i stedet anvender det dette nye paradigme for at stoppe dem.

Som Helga LaRouche udtrykte det, så er Kina omsider i færd med at feje Londons århundredelange Malthus-politik og nulsums-geopolitik til side; og Kina erstatter det med et Nyt Paradigme for gensidig fordel for nationer, for udryddelse af fattigdom, videnskabeligt fremskridt og for »et fællesskab for en fælles skæbne«. Lyndon LaRouche har i 50 år insisteret på nødvendigheden af denne udskiftning. Hans LaRouche-bevægelse har fremlagt ammunitionen til overvindelse af angrebene mod præsident Trump, som kommer fra britisk efterretning, og for de tiltag for en økonomisk politik, der kan virkeliggøre Amerikas fremtid på den »Nye Silkevej«.

[1] Se Harley Schlangers præsentation af geopolitikken historie, fra serien, ’Hvad er det Nye Paradigme’ (video; dansk pdf.)

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump i samtale med britiske PM Theresa May under et bilateralt møde i det ovale kontor, 27. januar, 2017. Premierminister May var det første statsoverhoved, der aflagde statsbesøg i Det Hvide Hus. (Official White House Photo)

Vært Matthew Ogden: Det er i dag den 23. marts, 2018, en meget gunstig dato: Det er nemlig 35 års dagen for en meget vigtig dato, som var 23. marts, 1983, hvor præsident Ronald Reagan annoncerede vedtagelsen af det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ  (SDI; Strategic Defense Initiative). I dag er det et meget passende tidspunkt for at bedømme den stadigt mere presserene nødvendige vedtagelse af en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur for planeten, og den samtidige nye økonomiske arkitektur, som må ledsage den.

Vi befinder os i et meget dramatisk øjeblik i verdenshistorien, og jeg mener, at, hvis vi træder et skridt tilbage og ser på det store billede, så står det klart, at verdensordenen, som vi har kendt den i de seneste 70 år, er i færd med at undergå en total transformation. Og udfaldet af de strategiske kampe, der raser netop nu, både på den nationale scene her i USA, men især på den globale scene; udfaldet af disse strategiske kampe vil afgøre menneskehedes historie i mange generationer fremover.

Med de begivenheder, der har fundet sted i løbet af de seneste tre uger, siden den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin den 1. marts annoncerede, at Rusland havde udviklet en helt ny generation af strategiske våben, baseret på avancerede fysiske [principper], og som er i stand til at gennemtrænge alle kendte forsvarssystemer, har vi set, hvor dramatisk nødvendigt det er, med det presserende i en sådan ny sikkerhedsarkitektur. Ikke én, der bygger på Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD; garanteret gensidig ødelæggelse), men derimod én, der bygger på win-win-overlevelse og økonomisk fremskridt for alle nationer på denne planet; nødvendigheden heraf bliver i stigende grad mere presserende. Jeg vil gerne fremhæve, hvad præsident Putin selv sagde i denne tale 1. marts til den føderale forsamling:

Han sagde:

» … lad os sætte os ved forhandlingsbordet og sammen udtænke et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation. … Dette er et vendepunkt for hele verden og for dem, der er villige til, og i stand til, at forandre sig; de, der handler og går fremad, vil tage føringen.«

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56957

Men, snarere end klart og nøgternt at vurdere denne ændrede, strategiske virkelighed, med denne game-changing tale af Ruslands præsident, og besvare dette tilbud for at forhandle, med hans ord, »et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation«, for endelig at bringe denne nihilistiske dødsspiral med stadigt mere dødbringende masseudslettelsesvåben til en afslutning; snarere end at gøre dette, har briterne og deres såkaldte »partnere« i Europa forsøgt at oppiske en generel støtte til en krigskonfrontation mod Rusland ved anvendelse af det, Labour-partiets leder, Jeremy Corbyn, meget korrekt karakteriserede som det, han kaldte »fejlbehæftet efterretning« og »uvederhæftige dossiers« af den type, som blev brugt til at retfærdiggøre invasionen af Irak. Og som Jeremy Corbyn advarede om, så bør vi ikke »affinde os med en ny Kold Krig … og en intolerance over for dissens som under McCarthy-perioden«.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går understregede i sin internationale webcast, så har briterne og Theresa May, i deres forsøg på at gennemtvinge en sådan krigsprovokation, overspillet deres hånd. Deres metoder og deres mål står nu afsløret for hele verden at se. På trods af Theresa Mays bestræbelser på at presse præsident Trump over i et hjørne, hvor han ikke ville vove at forsøge at tage skridt, der ville gøre det muligt for ham at honorere sin forpligtelse til at forbedre relationerne med Rusland; snarere end at lade sig blive bakket ind i et hjørne, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde, så udmanøvrerede præsident Trump imidlertid hele operationen ved at tage telefonen og ringe til præsident Putin og lykønske ham med genvalget og hans næste periode som Ruslands præsident, og fortsatte med en meget sober diskussion mellem de to statsoverhoveder om nogle af de meget vigtige, fælles bestræbelser og fælles udfordringer, som disse to nationer, USA og Rusland, sammen konfronteres med; og som, hvis vi fik lov at gøre det, vi kunne arbejde sammen om at løse, såsom krisen i Syrien; såsom muligheden for et totalt gennembrud for fred på Koreahalvøen; såsom den igangværende situation i Ukraine; og meget signifikant, såsom at forhindre et nyt våbenkapløb.

