De transatlantiske nationer konfronteres
med finanssammenbrud og borgerkrig
– Trump må gå ind for Glass-Steagall
og tilslutning til den Nye Silkevej

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 5. marts, 2017 – Alt imens hysteriet med den »farvede revolutions« angreb på Donald Trump fortsætter i hele Europa og i USA, så er sandheden bag denne »nye McCarthyisme« også ved at komme frem.

Udtalelser om et muligt mord på Trump er fremkommet i flere europæiske pressemedier og i blogosfæren. Obamas justitsminister Loretta Lynch, der nægtede at fængsle bankiererne for deres forbrydelser med hvidvask af narkopenge og med at ødelægge den amerikanske økonomi, har nu offentligt opfordret til voldelige demonstrationer og bemærker, at, i tidligere tider, »blødte folk og ja, nogle af dem døde. Dette er hårdt. Alt, hvad der er godt, er hårdt. Vi har gjort dette før. Vi kan gøre det igen.« At sammenligne det Obama/Soros-anførte kupforsøg med borgerrettighedsbevægelsen er både en løgn og en afskyelighed. Den eneste, legitime sammenligning er med det voldelige kup i Ukraine i 2014, anført af nynazister, som EIR har dokumenteret, blev kørt af netop de selvsamme agenter (Se EIR's rapport, »Obama-Soros ’farvede revolutioner’; Nazi-kup i Ukraine, 2014; USA, 2017?«)

Det er ikke det indbildte angreb på »vore vestlige værdier«, der er drivkraften bag dette kupforsøg, men snarere det desperate Britiske Imperium og dets aktiver i USA, der er rædselsslagne over, at imperieopdelingen af verden, der er afgørende for at opretholde deres bankerotte, vestlige finanssystem gennem krige og nedskæringspolitik, trues af Trumps bestræbelser på at bringe USA ind i et samarbejde med Rusland og Kina. Et sådant samarbejde, der vil forene verden gennem et nyt paradigme, baseret på fred og udvikling, vil ikke have plads til de spekulative finansinstitutioner, hvis fremgang beror på hasardspil, narkopenge og krige. Trump gør forberedelser til at mødes med både Putin og Xi Jinping i de kommende måneder. Samarbejde omkring bekæmpelse af terrorisme og USA’s tilslutning til den Nye Silkevejsproces ville betyde enden på Imperiet – måske for altid.

Men Trump har endnu ikke opfyldt sit kampagneløfte om at genindføre Glass-Steagall for at afslutte det tyranni, der begås af Wall Streets »for store til at lade gå ned«-banker, der har suget kreditten ud af hele det transatlantiske finanssystem for at nære deres derivatboble. Denne boble er nu en halv gang større end den, der eksploderede i 2008 som følge af den sindssyge genforsikring af subprime-ejendomslån og andre værdiløse, spekulative værdipapirer. Hvis præsidenten skal lykkes med at genopbygge den amerikanske økonomi og gøre en ende på den værste narkokrise i nationens historie, må han omgående genindføre de finansielle principper, i Hamiltons tradition, som har været drivkraften bag alle amerikanske perioder med fremskridt.

Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-angreb på Wall Street er modellen – den eneste model – der kan forhindre den langt værre, finansielle nedsmeltning, der nu truer det europæiske og amerikanske banksystem. Kun ved hjælp af dette indledende, første skridt vil en genindførelse af solide og fornuftige principper for bankpraksis – som dirigerer statslig kredit til industri, landbrug, infrastruktur og en genindførelse af videnskabeligt fremskridt – atter være i stand til at gøre Amerika stort igen. Det er den effekt, som LaRouches Fire Love har. 

Muligheden for en sådan revolutionær transformation af nationen og verden har aldrig været større end den er i dag. Kampagnen, der har til hensigt at bringe Trumps præsidentskab til fald, har ikke held til at overbevise det amerikanske folk. Efter at Trump anklagede Obama, og Obamas »oversiddere« i efterretningssamfundet, for at køre løgnekampagnen, der anklager Trump for ulovlige bånd til Rusland, måtte New York Times indrømme præcis dette. I en artikel fra 2. marts forklarede NYT Obama-administrationens anbringelse af hemmelige (og falske), udokumenterede efterretninger i officielle dokumenter, hvor de sænkede hemmelighedsgraden med det formål at maksimere disses cirkulering og forberedte efterforskninger for kriminelle handlinger, baseret på disse løgne.

Nu har Trump anklaget Obama for at aflytte hans kontorer i Trump Tower under kampagnen og tilføjet, at »dette er Nixon/Watergate« og »dette er McCarthyisme«. Han har krævet, at Kongressen udfører en tilbundsgående efterforskning. Obamas chef for den nationale efterretningstjeneste, James Clapper – bedst kendt for sin løgn over for Kongressen i 2013, hvor han benægtede, at efterretningssamfundet overvågede millioner af amerikanere (afsløret som løgn af Snowden-afsløringerne) – optrådte i dag på NBC’s »Mød Pressen« for at benægte, at der fandt en sådan aflytning af Trump Tower sted (selv om han denne gang var lidt mere forsigtig og sagde, »så vidt jeg ved«). Vi får se.

Aktivistteams fra LaRouchePAC deltog i pro-Trump møder i hele landet søndag, hvor de både oplevede en høj grad af anerkendelse af LaRouches år med at afsløre Obamas forbrydelser og også en åbenhed over for bestræbelserne på at få Demokrater og Republikanere til at kræve, at Trump går frem med sit løfte om at genindføre Glass-Steagall. Men aktivisterne bemærkede, at befolkningen, ligesom Kongressen, er selvisk optaget af partiske angreb uden meget hensyn til, eller blot begreb om, afgørende politiske spørgsmål. Indgriben med LaRouches Fire Love har aldrig været mere presserende. Med det transatlantiske banksystem, der er rede til at sprænges, og de hektiske bestræbelser på at fremprovokere en borgerkrig eller et kup i USA, har vi ikke tid til mangel på klarhed.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag sagde til medarbejdere: »Dette er vores livs største kamp. Folk bør ikke opføre sig dumt.«

Foto: New Yorks Børs.      




LaRouchePAC’s APPEL:
USA har brug for »win-win«-udvikling;
gennemfør LaRouches Fire Love
og gå med i Kinas Nye Silkevej

»Til præsident Trump og medlemmerne af Kongressen:

Underskriverne af denne Appel erkender, at det transatlantiske finanssystem er på randen af en ny nedsmeltning, der er værre end den fra 2007-08. Livsbetingelserne for det store flertal af amerikanere er støt og roligt brudt sammen i løbet af de seneste to årtier. USA’s økonomiske politik har fokuseret på at beskytte Wall Streets spekulative boble i stedet for at beskytte det almene vel og det amerikanske folks fremtidige eftertid. Vi erkender, at der nu må træffes nødforanstaltninger for at komme en ny finanskrise i forkøbet, og for atter at sætte amerikanere i arbejde for at genopbygge vores nation og vores fremtid.

For at opnå dette, anmoder vi præsident Donald Trump og den 115. Kongres om at vedtage og implementere programmet for LaRouches Fire Love for Økonomisk Genrejsning, som en hasteforanstaltning; og at tilslutte sig Kinas program for en Ny Silkevej for globalt samarbejde og storstilede infrastrukturprojekter og økonomisk udvikling.

De Fire Love definerer et sammenhængende program for økonomisk genrejsning, der har sine rødder i det Amerikanske System for økonomi:

  1. Genindfør Franklin Roosevelts oprindelige Glass/Steagall-lov, som adskiller kommercielle udlånsaktiviteter fra Wall Street spekulation.
  2. Vend tilbage til et nationalt banksystem i Hamiltons tradition.
  3. Direkte statslig kredit til projekter og initiativer, der skaber stigende niveauer af produktivitet og indkomster.
  4. Lancér et forceret program for udvikling af fusionskraft og en hurtig udvidelse af vores rumprogram.