Umiddelbart efter denne telefonsamtale, blev pressen, som I kan tænke jer, hysterisk, og Det Hvide Hus’ pressesekretær Sarah Sanders holdt en pressekonference i briefing-værelset i Det Hvide Hus, hvor hun ikke mindre end et halvt dusin gange understregede den absolutte betydning af at opretholde en dialog mellem USA og Rusland på lederskabsniveau, omkring fælles interesser og fælles udfordringer.

Jeg vil afspille nogle eksempler på nogle at disse gentagne udtalelser fra Sarah Sanders på denne pressebriefing i Det Hvide Hus.

 

Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet:

 

SARAH SANDERS:  We want to continue to have a dialogue with
Russia, and continue to talk about some of the shared interests
we have, whether it’s North Korea, Iran, and particularly as the
President noted today, slowing the tensions when it comes to an
arms race, something that is clearly important to both
leaders….
We want to continue to have dialogue so that we can work on
some of the issues that concern both countries, and we’re going
to continue to do that, while also continuing to be tough on a
number of things….
The President once again has maintained that it’s important
for us to have a dialogue with Russia so that we can focus on
some areas of shared interests…
These are conversations that sometimes take place, and
certainly the President finds there to be an importance in having
that dialogue with Russia so that we can talk about some of the
big problems that face the world….
We disagree with the fact that we shouldn’t have
conversations with Russia.  There are important topics that we
should be able to discuss, and that is why the President’s going
to continue to have that dialogue.
Again the focus was to talk about areas of shared interests.
We know that we need to continue a dialogue.  It’s important for
a lot of the safety and security of people across the globe.  We
would like to be able to work with them on things like North
Korea, on Iran, and also both countries shared interest in
lowering the tensions when it comes to an arms race, recognizing
that that’s not the best thing for either country, and so we want
to be able to have those conversations and that was the point of
today’s call…. [end video]

OGDEN:  So, that’s a very clear message, obviously.  Now, on
the same day, President Trump himself reiterated exactly the same
points in a couple of tweets that he posted, and I would like to
just read you those tweets.  He said:
“I called President Putin of Russia to congratulate him on
his election victory (in past, Obama called him also).  The Fake
News Media is crazed because they wanted me to excoriate him.
They are wrong!  Getting along with Russia (and others) is a good
thing, not a bad thing.”
“They can help solve problems with North Korea, Syria,
Ukraine, ISIS, Iran, and even the coming Arms Race.  Bush tried
to get along, but didn’t have the ‘smarts.’  Obama and Clinton
tried, but didn’t have the energy or chemistry (remember RESET).
PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH!” he concludes.
Now of course that final phrase is a quotation directly from
President Ronald Reagan.   And this direct reference is a very
timely one, and perhaps is not merely a coincidental one:  As I
said, today, March 23rd, is the 35th anniversary of one of the
groundbreaking moments in modern history, and it’s one which
completely reshaped the global, strategic geometry at that time,
and which remains immediately relevant all the way up to the
present day.
That moment, March 23rd, 1983 was representative of a
complete shock, a shock wave which was felt around the world.
This was the surprise announcement by President Ronald Reagan at
the conclusion of a live, national television broadcast which was
an address to the nation, nominally on national security.  But
what President Reagan did at the conclusion of that broadcast, to
the surprise of almost all of his leading advisors in the White
House even, was to announce what came to be known as the
Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI, what President Reagan
called a “vision of the future, which offers hope.”
In the speech, what President Reagan did was that he
committed the United States to a crash program, a crash
scientific program for the development of advanced technologies
which would be based on new physical principles to
(quote/unquote) “free the world from the threat of nuclear war.”
And so, in so doing, President Reagan completely overthrew the
ideology of retaliatory nuclear deterrence through the threat of
instantaneous, total nuclear response in the event of the
detection of a nuclear attack against the territory of the United
States.  This was what was so-called Mutually Assured Destruction
(MAD).
President Reagan completely rejected the very premise of
Mutually Assured Destruction and in so doing, Reagan shocked the
world, and truly did change the course of world history.  So,
right now, why don’t we wind the clock back 35 years, and listen
to what the world heard on that night, March 23rd, 1983:

My fellow Americans, thank you for sharing your time with me
tonight.
The subject I want to discuss with you, peace and national
security, is both timely and important. Timely, because I’ve
reached a decision which offers a new hope for our children in
the 21st century…
The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple
premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never
be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and
defend against aggression — to preserve freedom and peace.
Since the dawn of the atomic age, we’ve sought to reduce the
risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking
genuine arms control. “Deterrence” means simply this: making
sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States,
or our allies, or our vital interests, concludes that the risks
to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he
won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our strength;
weakness only invites aggression.
This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works.
But what it takes to maintain deterrence has changed. It took one
kind of military force to deter an attack when we had far more
nuclear weapons than any other power; it takes another kind now
that the Soviets, for example, have enough accurate and powerful
nuclear weapons to destroy virtually all of our missiles on the
ground. Now, this is not to say that the Soviet Union is planning
to make war on us. Nor do I believe a war is inevitable — quite
the contrary. But what must be recognized is that our security is
based on being prepared to meet all threats.
There was a time when we depended on coastal forts and
artillery batteries, because, with the weaponry of that day, any
attack would have had to come by sea. Well, this is a different
world, and our defenses must be based on recognition and
awareness of the weaponry possessed by other nations in the
nuclear age….
Now, thus far tonight I’ve shared with you my thoughts on
the problems of national security we must face together. My
predecessors in the Oval Office have appeared before you on other
occasions to describe the threat posed by Soviet power and have
proposed steps to address that threat. But since the advent of
nuclear weapons, those steps have been increasingly directed
toward deterrence of aggression through the promise of
retaliation.
This approach to stability through offensive threat has
worked. We and our allies have succeeded in preventing nuclear
war for more than three decades. In recent months, however, my
advisors, including in particular the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have
underscored the necessity to break out of a future that relies
solely on offensive retaliation for our security.
Over the course of these discussions, I’ve become more and
more deeply convinced that the human spirit must be capable of
rising above dealing with other nations and human beings by
threatening their existence. Feeling this way, I believe we must
thoroughly examine every opportunity for reducing tensions and
for introducing greater stability into the strategic calculus on
both sides….
Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are
we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by
applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly
lasting stability? I think we are. Indeed, we must.
After careful consultation with my advisors, including the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, I believe there is a way. Let me share
with you a vision of the future which offers hope. It is that we
embark on a program to counter the awesome Soviet missile threat
with measures that are defensive. Let us turn to the very
strengths in technology that spawned our great industrial base
and that have given us the quality of life we enjoy today.
What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that
their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S.
retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and
destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own
soil or that of our allies?
I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may
not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current
technology has attained a level of sophistication where it’s
reasonable for us to begin this effort….
I clearly recognize that defensive systems have limitations
and raise certain problems and ambiguities. If paired with
offensive systems, they can be viewed as fostering an aggressive
policy, and no one wants that. But with these considerations
firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our
country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great
talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us
the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and
obsolete.
Tonight, consistent with our obligations of the ABM treaty
and recognizing the need for closer consultation with our allies,
I’m taking an important first step. I am directing a
comprehensive and intensive effort to define a long-term research
and development program to begin to achieve our ultimate goal of
eliminating the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles. This
could pave the way for arms control measures to eliminate the
weapons themselves. We seek neither military superiority nor
political advantage. Our only purpose — one all people share —
is to search for ways to reduce the danger of nuclear war.
My fellow Americans, tonight we’re launching an effort which
holds the promise of changing the course of human history. There
will be risks, and results take time. But I believe we can do it.
As we cross this threshold, I ask for your prayers and your
support.
Thank you, good night, and God bless you. [end video]