USA’s økonomiske genrejsning vil blive meget fremskyndet, hvis USA tilslutter sig den globale udvikling af infrastruktur og den økonomiske renæssance, der strømmer fra Kinas Nye Silkevejsprogram.«




RADIO SCHILLER den 27. februar 2017:
Hvad Trump bør sige ved sin tale om nationens tilstand//
Ukraine//Rumprogram

Med formand Tom Gillesberg




Vi har brug for en international kampagne for sandhed,
ikke kun en international dag eller uge for sandhed.
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast, 24. februar, 2017; Leder

Meningen med denne Internationale Sandhedsdag, der fandt sted i går, var ikke kun at fortælle sandheden om begivenhederne i Maidan-kuppet for tre år siden i Ukraine; men var også for at advare om, at de samme netværk, der var ansvarlige for at bruge teknikkerne for ’farvede revolutioner’ i Ukraine for tre år siden for at vælte denne regering, og som har brugt disse samme teknikker i andre lande i hele verden – Rosen-revolutionen i Georgien, og andre steder – nu forsøger at begå præcis den samme form for farvede revolution internt i USA lige nu, imod præsident Donald Trumps demokratisk valgte regering. Dette har selvfølgelig en massiv, international sammenhæng, og det vil vi se nærmere på senere i udsendelsen. Helga Zepp-LaRouche understregede udtrykkeligt, da vi talte med hende tidligere på dagen, at vi må se dette i sammenhæng med det nye, fremvoksende, økonomiske paradigme, der kommer fra Kina; Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet, som er den motor, der driver historien frem i øjeblikket. Samt det faktum, at der er en meget reel mulighed for, at vi, under USA’s nye administration, kan gøre en ende på æraen med geopolitik og faktisk indgå i et samarbejde med Rusland, Kina, Indien, Japan og andre lande for at skabe et nyt, internationalt samarbejde, baseret på økonomisk udvikling og produktivitet.

(Inkl. hele det engelske udskrift).

Matthew Ogden: God eftermiddag. Det er i dag den 24. februar. Via video har vi i dag Diane Sare fra vores politiske komite, med os fra New York.

Som seere af denne webside ved, har denne uge af Helga Zepp-LaRouche været erklæret for en international uge for sandhed. Dette blev planlagt til at falde sammen med treårsdagen for kuppet, der væltede den demokratisk valgte regering i Ukraine for tre år siden i Kiev; det var den 23. februar, 2014. Der har været møder over hele USA, og også i Europa. Vi havde møder i New York City; Detroit; Washington, D.C.; Houston, Texas – andre byer i USA, Boston, Massachusetts, og i Berlin, Tyskland; Dresden, Tyskland; Paris, Frankrig, og også i andre lande i Europa.

Meningen med denne Internationale Sandhedsdag, der fandt sted i går, var ikke kun at fortælle sandheden om begivenhederne i Maidan-kuppet for tre år siden i Ukraine; men var også for at advare om, at de samme netværk, der var ansvarlige for at bruge teknikkerne for ’farvede revolutioner’ i Ukraine for tre år siden for at vælte denne regering, og som har brugt disse samme teknikker i andre lande i hele verden – Rosen-revolutionen i Georgien, og andre steder – nu forsøger at begå præcis den samme form for farvede revolution internt i USA lige nu, imod præsident Donald Trumps demokratisk valgte regering. Dette har selvfølgelig en massiv, international sammenhæng, og det vil vi se nærmere på senere i udsendelsen. Helga Zepp-LaRouche understregede udtrykkeligt, da vi talte med hende tidligere på dagen, at vi må se dette i sammenhæng med det nye, fremvoksende, økonomiske paradigme, der kommer fra Kina; Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet, som er den motor, der driver historien frem i øjeblikket. Samt det faktum, at der er en meget reel mulighed for, at vi, under USA’s nye administration, kan gøre en ende på æraen med geopolitik og faktisk indgå i et samarbejde med Rusland, Kina, Indien, Japan og andre lande for at skabe et nyt, internationalt samarbejde, baseret på økonomisk udvikling og produktivitet.

Som jeg sagde, så vil vi gå mere i dybden med denne sammenhæng; men, for at begynde vores udsendelse, vil jeg gerne vise en video for jer fra disse møder, der har fundet sted i hele landet og i hele verden, på denne Internationale Dag for Sandhed, den 23. februar.

Dane Sare (video): Jeg er Diane Sare fra LaRouchePAC Policy Committee, og vi står på Dag Hammarskjold Plaza ikke langt fra De forenede Nationer (New York City). Vi deltager i Sandhedens Dag, som Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har krævet. Denne uge markerer treårsdagen for kuppet i Ukraine; et kup mod nationen Ukraine, hvor den demokratisk valgte præsident, [Viktor] Janukovitj, blev afsat af en flok voldelige, pro-nazistiske demonstranter, der blev finansieret og støttet med de af [tidligere viceudenrigsminister for europæiske og eurasiske anliggender] Victoria Nuland hævdede $5 mia. gennem det Amerikanske Udenrigsministerium under Barack Obamas præsidentskab; samt med åbenlys støtte fra storspekulanten George Soros. Vores pointe er, at, i dag, begår Obama og Soros forræderi imod USA’s valgte regering, på vegne af Det britiske Imperium. Det britiske Imperium har i århundreder organiseret for at forhindre USA i at samarbejde med Rusland. Vi har nu et enormt potentiale pga. begivenhederne i 2013; oprettelsen af BRIKS-banken og den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings annoncering af, at Kina har indledt et initiativ for win-win-samarbejde – enden på geopolitik; at, hvis USA opgav politikken med regimeskifte og Det britiske Imperiums politik, som blev forfulgt under præsidentskaberne Bush og Obama, og i stedet samarbejder med Rusland, Kina, Indien og Japan om global udvikling, så ville vi transformere planeten; og menneskeheden ville have den mest lysende fremtid, man kan tænke sig. Det er derfor i dag meget presserende, at vi begraver løgnene, den nazi-lignende propaganda imod Rusland, der bliver brugt til at forsøge at omstyrte Donald Trumps præsidentskab; Trump, der har udtrykt sin hensigt om at ændre denne dynamik. Vi opfordrer indtrængende alle, der følger os på vores hjemmeside (LPAC), til at tilslutte sig denne indsats; til at printe vores litteratur ud, til at underskrive appellen, der kræver en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven, som ville trække tæppet væk under fødderne på Wall Streets og City of Londons evne til at finansiere sådanne terrorist-operationer, og vi opfordrer indtrængende alle til at arbejde sammen med os for at sikre, at USA kan vende tilbage til den arv, som var hensigten hos vore Grundlæggende Fædre, såsom George Washington, Alexander Hamilton og, i nyere tid, geniet og den amerikanske statsmand, Lyndon LaRouche.

Kesha Rogers : Den 23. februar markerer treårsdagen for Maidan-kuppet i Ukraine; det begyndte den 23. feb., 2014. Dette har fundet sted som en bestræbelse fra Barack Obama, USA’s tidligere præsident, og George Soros, multimilliardær-narkohandleren, der tilsammen har anført angrebet for at ødelægge og omvælte nationer med det formål at få USA ind i en krig med Rusland. Løgnene, der fortsat eskalerer aktiviteterne i Ukraine, og som pegede på ideen om, at det var Putin, der anførte eskaleringen i Ukraine, er de samme løgne, der finder sted her, nu, i USA, for at omstyrte Trumps præsidentskab. Dette må stoppes. Som en del af en National Sandhedsdag har vi udgivet et dossier, der afslører Obama og Soros for deres pengestøtte og deres løgne, der har skabt totalt kaos både USA og fortsætter med at skabe kaos i Ukraine. Endemålet er Putin og Rusland. (Se dossier her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=18018)

Det, vi burde gøre, er at samarbejde med Rusland; samarbejde med Putin. Vi må stoppe disse krige; vi må stoppe dette fortsatte kaos. Vi bør samarbejde, som Lyndon LaRouche har påpeget, om Silkevejens økonomiske udvikling; det er, hvad USA har brug for. Vi står her ved et møde i Twome ved en bro. Vore bannere lyder, »Sæt Obama og Soros i fængsel for forræderi! Ukraine 2014; USA 2017«. Folk må forstå, hvad det er, der finder sted i denne nation nu, og kræve økonomisk udvikling; vi har brug for samarbejde. Vi er her som en del af Sandhedens Dag; og vi beder om, at alle, der ser dette, deltager i vore møder og læser dossieret.

Harley Schlanger [voice over video med sang]: I dag er treårsdagen for kuppet, der blev gennemført af amerikanske efterretningsoperationer og neokonservative, finansieret af George Soros, for at bringe en flok nazister til magten i Kiev. Vi er her i dag som en Sandhedens Dag for at få den sande historie ud. Ukraine-operationen bliver nu atter gearet op for at skabe kamp mellem Rusland og Vesten, som en måde at sabotere det potentiale, der eksisterer med Trump-administrationen, for at bryde med denne politik for krig. De amerikanske vælgere stemte på Trump, i vid udstrækning for at bryde denne politik for konfrontation med Rusland; så det er vigtigt, at denne Sandhedsdag bringer den kendsgerning frem, at Ukraine-situationen aldrig handlede om demokrati i Ukraine. Men handlede derimod om en bevidst operation for at skabe en konfrontation mellem USA og Rusland. Dette er George Soros’, City of Londons og Barack Obamas politik, og som har været involveret i at sabotere præsident Trumps initiativ for fred mellem Rusland og USA.