OGDEN:  That was 35 years ago today.
Now, just as a side note, incidentally, President Trump is
not ignorant of this history.  In 1999, far before he ever was a
candidate for President, in a an interview with none other than
Wolf Blitzer on CNN, President Trump actually addressed what he
thought of as the necessity for the Strategic Defense Initiative,
but also the necessity for sitting down and having talks to work
out the tensions between the United States and Russia.  Here’s
just a quick quote from President Trump.  He said:
“As far as nuclear is concerned, this country, us, we need a
shield….”
Wolf Blitzer said, “A Strategic Defense Initiative?”
And Trump affirmed that, saying, “Because Russia is
unstable. We need a missile defense shield.  People used to
criticize Reagan, but now it’s very developable.  We need a
shield…. We need a change.  The ABM Treaty was 1972.  Who knew
what technology would develop?  We have to sit down with the
Russians and many others.”
So, that was just a side note.  That was Nov. 28, 1999.  But
as I think you can see, now-President Trump remains committed to
that inclination to sit down with the Russians and many others —
North Korea, for example; and to resolve these nuclear threats.
If you just go back again to that date in 1983, this was 35
years ago.  In President Reagan’s own words, he said that what he
announced that night would, indeed, change the course of world
history; and it did.  And, it took most of the world completely
by surprise.  But, it didn’t come out of nowhere, and this
history is very important for viewers to understand.
Let me just read you a portion of what Lyndon LaRouche had
to say at that time.  This is a statement that he issued the
morning following that historic speech, so this is from March 24,
1983.  What Mr. LaRouche had to say was the following:
“Only high-level officials of government, or a private
citizen as intimately knowledgeable of details of the
international political and strategic situation as I am
privileged to be, can even begin to foresee the Earth-shaking
impact the President’s television address last night will have
throughout the world…. [T]he words the President spoke last
night can never be put back into the bottle. Most of the world
will soon know, and will never forget that policy announcement.
With those words, the President has changed the course of modern
history.
“Today I am prouder to be an American than I have been since
the first manned landing on the Moon. For the first time in 20
years, a President of the United States has contributed a public
action of great leadership, to give a new basis for hope for
humanity’s future to an agonized and demoralized world. True
greatness in an American President touched President Ronald
Reagan last night; it is a moment of greatness never to be
forgotten.”
So that was Lyndon LaRouche, March 24, 1983.  Now, as
LaRouche alluded to in that statement, he was no bystander or
casual observer of the events of that night President Reagan
announced the SDI.  In fact, the grand idea behind what Reagan
announced that night, came directly from none other than Lyndon
LaRouche himself.  I would like to play for you a brief excerpt
of Mr. LaRouche, in his own words, speaking about the background
to what had shocked the world that night — March 23, 1983.  This
is taken from a video that LaRouche PAC published about ten years
ago, back in 2008, on the 25th anniversary of the SDI speech.
The video was titled “A Brief History of Lyndon LaRouche’s SDI.”
So, let’s listen to what Mr. LaRouche had to say in that video.

LYNDON LAROUCHE

:  I had been organizing the SDI
operation, including initially from 1977, long before it was
called an SDI.  I was the one who said, “We’re going to make a
project of this thing.”  So, I adopted this and stated this as my
program in 1979, when I was running as a Presidential candidate.
Then, I had this conservation with Reagan, and then as a
follow-up after he was President, we had a follow-up with various
people in the Reagan circle; including his National Security
Council.  I was working with the head of the National Security
Council on this operation, and with people from the CIA and this
and that.  I was sworn to this and sworn to that, so I was doing
the whole thing.  The SDI was my work, which they liked.  And
there was a faction, including the President, who liked it.  He
liked it because he was against, he always hated Henry Kissinger;
and he hated Henry Kissinger particularly because of the
so-called “revenge weapons.”  The idea that you build super
weapons, and if somebody throws a bomb at you, you obliterate the
planet.  That is not considered a good defense, and he was
against that.  When he saw from experts that what I was saying
was accepted experts — military and others — and this was
French intelligence, the leadership of the Gaullist faction in
France; this was the leadership of the German military; this was
the leadership of the Italian military, and all over the world.
So, I was the creator of the SDI.  Reagan liked it, he adopted
it.  I was creating the thing in direct cooperation during the
entire period, with the cooperation of the National Security
Council and the heads of the CIA.  People recognized that I was
right; I had the scientific capability and knowledge to do it,
and we were doing it.

OGDEN:  So, that’s the story in Lyndon LaRouche’s own words.
That is merely the tip of a very fascinating iceberg.  We
encourage you to watch that full video that I cited that that
excerpt was taken from.  But also, to visit the page on the
LaRouche PAC website which gives you the full background of this
story.  As you can see there, the link is larouchepac.com/sdi.
That gives you this full, historic background.  But as you heard
Mr. LaRouche say there in that video clip, this effort on his
part to craft the idea of what then became adopted by the
President of the United States in the form of the SDI, this
effort went all the way back to the mid-1970s.  Here’s an image
of a campaign pamphlet which was commissioned by Lyndon LaRouche,
titled “Sputnik of the ’70s: The Science behind the Soviets’ Beam
Weapon.”  In this pamphlet, Lyndon LaRouche called for an
international crash program to develop a space-based missile
defense system based on new physical principles.  A Manhattan
project-style mission which would provide the economic driver to
fuel global development.  The pamphlet proposed .”.. Long-range
economic and scientific collaboration with the Soviet Union,
among other nations, which would eliminate the danger of world
obliteration,” and it emphasized .”.. Tremendous revolutionary
industrial implications available to this nation and the world if
the political will of the United States forces a recommitment to
technological progress in the form of an International
Development Bank and its national concomitant Third National
Bank.”
So, as you can see, Lyndon LaRouche’s idea of this missile
defense system, was always framed around the idea of not
unilateral defense systems, but rather, a joint missile defense
and joint scientific and economic collaboration between the
United States and the Soviet Union.  To do so, would be to
unleash the revolutionary industrial and economic implications of
such technological breakthroughs as the basis for a new
international, economic order; something which he had been
involved in all the way back to at least 1971 when he first
issued the proposal for a new International Development Bank —
the so-called IDB.  So you can see in LaRouche’s idea, the kernel
of what became the SDI, always had with it a new international
security architecture, overthrowing this entire reign of terror
of Mutually Assured Destruction and revenge weapons.  But
concomitantly, a new international economic order, which would be
driven by the revolutionary, unprecedented economic boom that
would come out of the progress associated with such technological
breakthroughs around these new physical principles in the
collaboration of US and Soviet scientists to develop this joint
missile defense to make International Ballistic Missile and
nuclear war impotent and obsolete.
The history is as fascinating as it is extensive.  Here is
not the time or the place to go through every single aspect of
this history; but the full background, again as I said is
available on that webpage — larouchepac.com/sdi.  But if you
fast forward from that pamphlet “Sputnik of the ’70s” all the way
to the lead-up into the 1980 Presidential campaign in which
Lyndon LaRouche himself was a candidate for President of the
United States.  Let’s take a look at a picture here of Lyndon
LaRouche meeting face-to-face with then-candidate Ronald Reagan
at a candidates’ forum that took place in Concord, New Hampshire.
During this face-to-face meeting and in several other
opportunities to interface with the Reagan campaign team, Lyndon
LaRouche presented this idea, in principle and in detail.
Following Reagan’s victory and his election, Lyndon LaRouche and
representatives of his organization, were brought in for meetings
with first the Reagan Presidential transition team, and then with
leading members of the National Security Council and Reagan’s
intelligence community.  They discussed LaRouche’s idea for this
new strategic doctrine, and the related scientific and energy
policies that would go along with it.  So, Lyndon LaRouche
commissioned numerous reports and campaign pamphlets promoting
this idea.  As you can see here, this is from {Fusion}; this is a
special report titled “Directed Energy Beams; A Weapon for
Peace.”  Here’s the next one; this is an edition of the
{Executive Intelligence Review} magazine from November 30, 1982.
Again, before the March 23, 1983 announcement of the SDI.  This
was titled “Beam Weapons: The Science to Prevent Nuclear War.”
Here’s another one; this is a pamphlet.  “How Beam Weapon
Technologies Can Reverse the Depression.”  So, all along, this
was always an economic idea from Lyndon LaRouche’s standpoint.
As you can see, being an American at this point, in the years
preceding the 1980 Presidential election and then coming out of
Reagan’s victory, 1980, ’81, ’82, the idea of this Beam Defense
system which would be based on new physical principles, was
associated — including in the popular mind — it was associated
with Lyndon LaRouche.  And it had been associated with Lyndon
LaRouche for at least half a decade prior to Reagan’s historic,
groundbreaking speech.
The morning after Reagan’s March 23rd address, the media was
scrambling to try to find experts to interview to explain what it
was that Reagan had presented the night before.  Naturally, they
had to turn to representatives of the LaRouche organization.
Here’s a photograph of Paul Gallagher, who was at that time
Executive Director of the Fusion Energy Foundation, appearing on
CBS’ Evening News program on March 24, 1983 — the day following
Reagan’s address — to explain the science behind Reagan’s policy
that had been announced the evening before.
Immediately following Reagan’s address to the nation, Lyndon
LaRouche launched a mass educational campaign to educate the
American people as to what their President had just presented.
He published and commissioned the publication of numerous mass
circulation reports to inform the American people and also
policymakers on the details of how such a program would work.
This image here is an array of different publications that were
issued by the LaRouche movement, supporting Reagan’s announcement
of the Strategic Defense Initiative and detailing the scientific,
the economic, and the military-strategic implications of the
policy.  There you can see one pamphlet — “Support the
President’s Strategic Defense Initiative; Kill Missiles, Not
People.”
As should be very clear, Lyndon LaRouche was in a leading
position of authority following this groundbreaking announcement,
and the influence that his ideas had come to wield put him in a
position of real power inside the political structure of the
Presidency of the United States.  He used that influence to
launch and to escalate on his campaign to completely reorganize
the entire international economic and strategic architecture of
the planet.  Let’s take a look at a document that Lyndon LaRouche
released exactly one year following Reagan’s March 23, 1983
announcement of the SDI program.  This was called “The LaRouche
Doctrine:  Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the United
States and the USSR.”  This was published March 30, 1984.  Let me
read you some excerpts from what Lyndon LaRouche published under
this title “The LaRouche Doctrine.”  He begins by saying:
“The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) The
unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b)
Cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the effect of
promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits
of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all.
“The most crucial feature of present implementation of such
a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary,
economic, and political relations between the dominant powers and
those relatively subordinated nations often classed as
‘developing nations.’ Unless the inequities lingering in the
aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there
can be no durable peace on this planet.
“Insofar as the United States and Soviet Union acknowledge
the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the
planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both,
the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a
common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic
policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of durable
peace between those two powers.
.”.. [T]he general advancement of the productive powers of
labor in all sovereign states, most emphatically so-called
developing nations, requires global emphasis on: a) increasing
globally the percentiles of the labor force employed in
scientific research and related functions of research and
development … b) increasing the absolute and relative scales of
capital-goods production and also
the rate of turnover in capital-goods production; and c)
combining these two factors to accelerate technological progress
in capital-goods outputs.
“Therefore, high rates of export of such capital-goods
output to meet the needs of developing nations are indispensable
for the general development of so-called developing nations: Our
common goal, and our common interest, is promoting both the
general welfare and promoting preconditions of durable peace
between our two powers….
“By supplying increased amounts of high-technology capital
goods to developing nations, the exporting economies foster
increased rates of turnover in their own most advanced
capital-goods sectors of production….
“The importer of such advanced capital goods increases the
productive powers of labor in the economy of the importing
nation. This enables the importing nation to produce its goods at
a lower average social cost, and enables it to provide
better-quality and cheaper goods as goods of payment to the
nations exporting capital goods.
“Not only are the causes of simple humanity and general
peace served by such policies of practice; the arrangement is
equally beneficial to exporting and importing nations….
.”.. [T]he general rate of advancement of the productive
powers of labor is most efficiently promoted by no other policy
of practice.”
Then a little later in the report, he reviews the situation
of strategic tensions between the USSR and the United States.  He
says:
“Since the rupture of the wartime alliance between the two
powers, U.S. military policy toward the Soviet Union has passed
through two phases. The first, from the close of the war until a