Vi er her i Berlin som en del af den Internationale Dag for Sandhed, for at gøre opmærksom på det faktum, at de kriminelle personer, der bragte nazisterne til magten i Kiev, stadig ikke er blevet stillet for retten; de er ikke blevet retsforfulgt. Denne demonstration her i Berlin er en del af den Internationale Aktionsdag. På LPAC’s webside kan man downloade et dossier, som vi har sammensat, om hvem, der er ansvarlig for drabene i Ukraine. Det er ikke russerne; det er ikke præsident Putin. Det er Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland, de neokonservative i USA og tidligere præsident Barack Obama.

[Mand 1 taler på tysk]

[Mand 2 taler på tysk og siger, der er møder i Boston, New York City, Paris, Berlin og Frankurt am Main, og beskriver kuppet for tre år siden.]

Mathew Ogden, (studiet): Dette dossier kan altså læses på https://lpac.co/ukraine-dossier, som vi viser på skærmen lige nu. (Med dansk introduktion, her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=18018). Det har titlen, »Obama-Soros ’farvede revolutioner’; Nazi-kup i Ukraine, 2014; USA, 2017?« Dossieret cirkuleres ved alle disse møder for Sandhedens Dag, som I netop så, inkl. i New York City. Jeg får en rapport direkte fra Diane [Sare], men før hun kommer på, så lad mig rapportere, at der er en lang artikel i Itar-TASS, som er en russisk nyhedstjeneste, der har en dækning af mødet, der fandt sted i New York City (se http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=18092); det var lige i begyndelsen af vores aktion. Titlen var »Demonstranter i New York anklagede Obama og Soros for at organisere kuppet i Ukraine«. Dernæst bemærkes det, at lignende aktioner fandt sted i Boston, Houston, Berlin og andre steder. Lad mig blot lige læse et hurtigt uddrag af denne artikel fra Itar-TASS. Den siger:

I flere timer uddelte aktivister torsdag i New Yorks centrum, såvel som i flere andre amerikanske byer, trykt materiale, der erklærer, at magtskiftet i Ukraine blev gennemført med direkte støtte fra milliardær George Soros og den 44. amerikanske præsident Barack Obamas administration.

Aktionsdagen var arrangeret af Schiller Instituttet inden for rammerne af en kampagne for at oplyse amerikanere om den aktuelle situation i Ukraine, i anledning af årsdagen for begivenhederne på ’Maidan’.

Artiklen har dernæst underoverskriften,

I går Janukovitj; i morgen, Trump

I New York, siger artiklen, blev begivenheden afholdt i den centrale bydel Manhattan, på pladsen, hvor 47. gade og Second Avenue mødes, i nærheden af FN’s hovedkvarter. Medlemmerne viste i særdeleshed bannere og posters med ordene: »Obama – i fængsel«, »Din fjende – George Soros«.

Dernæst citerer artiklen Diane Sare:

»Vi har sandsynligvis uddelt flere hundrede eksemplarer af vore publikationer her«, sagde talskvinde Diane Sare fra Schiller Instituttet, som er en del af Lyndon LaRouche-bevægelsens politiske komite.

Ifølge Diane Sare fandt lignende aktioner sted torsdag i Boston (Massachusetts), Houston (Texas), så vel som også i den tyske hovedstad Berlin. Som Sare pointerede, så »går aktivister ud til hele verden, for at den skal kende sandheden om det, der skete i Ukraine for tre år siden«.

Og vi springer lidt, og artiklen siger:

»Ifølge Sare er det vigtigt, at amerikanere kender til begivenhederne i Ukraine, hvor den lovligt valgte præsident, Viktor Janukovitj blev omstyrtet, fordi et lignende senarie kunne begynde at udvikle sig i USA. De samme personer forsøger nu at fjerne den amerikanske præsident Donald Trump fra magten«.

Artiklen slutter med at sige:

Materialet, som uddeles af aktivisterne, er data fra en rapport, forberedt af LaRouche-bevægelsen, om begivenhederne i Ukraine og eventualiteten af en lignende situation i USA. TASS har modtaget den fulde version af dokumentet. I rapporten beskrives magtskiftet i landet som en »voldelig revolution«, der blev gennemført med den aktive deltagelse af »neo-nazistiske grupper«. Obama-administrationen og nogle af Washingtons allierede, bemærkes det, brugte begivenhederne i Ukraine som »en retfærdiggørelse af den nye fase af NATO’s militære oprustning imod Rusland«.

Victoria Nuland, der på det tidspunkt indtog posten som viceudenrigsminister for europæiske og eurasiske anliggender, »kom flere gange til protesterne og uddelte cookies til ’Maidan’, samtidig med, at hun nægtede at indrømme den kendsgerning, at der, ud over fredelige demonstranter, der var bekymrede over korruption og den økonomiske situation, også var eksplicit neofascistiske bander, der deltog i den bevæbnede opstand imod en valgt regering«.

Den slutter dernæst med,

Forfatterne påpeger også, at Soros, så vel som andre personer, der tidligere var en del af Obamas inderkreds, i øjeblikket er aktivt involveret i forsøgene på at miskreditere Trump og lovede ikke at give den nye indvåner i Det Hvide Hus mulighed for at normalisere relationerne mellem Moskva og Washington.

Den siger dernæst,

Ved slutningen af december 2016 bragte aktivister fra Schiller Instituttet, til minde om ofrene i Tu-154-flystyrtet, blomster til den Russiske Føderations Generalkonsulat i New York og opførte den russiske nationalhymne foran dets indgang. I begyndelsen af januar afholdt de en ceremoni ved »Tåremindesmærket« af Zurab Tsereteli, i den amerikanske by Bayonne (New Jersey), for at mindes de omkomne i styrtet.

Lyndon LaRouche – amerikansk økonom og politiker, ophavsmand til teorien om den såkaldte »fysiske økonomi« og fjende af monetaristiske ideer. Han anser Rusland for at være en hovedspiller på verdensscenen og mener, at Rusland, sammen med Kina, Indien, USA og flere andre lande, kan redde verden fra den største krise i historien.

Her slutter artiklen.

Så det er en meget omfattende reportage og dækning i TASS, og jeg ved, at du, Diane, blev interviewet af flere andre, internationale medier ved dette møde ved FN, så du kan måske give os en rapport fra marken der.

Diane Sare: Jo da! Det er slående, og jeg har hørt fra vore folk i Boston, der har en lignende, måske mere stram og storsnudet befolkning, end vi har her i New York – dermed mener jeg, at folk i vid udstrækning anser den for liberal. Man kunne måske tro, at vi ville få en meget tilknappet eller fjendtlig respons til det, vi har at sige; men åbenheden var faktisk ret usædvanlig. Vi fik uddelt 70 kopier af dossieret med den eksplicitte forståelse, at vi kun uddeler dem til repræsentanter fra (diplomatiske) missioner eller andre organisatoriske institutionsfolk, så jeg mener, at flere folk fra et par forskellige lande stoppede op for at tage materialet, og mange kom tilbage efter mere information.

Jeg mener, at en bemærkning fra en ung, afroamerikansk militærveteran var bemærkelsesværdig; han sagde: »Jeg havde tænkt på Trump som en del af the establishment. Han er rig, han er milliardær, han er hvid, han er en del af Wall Street. Hvorfor angriber de ham?« Han sagde, at det gav mening, hvis der var et fremstød for krig med Rusland, på den ene side – og det er noget, Trump er modstander af – at det så var årsagen til et sådant angreb.

Jeg vil også gerne forklare lidt mere om det, jeg sagde på denne video om 2013, for jeg mener, at, med mindre folk forstår dette, kan man ikke rigtig forstå, hvad det er, der foregår her, og jeg reflekterede over den sommer. Der skete to ting i 2013: Den ene ting var, at den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping annoncerede Ét Bælte, én Vej-initiativet, der nu omfatter over 70 nationer, milliarder af verdens befolkning, ti tusinder af kilometer højhastigheds-jernbaner, forestående aftaler om byggeri af havne, kernekraftværker, rumforskning osv.; men der var også en konference i Fortaleza, Brasilien, med BRIKS-nationerne, hvor de oprettede en udviklingsbank og også en bank til at beskytte sig mod valutaspekulation, og som kom i drift omkring et år senere.

Jeg reflekterede over dette, for vi befandt os i USA’s Kongres for at udføre lobbyvirksomhed – Matt, det husker du nok – den uge, og vi opdagede, at ingen i Kongressen havde hørt noget som helst om denne ekstraordinære begivenhed. Det er virkelig stort, når man har nationer – Rusland, Kina og Indien, det er store nationer. Brasilien er et stort land i Sydamerika. Sydafrika er meget avanceret mht. det afrikanske kontinent, og de er forpligtende engageret over for kernekraft, hvilket er interessant. Det faktum, at de skaber en finansiel og økonomisk institution, der gør det muligt for nationer at komme ud af det bankerotte Britiske Imperiums greb.

Jeg husker, at vi opdagede, at Udenrigsministeriet faktisk havde udsendt et memo eller sådan noget, der instruerede folk om, at dette virkelig ikke var en betydningsfuld udvikling. Jeg rejser dette nu, for det, amerikanere ikke bør overse, er potentialet. Hvorfor alt det hysteri? Hvorfor skulle George Soros deployere sine titals millioner af dollars til at betale alle disse agitatorer og organisere denne 30.000 mand stærke hær af aktivister, som Barack Obama efter sigende skal anføre? Jamen fordi det, der nu er opstået – og allerede er langt fremme – er et Nyt Paradigme.

Vore seere er sandsynligvis klar over dette: kineserne har, sammen med Etiopiens regering, netop færdiggjort en jernbane fra Djibouti til Addis Abeba. (Se http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17298). Denne strækning tog 3 dage med lastbil, og tager nu 12 timer med tog. Det betyder, at, når man har tørke i Etiopien, så behøver folk ikke at dø. Man kan hurtigt få mad og vand frem. Det betyder store muligheder for udviklingen af hele det afrikanske kontinent, og for det sydamerikanske kontinent. Og hvis man tænker på det, folk har lært – hvad det Britiske økonomiske System er – ikke bare »køb billigt og sælg dyrt«, men Malthus: resurser forøges aritmetisk, og befolkningen forøges geometrisk. Derfor er vi overbefolkede; vi må nedlukke menneskers forbrug af energi og mad; reducere befolkningen. Det er krige gode til.

Med andre ord, så har vi et potentiale for et helt nyt paradigme for menneskeheden, globalt, og nøglen er, at USA går med i dette paradigme. Præsident Trump har, gennem at udtale sin plan om at få en fornuftig relation til Rusland, og forhåbentlig også Kina og Japan (nævnte han), indikeret en åbenhed over for at blive en del af dette nye paradigme; og derfor er bagslaget temmelig ekstraordinært. Jeg tror ikke, der har været noget tidspunkt – jeg ved, at Abraham Lincoln måtte tage til sin indsættelse, forklædt som en kvinde, pga. protester osv.; men jeg tror ikke, der har været noget tidspunkt, hvor man i ugevis, månedsvis, denne form for agitation, såkaldt »modstandsbevægelse«, eller hvad de nu kalder det for, oppositionen til en ny præsident. Jeg mener, at det er meget vigtigt, at amerikanere identificerer, hvad dette potentiale er, så vi ved, hvad der er for en kamp, der finder sted; og derfor bekæmper de løgne i de amerikanske medier om Rusland, om Vladimir Putin og om, hvad Ruslands intentioner er. Det, der skete i Ukraine, er et meget, meget vigtigt aspekt for at neutralisere dette angreb på vort præsidentskab, og for at gøre det muligt for USA at tilslutte sig dette [paradigme].

Mathew Ogden: En ting, jeg bør nævne, er, at, ud over de aktiviteter, som den internationale LaRouche-bevægelse afholdt i denne uge omkring denne Internationale Uge for Sandhed, har Helga Zepp-LaRouche også sat fokus på to meget betydningsfulde appeller, som kom fra både tidligere (ukrainske) præsident, Viktor Janukovitj, og fra Ukraines tidligere premierminister, Mykola Azarov, og som ligger præcis på linje med dette spørgsmål om »en uge for sandhed«.

Viktor Janukovitj har skrevet et brev til verdens ledere, som også inkluderer præsident Trump, præsident Putin, den tyske kansler Angela Merkel og den franske præsident François Hollande. Han appellerer til verdens ledere om at »indlede skabelsen af en særkommission i Europarådet, der skal overvåge en efterforskning af forbrydelser, der blev begået på Maidan«. Det vil sige, en »Sandhedskommission«, der skal nå frem til sandheden om, hvad det var, der i virkeligheden skete under den såkaldte »fredelige revolution« på Maidan.

På linje med dette har den tidligere ukrainske premierminister, Mykola Azarov, der tjente fra 2010 og frem til januar 2014, hvor han trak sig tilbage på højden af Maidan-protesterne, udgivet en rapport på sin Facebookside, hvor han siger: »I dag er vi og efterforskere i Kiev i besiddelse af pålidelige informationer om det faktum, at mordene på Maidan blev udført af specialgrupper af snigskytter fra Georgien, de baltiske lande og Polen, under ledelse af instruktører fra Frankrig og Tyskland.« Dernæst siger han: »Man gjorde forsøg på at lægge skylden for massakren helt og holdent på Janukovitj og Berkut-uropolitiet.« Han siger direkte her, at dette var et svindelnummer, og at de såkaldte »snigskytter« blev deployeret af efterretningstjenester fra udlandet, med det formål at få en allerede meget ustabil situation til at eksplodere, og at ændre den fra blot at være protester og til at være et voldeligt statskup. Dette er ligeledes i sammenhængen med denne Internationale Uge for Sandhed om sandheden om det, der sker, eller det, der skete, i Ukraine.

Samtidig er der flere amerikanske kongresmedlemmer, der er ved at identificere den rolle, som George Soros spiller netop nu, i forsøg på at starte en farvet revolution i Makedonien. De bør måske snarere vende deres opmærksomhed mod deres egen baghave og deres egne offentlige borgermøder og mod begivenhederne i USA; men det er meget nyttigt, at dette er siddende amerikanske kongresmedlemmer, der er i færd med at identificere den rolle, som George Soros og hans netværk spiller i disse internationale farvede revolutioner.

Lad mig vende tilbage til den pointe, som du kom med, Diane, og jeg mener, at det er et afgørende punkt, at man ikke kan forstå virkeligheden af, hvad der var den virkelige hensigt bag det, der skete i Ukraine i 2014, uden at man forstår det dramatiske vendepunkt, som historien oplevede på det tidspunkt. Dette var BRIKS-topmødet i Fortaleza – som du nævnte – og i særdeleshed præsident Xi Jinpings annoncering af Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet; en Nye Silkevej. Det var Viktor Janukovitj’ beslutning om ikke at indgå denne frihandelsaftale med den mislykkede Europæiske Union, og i stedet bevare hans økonomiske forbindelser til Rusland, som udgjorde påskuddet til, at det på det tidspunkt blev besluttet at lancere denne form for voldelige omstyrtelse af hans regering.

Lad os se på det aktuelle øjeblik. Hvad har Donald Trump telegraferet? Ikke alene trak han sig tilbage fra TPP – som var Obama-administrationens tilsigtede plan for at forsøge at begrænse den kinesiske indflydelse i Asien; men han havde også direkte samtaler med præsident Xi Jinping, som han sagde, var meget konstruktive. Han havde dette topmøde med [den japanske premierminister] Abe. Men disse relationer behøver ikke være gensidigt ekskluderende. Og helt klart, hans relation til Rusland – det faktum, at han trak os tilbage fra randen af en atomkrig, der forfulgtes af Obama og, på sigt, at Hillary Clinton.

Det er altså i denne sammenhæng, og det er spændingen i det aktuelle øjeblik i historien, der endnu ikke er løst. Men spørgsmålet er, vil USA tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej? Som folk ved, så er der et forestående topmøde i maj måned i Kina, om Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet; præsident Xi Jinping vil være vært, og Ruslands præsident Putin vil deltage personligt. Den aktuelle kampagne går ud på at formidle til præsident Trump, at, ikke alene bør han deltage i dette topmøde personligt; men at han bør forlade topmødet med et udtrykkeligt forpligtende engagement for, at USA vil opgive de seneste mange årtiers geopolitik og beslutsomt vil indgå i et win-win-samarbejde omkring dette Nye Silkevejsinitiativ. Der er ingen som helst chance for, at USA kan få en økonomisk genrejsning uden at deltage i dette nye paradigme for udvikling, med store projekter, som Kina allerede er begyndt at sprede i hele Eurasien. Og, som du sagde, Diane, ind i Afrika og selv ind i lande i Sydamerika.