point beyond the death of Joseph Stalin, was preparation for the
contingency of what was sometimes named ‘preventive nuclear war.’
The second, emerging over the period from the death of Stalin
into the early period of the administration of President John F.
Kennedy, was based on the doctrines of Nuclear Deterrence and
Flexible Response …
“From approximately 1963 until approximately 1977, it might
have appeared, as it appeared to many, that the doctrines of
Nuclear Deterrence and Flexible Response had succeeded in
preserving a state of restive peace, something called ‘détente,’
between the two powers. This appearance was deceptive; during the
period 1977-83, there was an accelerating deterioration in the
military relationships between the two powers….
“Beginning shortly after the inauguration of President Jimmy
Carter, the deterioration of the military situation
accelerated….
“In response to this direction of developments, the U.S.
public figure Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. proposed that both powers
develop, deploy, and agree to develop and deploy ‘strategic’
defensive, anti-ballistic-missile defense based on ‘new physical
principles.’ This proposal was issued publicly by LaRouche
beginning February 1982; he proposed to U.S.A., Western European,
and Soviet representatives that the development and deployment of
such strategic defensive systems be adopted policy, as a means
for escaping from the ‘logic’ of Nuclear Deterrence….
.”.. The true solution must be found in the domain of
politics and economics, and the further shaping of military
relations between the powers must produce military policies by
each coherent with the direction of development of the needed
political and economic solutions….
“On the part of the United States of America, the government
is committed to avoiding all colonial, imperial, or kindred
endeavors in foreign policy, and to establish, instead, a growing
community of principle among fully sovereign nation-states of
this planet. This shall become a community of principle coherent
with the policies of the articles of this draft memorandum. If
any force should endeavor to destroy that community of principle,
or any member of that community of sovereign nations, the United
States will be prepared to defend that community and its members
by means of warfare, should other means prove insufficient. With
respect to the Soviet Union, the government of the United States
offers the Soviet Union cooperation with itself in service of
these principles, and desires that the Soviet Union might enter
fully into participation within that community of principle….
“Under these conditions, provided that all nations share in
development of the frontiers of scientific research, in
laboratories, and in educational institutions, all nations will
be made capable of assimilating efficiently the technological
by-product benefits of the military expenditures on systems
derived from application of ‘new physical principles.’
“To lend force to this policy, the powers agree to establish
new institutions of cooperation between themselves and other
nations in development of these new areas of scientific
breakthrough for application to exploration of space.
“To this purpose, the powers agree to establish at the
earliest possible time institutions for cooperation in scientific
exploration of space, and to also co-sponsor treaty-agreements
protecting national and multinational programs for colonization
of the Moon and Mars.
“At some early time, the powers shall enter into
deliberations, selecting dates for initial manned colonization of
the Moon and Mars, and the establishment of international space
stations on the Moon and in the orbits of Moon and Mars, stations
to be maintained by and in the common interest and use of space
parties of all nations.
“The powers jointly agree upon the adoption of two tasks as
the common interest of mankind, as well as the specific interest
of each of the two powers: 1) The establishment of full economic
equity respecting the conditions of individual life in all
nations of this planet during a period of not more than 50 years;
2) Man’s exploration and colonization of nearby space as the
continuing common objective and interest of mankind during and
beyond the completion of the first task. The adoption of these
two working-goals as the common task and respective interest in
common of the two powers and other cooperating nations,
constitutes the central point of reference for erosion of the
potential political and economic causes of warfare between the
powers.”
That was known as the “LaRouche Doctrine,” published March
30, 1984.  As you can see, what Lyndon LaRouche outlined in that
document was the basis for exactly what we’re calling now a new
international economic and strategic architecture.  In fact, the
one requires the other.  You cannot have a new strategic
architecture without resolving what Lyndon LaRouche characterized
as the root causes behind the conflict between these nations; the
persisting inequalities between nations.  And you cannot have the
kind of cooperation needed for the common, mutual economic
development and the application of these groundbreaking new
physical principles and the technologies that are derived from
those, without the establishment of a new international economic
order.  Elsewhere in that document, Mr. LaRouche described
exactly how such an economic order must take place; with fixed
exchange rates between currencies, massive credits — both
domestically within countries for the upgrading of the
technological and infrastructure platforms within those nations
— but also, international credit treaty agreements in the form
of what he originally described in 1971 as the International
Development Bank, or the IDB.
As you can see, and I think any astute reader of that
document now, almost 35 years later, that document laid the basis
for what we now see as the so-called “win-win” new economic
paradigm.  This idea of the common benefit of all; mutual
cooperation for joint development; the upgrading of the so-called
“developing” nations, which were still suffering under the
effects of colonialism and post-colonial policy.  So, when
President Xi Jinping of China speaks about “win-win” economic
development and a new community of nations with a shared destiny,
I think that the echoes couldn’t be more clear of what Lyndon
LaRouche himself was describing at that time in the middle of the
1980s, almost 35 years ago today.  When Xi Jinping offers the
United States to join this new “win-win” system, the Belt and
Road Initiative, which is already resolving these persisting
inequalities that the world has been suffering, such as in Africa
or Central and South America.  Or, when President Putin offers to
“sit down at the negotiating table and devise together a new and
relevant system of international security and sustainable
development for human civilization,” we should reflect on what
was laid in that document.  That LaRouche Doctrine now almost 35
years ago today, in the wake of that history-changing
announcement by President Ronald Reagan, at which he called a
spade a spade.  The world could no longer survive under the
dictatorship of Mutually Assured Destruction; that reign of
terror that President Kennedy characterized as the Sword of
Damocles hanging by the slenderest of threads over every man,
woman, and child on this planet, threatening nuclear
annihilation.  What Lyndon LaRouche characterized at that moment
as the “LaRouche Doctrine” is the principle behind the new
economic and new security architecture which must be adopted on
this planet today.  Not as a recipe, not taking everything
exactly as it was said, because clearly of course, the world has
changed; and we must apply the principles that lay at the root of
exactly what Lyndon LaRouche had in mind when he proposed the
Strategic Defense Initiative and when he proposed the subsequent
LaRouche Doctrine, and apply those to evolve necessarily to fit
the specific conditions of today.
One thing that Lyndon LaRouche alluded to explicitly in that
document, was the need for joint cooperation in the colonization
and exploration of space.  In fact, that is the form that the
idea of a revived SDI has actually been taken.  The proposal for
not an SDI, but what’s now called an SDE — the Strategic Defense
of Earth — to literally re-tool the strategic nuclear weapons
with these massive payloads that have been accumulated by the
United States, Russia, also other nations — China and India and
other nations.  To re-tool those nuclear weapons and also the
delivery systems, these high-power intercontinental ballistic
missiles, and also the new technologies that Russia has just
announced.  To re-tool these technologies and have what were
offensive weapons become defensive tools against asteroids and
other threats to planet Earth which we may encounter from outer
space.  While this was proposed under that name, the SDE, by
certain individuals inside Russia about five years ago,
coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the original SDI speech.
What this originally actually came out of, had its origins in the
late 1980s and the early 1990s with the scientist Dr. Edward
Teller.  Teller was actually one of the leading scientific
advisors of President Reagan in the 1980s around the SDI
initiative, but following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Dr.
Edward Teller travelled to Russia and visited some of the leading
science cities that had been involved in developing nuclear
weapons and their delivery systems.  He met with some of the
leading former Soviet scientists, the Russian scientists, and
proposed exactly this.  He proposed the idea of the United States
and Russia saying the Cold War is over; let’s now cease this
policy of aiming our nuclear missiles one against the other, and
let’s now aim them against the common threats that mankind as a
whole faces.  Especially with the latest news of an asteroid
which poses a credible threat — what’s called a “non-zero
threat” — to the Earth in the foreseeable future, which was
just discussed in the  media over the past week, this proposal is
all the more timely and all the more relevant today.
So, what I’d like is to just play an excerpt from Helga
Zepp-LaRouche’s international webcast that she delivered
yesterday.  She takes up exactly this idea, so here’s an excerpt
from Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE

:  I think that the SDI proposal,
which was absolutely not what the media made out of it, calling
it “Star Wars,” and things like that, the SDI proposal of my
husband, Lyndon LaRouche was an absolutely farsighted vision of a
New Paradigm!  And if you read the relevant papers about it,
especially the proposed draft for a dialogue among the
superpowers, which was published one year later, which you can
find in the archives or in the newer {EIR}s. This was a vision
where both superpowers would develop together, new physical
principles which would make nuclear weapons obsolete.  And I
think what Putin announced on March 1st in terms of new physical
principles applied for new weapons systems, is absolutely is in
this tradition. And Putin also asked, now they have to sit down
and we have to negotiate and put together a new security
architecture, including Russia, the United States, China, and the
Europeans.
This was all envisioned by my husband in this famous SDI
proposal, and it was a very far-reaching to dissolve the blocs,
NATO and the Warsaw Pact,  to cooperate instead among sovereign
republics, which is exactly what the New Silk Road dynamic today
represents. And it was also the idea to use a science-driver in
the economy to use the increased productivity of the real economy
for a gigantic technology transfer to the developing sector, in
order to overcome their underdevelopment and poverty.
And this is what we’re seeing today, also, in the
collaboration between China, Russia, and the countries that are
participating in the Belt and Road Initiative.
So I think, in a certain sense, part of this danger of peace
breaking out, that there is right now the very vivid tradition
and actualization of that tradition of the SDI, and I think we
should circulate this proposal by my husband again.  I think we
should enlarge it to become the SDE, the Strategic Defense of the
Earth, because it was just discovered that very soon, another big
asteroid is already taking course on the planet Earth. So we need
to move quickly to the common aims of mankind, and all countries
should cooperate and be a shared community for the one future of
humanity.
This is the New Paradigm which I think is so obvious.  I
mean, if you look at the long arc of history, we {have} to
overcome geopolitics and we have to move to a kind of cooperation
where we put all our forces together to solve those questions
which are a challenge to all of humanity — nuclear weapons,
poverty, asteroids — there are so many areas where we could
fruitfully cooperate — space exploration is one of them.  And I
think we are in a very fascinating moment in history, but we need
more active citizens.  So please contact us, work with us, and
let’s together make a better world.