En meget betydningsfuld ting er en rapport, der netop er udkommet, publiceret af PriceWaterhouse Cooper, som er et stort, internatonalt erhvervs- og analysefirma. Denne rapport har titlen, »2016 B&R vurdering; Kina og Bæltet og Vejens infrastruktur; gennemgang og udsigter«. Den er netop blevet udgivet i februar 2017. rapporten har en meget omfattende gennemgang af, hvad Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet er; den indeholder et meget veludarbejdet kort, der hedder, »Bælt og Vej; en genoplivelse af den Gamle Silkevej«. Den har et afsnit, der dokumenterer, hvor mange lande, der allerede er involveret i Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet. Den siger: »B&R (Belt & Road) området spænder over tre kontinenter og inkluderer i alt 66 lande, fra Litauen til Indonesien.« Dernæst, i sammenhæng med den eksplosive vækst, der allerede er begyndt at vise sig i nogle af disse lande – især i Kina, men også i andre lande, der nyder godt af denne investering i disse store projekter; rapporten har så en analyse af dem for de kommende måneder og kommende år. En grafisk fremstilling siger, »Vi ser potentiale for betydelig vækst inden for energi, jernbaner og sundhedssektor i flere af mellemindkomst-landene i Bæltet-og-Vejen. En anden grafisk fremstilling siger, «trans-eurasiske jernbanenet vil dramatisk reducere tiden mellem Kina og europæiske forbrugermarkeder«. Sluttelig siger rapporten, »Urbanisering og befolkningstilvækst vil anspore en fortsat efterspørgsel af transportinfrastruktur med stor kapacitet«.

Så dette er altså verdensøkonomiens fremtid. Væksten, tyngdepunktet er afgørende skiftet til Eurasien, til Kina og til de lande, der nu udgør en del af Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet. Hvis Donald Trump mener det alvorligt mht. at fremme en økonomisk genrejsning i USA, vil det ske ved at tilslutte sig – i et win-win-samarbejde – Kina og disse andre lande; og ved at tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej. Som jeg har nævnt, så udgav LaRouchePAC for to år siden en brochure om spørgsmålet om USA, der bør tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej; og vi er i øjeblikket i færd med at opdatere denne brochure på en hel ny måde. Den vil forhåbentlig være tilgængelig om en uge eller to.

Så sæt dette i sammenhæng og indse, at Ukraine-kuppet skete pga. Viktor Janukovitj’ beslutning om ikke at indgå en frihandelsaftale med en Europæisk Union, der er i færd med at blive en fiasko; og fordi han indså, at der var ved at vokse en ny, økonomisk dynamik frem med udgangspunkt i Eurasien. Vi har nu en potentielt lignende situation internt her i USA. Så denne Dag for Sandhed var ikke bare for at sige, »Her er, hvad der skete i Ukraine for tre år siden«, men, lad det være en advarsel; dette bliver faktisk forsøgt også internt i USA i dag.

Du vil måske følge op på dette spørgsmål, Diane? Men jeg bør også påpege, at præsident Trumps Tale om Nationens Tilstand (’State of the Union’) til en fælles Kongressamling finder sted på tirsdag. Det er den 28. februar, og det er deadline for vores kampagne for appellen om Glass/Steagall-initiativet. Adressen kommer her på skærmen: https://lpac.co/trumpsotu. Og denne kampagne for appellen accelererer fortsat. I går på vores aktivist-telefonmøde, Fireside Chat, fik vi en rapport fra flere aktivister i LaRouchePAC, fra New York til Connecticut og til Californien, som deltog i offentlige borgermøder og intervenerede med dette spørgsmål. Glass-Steagall haster; Trump lovede dette under sin præsidentvalgkamp. Vi må holde ham til hans ord og opfordre ham til at forpligte sig til genindførelsen af Glass-Steagall under, eller før, han holder sin tale til nationen på næste tirsdag. Vil du sige mere om denne kampagne, eller om noget andet, du har på hjerte, Diane?

Diane Sare: Jeg vil gerne sige, at Trump har udtalt sin plan om at bruge $1 billion på infrastruktur i USA. Jeg forstår, at kineserne mener, vi har brug for omkring $8 billion i investeringer; hvilket sandsynligvis er mere præcist. Men $1 billion er bestemt en god begyndelse. Men hvordan gør vi det? Hvor går det hen, hvis Japans premierminister Abe, der netop har været her, ønsker at investere $150 mia. på at bygge højhastighedsjernbaner? For det første, når man har et banksystem, hvor alle indskud kan blive brugt som sikkerhed for en bail-in af derivat-forpligtelser, hvem ville så ønske at sætte deres investeringer igennem et sådant system? For det andet, så har vi ikke en nationalbank (uafhængig statsbank); vi har ikke Finansministeriet, der er under Kongressens kontrol i den forstand, som det burde være det. Vi har Federal Reserve, der har udført bail-out (statslig bankredning) for $31 billion. Så for, at dette kan lykkes, er LaRouches Fire Love, med begyndelse i først og fremmest Glass-Steagall, absolut presserende nødvendigt. Men Glass-Steagall alene er ikke nok; men det er et første skridt. Jeg vil sige, at, hvis Trump undlader at indføre Glass-Steagall og vedtage denne fremgangsmåde, så udgør det en stor sårbarhed; for med mindre USA’s regering rent faktisk handler for at lægge denne gigantiske boble af spekulativ gæld i tømme, og rejser denne brandmur mellem investeringsbankerne og de kommercielle banker, så, når systemet nedsmelter – og det vil det uvægerligt gøre; det det.

Alle bør blot overveje, hvad vi har lavet, mht. fysisk produktivitet, der svarer til den pengemængde, der nu er i omløb? Intet. Den fysiske produktivitet er kollapset. Dette er hr. LaRouches berømte Trippelkurve, der ser ud som en trompet; med en hyperbolsk kurve, der går opad, og en hyperbolsk kurve, der går nedad. Vi befinder os ved kollapspunktet; systemet vil krakke. Vi må have Glass-Steagall på plads. Hvis det ikke bliver gjort, så skaber det muligheden for et ekstraordinært kaos i dette land, og globalt. Men dernæst ønsker man også et banksystem; et nationalt banksystem, der gør det muligt for den nødvendige kredit at strømme til drivkraften for hele økonomien. Hvilket udtrykkeligt betyder finansiering af udviklingen af nuklear fusionskraft for at hæve hele den platform, vi fungerer på, samt rumprogrammet. I stedet for blot at have små lommer med højhastighedsjernbaner, så har vi i realiteten brug for et transkontinentalt jernbanenet. Som jeg før har sagt; hvis vi vil krydse Hudson-floden, bør vi sørge for, at vi krydser Beringstrædet i den anden ende. Disse ting er kun mulige med et fornuftigt banksystem; så jeg mener, at det er meget presserende, at vi ikke lader denne sårbarhed stå åben. Alle, der ser dette, eller jeres venner, jeres naboer, få disse appeller til at cirkulere, underskrevet, og overgiv dem til jeres kongresmedlem eller jeres senator, eller send dem til os. Jeg ved, at vi har overgivet 2300 underskrifter på dette til Trumps Hvide Hus, og vi vil få mange flere. Vi bør gøre det meget hurtigt.

Matthew Ogden: Der er en ting, du også påpegede i går, og det er, at, på trods af mediepropagandaen, så er alle disse folk ved de offentlige borgermøder bare der for at forsvare Obamacare eller sådan noget, og de er bare vrede mennesker, der protesterer. Når man går ud med dette budskab, »Sådan her vil vi genopbygge USA; vi må have Glass-Steagall. Vi må have en økonomisk politik i Hamiltons tradition, og vi må have jobs og infrastruktur«. Responsen er ekstraordinær. Og faktisk, på trods af bestræbelserne, der udføres af Soros og nogle af disse andre Obama for Amerika, forbliv, hvor vi er former for organisationer, så ønsker det amerikanske folk at forenes for at arbejde konstruktivt sammen; og de ville ønske, de havde en præsident, der var seriøs i disse spørgsmål. Når man siger, »Dette er dagsordenen, og dette er, hvad vi bør gøre«, så har det en ekstraordinær virkning med at forene folk. Vil du sige noget om det?

Diane Sare: Du sagde det, det er absolut tilfældet. Men det går imod, hvad almindelig fornuft dikterer, for medierne vil have, at man skal tro, at alle disse mennesker, der protesterer, er en flok skrigende, irrationelle fanatikere. Det er simpelt hen ikke sandt. Man må huske på, hvorfor Trump vandt valget? Fordi den amerikanske økonomi er færdig. Fordi, af 320 millioner amerikanere er 90 millioner, der kan arbejde, uden beskæftigelse; de udgør ikke en del af arbejdsstyrken. Så det er virkeligheden, uanset, hvad medierne siger om det. Når vi går til disse demonstrationer, bliver vi alle slået; jeg tror, de var i Boston på denne Aktionsdag. Den åbenhed, vi møder, er ekstraordinær; folk er eftertænksomme, de vil have løsninger. De vil have et program; det har vi. Man kan meget hurtigt trække folk ind i fornuft på dette princip.

Matthew Ogden: Lige præcis. Lad mig blot sige, at, som konklusion, så er Talen til Nationen nu på tirsdag. I løbet af denne weekend er der fremragende muligheder for folk, der ser denne udsendelse, til at gå til disse offentlige borgermøder og uddele denne appel. Man kan også uddele dette dossier, som er meget vigtigt; få folk til at læse det og opmuntr andre mennesker til at printe det ud og cirkulere det selv. Jeg sætter adressen på skærmen, hvor man kan hente dette dossier; vi vil også vise det på YouTube-videoen. (https://lpac.co/ukraine-dossier).Videomontagen, som vi viste tidligere i aftenens udsendelse, vil også blive tilgængelig som en separat video, så man kan cirkulere den.

Lad mig slutte med at sige, at Helga Zepp-LaRouche ønskede, at alle skal vide, at den Internationale Sandhedsdag ikke kun skal begrænses til en dag, eller en uge.       

At dette må være en fortsættende kampagne; vi må holde presset oppe. Dette er noget, som præsident Trump bør respondere på, og bør opfordres til at respondere på. Den propaganda, der er bragt til torvs om situationen i Ukraine, har været den væsentligste kile, der er drevet ind mellem udsigten til samarbejde mellem USA og Rusland. Som præsident Trump sagde i sin pressekonference for en uge siden, »Den russiske ting er en snare«. Folk bør indse, at den ukrainske ting også er en snare, en list. I diskussioner i denne uge påpegede vi, at den form for kampagne, der blev ført om de 28 sider og sandheden bag det, der skete den 11. september (2001), med saudiernes finansiering af disse flykaprere, og kampagnen, som LarouchePAC førte for at få sandheden om de 28 sider ud, var en sejrrig kampagne. Men det var en kampagne, som måtte føres uden ophør; og det var en masse pres over lang tid, der resulterede i sejren med ophævelsen af klassificeringen af de 28 sider. Og vedtagelsen af JASTA-loven, der var et stort nederlag for Obama i hans sidste måneder i embedet. Dette er et meget lignende spørgsmål. Oliver Stone har krævet, at præsident Trump offentliggør dokumenterne om USA’s involvering i dette Maidan-kup. Det ville være en meget konstruktiv ting at gøre; og han har myndighed til at gøre det. Men dette er en international uge for sandhed; men det burde blot være en international kampagne for sandhed. Det bør være på linje med og i sammenhæng med, at vi befinder os på et ekstraordinært tidspunkt i historien, hvor den geopolitiske æra kan afsluttes; og USA kan beslutsomt tilslutte sig dette Nye Paradigme for økonomisk udvikling og store projekter, som Kina anfører med den Nye Silkevej.

Mange tak til Diane; jeg ved, du blev interviewet af flere medier under mødet i går i New York. Så vi skal nok se frem til mere dækning af det i forskellige internationale medier i løbet af de næste timer og dage. Vi møder dig igen på mandag til vores diskussion med den politiske komite; og det vil altså finde sted aftenen før Talen til Nationen på næste tirsdag. Så bliv på kanalen larouchepac.com, cirkuler dette dossier så vidt omkring som muligt. Bliv ved at få underskrifter på vores appel og send dem til os. Meld jer til vores e-mailliste, hvis I ikke allerede har.

Mange tak, og på gensyn.        

(Engelsk udskrift)

 WE NEED AN INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN OF TRUTH; NOT JUST AN INTERNATIONAL DAY OR A WEEK OF TRUTH

        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good afternoon, it's February 24, 2017. My
name is Matthew Ogden and you're joining us for our Friday
afternoon webcast here at larouchepac.com. I'm joined via video
today by Diane Sare, who is a member of our Policy Committee,
joining us from New York City.
        Now as viewers of this website know, this week has been
declared by Helga Zepp-LaRouche to be an international week of
Truth. This was intended to coincide with the third anniversary
of the coup which overthrew the democratically-elected government
of Ukraine three years ago in Kiev; that was February 23, 2014.
Rallies happened all across the United States, and in fact, in
Europe as well. We had rallies in New York City, in Detroit, in
Washington, DC, in Houston, Texas — other cities in the United
States — Boston, Massachusetts; and in Berlin, Germany, Dresden,
Germany, Paris, France, and other countries in Europe as well.
        Now the significance of this International Day of Truth that
happened yesterday, was not only to tell the truth about the
events of the Maidan coup three years ago in Ukraine; but to give
the warning that, in fact, the same networks that were
responsible for using the techniques of color revolution in
Ukraine three years ago to overthrow that government, and have
used those same techniques in other countries around the world —
the Rose Revolution in Georgia, and elsewhere — are now
attempting to perpetrate that exact same kind of color revolution
inside the United States right now against the
democratically-elected government of President Donald Trump. Now
obviously this has a massive international context, and we're
going to get more into detail on that in the discussion later in
the broadcast. Helga Zepp-LaRouche was very emphatic in stating
— when we talked to her earlier today — that we have to look at
this in the context of the new emerging economic paradigm that's
coming out of China; the Belt and Road initiative, which is the
engine moving history right now. And the fact that there's a very
real possibility that under the new administration in the United
States, we can end the era of geopolitics and actually enter into
a cooperation with Russia, China, India, Japan, and other
countries to create a new international cooperation based on
economic development and productivity.
        As I said, we will get more into detail in that context; but
to begin the broadcast, I would like to play a video montage for
you of these rallies that happened around the country and around
the world yesterday, on this February 23rd International Day of
Truth.

        DIANE SARE : I'm Diane Sare with the LaRouche PAC
Policy Committee, and we're here at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza not
far from the United Nations. We're participating in the Day of
Truth called for by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche. This week marks
the third anniversary of a coup in Ukraine; a coup against the
nation of Ukraine, where the democratically-elected President,
Yanukovych, was ousted by a bunch of violent, pro-Nazi
demonstrators who were funded and supported with Victoria
Nuland's claim of $5 billion through the US State Department
during the Presidency of Barack Obama; and with obvious support
from mega-speculator George Soros. Our point is that today, Obama
and Soros are committing treason against the elected government
of the United States on behalf of the British Empire. The British
Empire has, for centuries, organized to prevent the United States
from working with Russia. We have a great potential right now
because of the events of 2013; the formation of the BRICS Bank
and the announcement by Chinese President Xi Jinping that China
has embarked on an initiative of win-win collaboration — the end
of geopolitics. That if the United States were to abandon the
policies of regime change and the policies of the British Empire
which we were carrying out under the Bush and Obama Presidencies,
and work with Russia, China, India, and Japan on global
development, we would transform the planet; and mankind would
have the brightest future imaginable. So, it is very urgent today
that we lay to rest the lies, the disgusting, Nazi-like
propaganda against Russia, which is being used to try and
overthrow the Presidency of Donald Trump; who has expressed his
intent to change that dynamic. We urge everybody on the LaRouche
PAC website to join this effort; to print out the literature, to
sign the petition calling for the reinstatement if the
Glass-Steagall Act, which would cut off the legs of the Wall
Street and City of London to finance such terrorist operations,
and to work with us to insure the United States is able to return
to the intended legacy of our Founding Fathers such as George
Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and recently the intent of
American statesman and genius, Lyndon LaRouche.