OGDEN:  So, that was Helga LaRouche’s call to action, and I
think that’s a perfect concluding point for our webcast today, as
we observe this very auspicious date — March 23rd — the 35th
anniversary of President Reagan’s groundbreaking speech
announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative.  Let’s take that
kind of sense of victory and the optimism that indeed, ideas can
change the course of history, and consolidate this New Paradigm;
this new security architecture and new economic architecture for
the planet.  The opportunity is greater than it ever has been
before; but the need is ever more dire.
Thank you for joining me, and please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.

Denne artikel vil udforske den strategiske betydning af betydningsfulde begivenheder i verden, med begyndelse i februar, 2018. Vores formål er præcist at placere Theresa Mays sindssyge bestræbelse den 12.-14. marts på at fabrikere et nyt svindelnummer med »masseødelæggelsesvåben« med anvendelse af de samme folk (MI6-efterretningsgrupperingen omkring Sir Richard Dearlove) og det samme manuskript (en efterretningssvindel med hensyn til masseødelæggelsesvåben), som blev brugt til at trække USA ind i den katastrofale Irakkrig. Svindelnummeret med forgiftningen af Skripal involverer ligeledes direkte den britiske agent, Christopher Steele, den centrale person i det igangværende kup mod Donald Trump. Denne gang er den britiske operation for informationskrig direkte rettet mod at provokere Rusland samtidig med, at de fastholder den amerikanske befolkning og præsident Trump som mål for deres angreb.

Som den ophedede, krigstidslignende mediedækning og hysteriet omkring sagen gør det klart, så synes en vist lag i den britiske elite at være parat til at risikere alt på vegne af det døende imperiesystem. På trods af alt ståhejet, så synes økonomisk krigsførelse og sanktioner at være briternes foretrukne våben. Som vi vil få at se, så afslørede Putin for nylig Vestens atomare bluff.[1] Med Russiagate-kuppet mod Donald Trump, der er ved at ebbe ud og eksponerer den britiske agent Christopher Steele og et slæng af hans amerikanske venner til retsforfølgelse for kriminelle handlinger, var der et desperat behov for et nyt værktøj til at drive USA’s præsident ind i det britiske, geopolitiske hjørne, som de har til fælles med det meste af det amerikanske establishment. Dette værktøj er et efterretnings-svindelnummer, et gennemprøvet og pålideligt britisk produkt.

Foto: Den britiske premierminister, Theresa May.  (Photo: EU2017EE Estonian Presidency

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)