        KESHA ROGERS : February 23rd marks the three-year
anniversary of the coup in the Maidan in Ukraine; it started
February 23, 2014. This has been ongoing as an effort by Barack
Obama, former President of the United States, and George Soros,
the multi-billionaire drug pusher, who has been leading the
charge to destroy and overthrow nations in order to get the
United States into a war with Russia. The lies that continue to
escalate the activities in Ukraine that pointed to the idea that
it was Putin who was in charge of the escalation in Ukraine, are
the same lies that are taking place here, right now, in the
United States to get the Trump Presidency overthrown. This has to
be stopped. As a part of a national Day of Truth, we have
unleashed a dossier that exposes Obama and Soros for their
money-pushing, lies that have created total chaos both in the
United States and continues to push the chaos in Ukraine. The
target is Putin and Russia.
        What we should be doing is working with Russia; working with
Putin. We have to stop these wars; we have to stop this continued
chaos. We should be working in terms of cooperation, as Lyndon
LaRouche has pointed out, with the Silk Road economic
development; that is what the United States needs. We're here at
a rally at Twome and 59th at an overpass. Our banner reads "Jail
Obama, Soros For Treason! Ukraine 2014; US 2017". People must
understand what is happening to this nation now, and demand that
we need economic development; we need cooperation. So, we're out
here as part of a Day of Truth; and we ask that each and every
person who sees this, participates in our rallies and reads the
dossier.

        HARLEY SCHLANGER [voice over video of singing]: Today is the
third anniversary of the coup that was carried out by US
intelligence operations, neo-conservatives funded by George
Soros, to bring a gang of Nazis into power in Kiev. We're here
today as a Day of Truth, to get out the real story. The Ukraine
operation is being geared up again to create fighting between
Russia and the West as a way of sabotaging the potential that
exists with the Trump administration to break with this policy of
war. The American electorate voted for Trump, in large part, to
break this policy of confrontation with Russia; so it's important
that this Day of Truth bring out the reality that the Ukraine
situation was never about democracy in Ukraine. But about a
deliberate operation to create a confrontation between the United
States and Russia. This is the policy of George Soros, the City
of London, and Barack Obama, who was involved in sabotaging
President Trump's initiative for peace between Russia and the
United States.
        So, we're here in Berlin as part of an International Day of
Truth, to call attention to the fact that the criminals who
brought the Nazis into power in Kiev, have still not been brought
to court; have not been brought to justice. So this demonstration
here in Berlin is part of the International Day of Action. You
can go to the websites of the LaRouche organization to get a
dossier that we put out on who is responsible for the killing in
Ukraine. It's not the Russians; it's not President Putin. It's
Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland, the neo-conservatives in the
United States, and former President Obama.
        [Male #1 speaking in German]
        [Male #2 speaking in German, saying that there are rallies
in Boston, New York City, in Paris, Berlin, and
Frankfurt-an-Main, and describing coup three years ago.]

       

        OGDEN: Now, this full dossier can be accessed at
https://lpac.co/ukraine-dossier which we'll put on the screen
right now. The title of it is "Obama and Soros; Nazis in Ukraine
2014, U.S. in 2017?" This is being circulated at all of these Day
of Truth rallies that you saw, including in New York City. I will
get a report directly from Diane, but before I bring her on, let
me report that there is a long article in {Itar-Tass} which is a
Russian news publication which features coverage of the rally
that occurred in New York City; that was the very beginning of
our montage. The title of this was that "Protesters in New York
Accused Obama and Soros of Organizing the Coup in Ukraine." Then
it is noted that similar actions took place in Boston, Houston,
Berlin, and elsewhere. Let me just read you a very quick excerpt
from this {Itar-Tass} article. It says:
        "Activists for several hours, were handing out on Thursday
in the center of New York as well as a number of other American
cities, printed materials that state that the change of power in
Ukraine was carried out with the direct support of billionaire
George Soros and the administration of the 44th US President,
Barack Obama. The action was organized by the international
Schiller Institute in the framework of a campaign to educate
Americans with the actual situation in Ukraine on the occasion of
the anniversary of the events in Maidan."
        Then it has a subtitle — "Yesterday, Yanukovych; Tomorrow,
Trump". "In New York," the article states, "the event was held in
the central district of Manhattan in the square at the
intersection of 42nd Street and Second Avenue, near the United
Nations headquarters. Members deployed in particular. Posters
with the words 'Obama in Prison'; 'Your Enemy, George Soros'."
Then it quotes from Diane Sare: "|'We have distributed here
probably several hundred of our publications,' says spokesman
Diane Sare, who is part of the political committee of the
movement of Lyndon LaRouche. According to her, similar actions
took place on Thursday in Boston and in Houston, as well as the
German capital, Berlin. As emphasized by Sare, activists are out
to 'Tell the whole world the truth about what happened in Ukraine
three years ago.'"
        Then, skipping over a little bit, it says, "According to
Sare, it is important for Americans to know about the events in
Ukraine, where Viktor Yanukovych, the legitimately elected
President, was deposed; as in a similar scenario, the situation
may begin to develop in the United States. 'The same people are
now trying to remove from power, the American President Donald
Trump.'"
        Then it concludes by saying, "The materials which were
distributed by the activists, are data from the LaRouche Movement
that have been prepared in the report on the events in Ukraine
and the possibility of a similar situation in the United States.
The full version of the document was provided to Tass; in it, the
change of power in the country was described as a violent
revolution carried out by the active participation of 'neo-Nazi
groups'. The Obama administration, and some of Washington's
allies, as noted, used the events in Ukraine, 'as a justification
of the new stage of NATO's military mobilization against Russia.
Victoria Nuland, who at the time held the post of Assistant
Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, came
several times to the protest; handing out cookies to the Maidan,
while she refused to acknowledge the fact that aside from the
peaceful protesters concerned about corruption and the situation
in the economy, there were also explicitly neo-fascist gangs that
participated in the armed rebellion against an elected
government."
        And then it concludes, saying "The authors point out that at
the present time, Soros, as well as people who previously were
part of Obama's inner circle, are actively involved in the
attempts to discredit Trump, and promised not to allow the new
occupant of the White House the normalization of relations
between Moscow and Washington." Then it says, "At the end of
2016, activists of the Schiller Institute, in memory of the
victims of the TU-154 crash, brought flowers to the
Consulate-General of the Russian Federation in New York, and
performed at the entrance the Russian Anthem. And in early
January, they held a ceremony at the Tear of Grief Monument in
Bayonne, New Jersey, in memory of those killed in the crash.
        "Lyndon LaRouche," — and this is the conclusion of the TASS
article –"American economist and politician, author of the
so-called theory of physical economy, and the enemy of monetarist
conceptions, considers Russia a key player on the world stage,
and believes that Russia, along with China, India, and the United
States, and several other countries, can save the world from the
biggest crisis in history."
        So, that's a very substantial report and coverage in TASS,
and Diane, I know that you were interviewed by a number of other
international media outlets at this rally at the United Nations,
so maybe you can give us a report from on the ground there.

DIANE SARE: Sure! What's striking there, as what also has, I've
learned from our people who were in Boston, which has a similar,
maybe more uptight and snooty population than we have in New York
— and by that I mean people consider it largely liberal. You
would think we would be getting a very closed or hostile response
to what we have to say; but actually the openness was quite
extraordinary. We got out 70 copies of the dossier with the
explicit understanding that we're only giving them to
representatives of missions or other organizational institutional
people, so I imagine that that number of people from a couple of
dozen different nations stopped to take the material and many of
them came back to get more information.
        I think, notable, was a comment from a young
African-American military veteran who said, "You know, I had
thought of Trump as one of the Establishment. He's wealthy, he's
a billionaire, he's white, he's part of Wall Street. Why are they
attacking him?" He said that it began to make sense that if there
is, on the one hand, a push for war with Russia — and that is
something that Trump is opposed to — that this might be the
cause of such an attack.
        I also wanted to just elaborate a little bit more on what I
was saying in that video about 2013, because I think that unless
people understand that, you can't really understand what's going
on here, and I was reflecting on that summer. What happened in
2013 were two things: one, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced
the One Belt, One Road Initiative, which now has over 70 nations,
billions of the world's people, tens of thousands of kilometers
of high-speed rail, pending agreements on building ports,
building nuclear power plants, space exploration, etc.; but also
there was a conference in July in Fortaleza, Brazil of the BRICS
nations, where they established a development bank and also a
bank to protect themselves against currency speculation, which
went into operation about a year later.
        I was reflecting on this, because we were in the U.S.
Congress lobbying — Matt, you will remember this — that week,
and we discovered no one in the Congress had heard anything about
this extraordinary development. It's a really big deal, to have
nations — Russia, China, India, these are big countries. Brazil
is a large country in South America. South Africa is very
advanced in terms of the continent of Africa, and they have a
commitment for nuclear power, which is interesting. And the fact
that they would create a financial and economic institution which
would make it {possible} for nations to get out of the grip of
the bankrupt British Empire.
        I remember what we learned, is that, actually, the State
Department had sent out a memo or something instructing people
that this was really not an important development. I raise that
now, because what Americans should not miss, is the {potential}.
Why the hysteria? Why would George Soros be deploying his tens of
millions of dollars to pay all these agitators and organize this
30,000-person army of activists that Barack Obama is allegedly
going to be leading? Well, because what has come into existence
— and it's very advanced already — is a New Paradigm.
        Viewers of LaRouche PAC are probably aware: the Chinese,
together with the government of Ethiopia, just completed a
railroad from Djibouti to Addis Ababa. This was a route that took
3 days by truck, and now takes 12 hours by train. This means that
when you have a drought in Ethiopia, people don't have to die.
You can quickly get food and water there. It means great
potential for the development of the entire continent of Africa,
for the continent of South America. And if you think about what
people were taught — what the British system of economics is —
not just "buy cheap and sell dear," but Malthus: resources are
increasing arithmetically and population geometrically.
Therefore, we're over-populated; we have to shut down human
consumption of energy and food; reduce the population. Wars are
good for that.
        In other words, what we have a potential for, is a
completely new paradigm for mankind, worldwide, and the key is
for the United States to join this. President Trump, by
expressing his intent to have a reasonable relationship with
Russia, and hopefully China and Japan (he mentioned), as well,
has indicated an openness to being part of this new paradigm; and
therefore the backlash is rather extraordinary. I don't think
there's been a time — I know Abraham Lincoln had to travel to
his inauguration disguised as a woman, because of protests and so
on. But I don't think there's been a time where you've had for
weeks, going on months, this kind of agitation, so-called
"resistance," whatever they're calling it, the opposition to a
new President. I think it's very important that Americans
identify what the {potential} is, so we know what the battle is
that's occurring; and therefore combatting the lies in the U.S.
media about Russia, about Vladimir Putin, and what Russia's
intention is. And what happened in Ukraine is a very, very
important aspect to neutralizing this attack on our Presidency
and allowing the potential for the United States to join this.

OGDEN: Absolutely! One thing I should mention, is that in
addition to the activities that the international LaRouche
movement held this week around this International Week of Truth,
Helga LaRouche also highlighted two very significant calls that
came out of both ex-President Viktor Yanukovych and then the
former Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mykola Azarov, which also
parallel exactly this question of the "week of truth."
        Viktor Yanukovych has written a letter, which is addressed
to world leaders, which includes President Trump, President
Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and French President
François Hollande. And he is calling on world leaders to
"initiate the creation of a special commission of the Council of
Europe to monitor the investigation of crimes that were committed
on the Maidan." So, essentially a "Truth Commission," to get at
the truth of what really happened during the so-called "peaceful
revolution" of the Maidan.
        In parallel with that, the former Ukrainian Prime Minister,
Mykola Azarov, who served from 2010 until January 2014, when he
resigned at the height of the Maidan protests, has unleashed a
report on his Facebook page, saying "Today, we and investigators
in Kiev have reliable information about the fact that the murders
on the Maidan were carried out by special groups of snipers from
Georgia, the Baltic countries, and Poland, under the guidance of
instructors from France and Germany." And then he says, "An
attempt was made to place the blame for the massacre squarely on
Yanukovych and the Berkut riot police." So, he is saying,
directly here, that this was a fraud and that the so-called
"snipers" were deployed in by intelligence services from the
outside in order to explode an already very volatile situation,
and to turn it from just protests, into a violent coup d'etat.
This is also in the context of this International Week of Truth
around the truth of what's happening, or what {did} happen in
Ukraine.
        At the same time, you have several U.S. Congressmen who are
identifying the role that George Soros is playing {right now} in
attempts to start a color revolution in Macedonia. They should
maybe, perhaps, turn their focus right to their own back yard and
to their own town hall meetings, and to the events in the United
States; but it's very useful that these are sitting U.S.
Congressmen [who] are identifying the role that George Soros and
his networks play in these international color revolutions.
        Now, Diane, let me come back to the point that you made, and
I think it's a critical point, that there is no way to understand
the reality of what really was the intention behind what happened
in Ukraine in 2014, without understanding this dramatic turning
point that history experienced at that moment. This was the BRICS
Summit in Fortaleza — as you mentioned — and really especially,
the announcement of President Xi Jinping of the Belt and Road
Initiative; the New Silk Road. It was the decision by Viktor
Yanukovych not to enter into this free-trade agreement with the
failing European Union, and instead to preserve his economic
relationship with Russia, which was the pretext behind the reason
why it was decided {at that point} to launch this kind of violent
overthrow of his government.
        Now, take a look at the present moment. What has Donald
Trump telegraphed? Now only did he withdraw from the TPP — which
was the intended plan by the Obama Administration to try to
{contain} the Chinese influence in Asia; but he has also had
direct conversations with President Xi Jinping, which he said are
very constructive. He had this summit with President Abe. But
these relationships — as he made clear — do not have to be
mutually exclusive. And clearly, his relationship with Russia —
the fact that he pulled us back from the brink of a thermonuclear
war which was being pursued by Obama and prospectively by Hillary
Clinton.
        So, it's in that context, and it's the tension of this
present moment in history which is not yet resolved. But the
question is, will the United States join the New Silk Road? As
people know, there is this upcoming summit in May on the Belt and
Road Initiative in China; which is being hosted by President Xi
Jinping, and will be attended personally by President Putin of
Russia. The current campaign is to convey to President Trump that
not only should he attend this summit in person; but that he
should walk away from the summit with an expressed commitment
that the United States is abandoning the geopolitics of the past
several decades, and is decisively entering into a win-win
cooperation with the nation of China and all of the allied
countries around this New Silk Road initiative. There is no way
that the United States can have an economic recovery {without}
participating in this new development paradigm of great projects
which China has already begun spreading across Eurasia. As you
mentioned, Diane, into Africa; and even in countries in Latin
America.
        One thing that's very significant is a report that has just
come out, published by PriceWaterhouse Cooper, which is a major
international business and analysis firm. This is a report which
is titled "2016 Assessment B&R Watch; China and the Belt and Road
Infrastructure; Review and Outlook". And this was just published
in February of 2017. This has a very comprehensive overview of
what the Belt and Road Initiative is; it has a very well-made map
which is called "Belt and Road; Resurrecting the Ancient Silk
Road". It has a section which documents how many countries are
already involved in the Belt and Road Initiative. It says, "The
B&R region spans three continents and includes a total of 66
countries, from Lithuania to Indonesia." Then in the context of
the explosive growth that has already begun to be seen in some of
these countries — especially China, but other countries that are
benefiting from this investment in these great projects; it then
has their analysis for the coming months and the coming years.
One slide says "We see potential for significant growth in power,
rail, and health care in a number of the middle-income Belt and
Road countries." Another slide says "Trans-Eurasian rail networks
will dramatically reduce the time between China and European
consumer markets." Then finally, it says "Urbanization and
population growth will spur continued demand for high-capacity
transportation infrastructure."
        So, again, this is the future of the world economy. The
growth is now, the center of gravity has now shifted decisively
to Eurasia, to China, and to these countries that are now a part
of the Belt and Road Initiative. If Donald Trump is serious about
facilitating an economic recovery in the United States, it will
be done by joining — in a win-win cooperation — with China and
these other countries; and joining the New Silk Road. As I
mentioned, LaRouche PAC had published a pamphlet two years ago on
the subject of the United States joining the New Silk Road; and
we are currently in the process of updating this pamphlet in a
completely new way. Hopefully, that will be available in the next
week or two.
        So, put this in context and recognize, the Ukraine coup
happened because of Viktor Yanukovych's decision not to enter
into a free-trade agreement with the failing European Union; and
was recognizing that there was a new economic dynamic that was
emerging from Eurasia. Now, you've got a very similar situation
potentially, from inside the United States. So, this Day of Truth
was not only to say "Here's what happened in Ukraine three years
ago," but let that be a warning; this is, in fact, actively being
attempted inside the United States today.
        So Diane, maybe you want to follow up a little bit on that
question. But also, I should point out, that President Trump's
State of the Union address to a Joint Session of Congress is
coming up next Tuesday. That's February 28th, and that is the
deadline for our petition campaign around the Glass-Steagall
initiative. We can put up on the screen right now the address;
this is https://lpac.co/trumpsotu. And this petition campaign
continues to accelerate. We had a report last night on our
Fireside Chat activist call, of several activists with LaRouche
PAC from New York City to Connecticut to California attending
town hall meetings, and intervening with this issue.
Glass-Steagall is urgent; Trump promised this during his
Presidential campaign. We have to hold him to this, and urge him
to commit to the restoration of Glass-Steagall during or before
his State of the Union address next Tuesday. So, Diane maybe you
can say a little more about that campaign; or anything else that
you want to add.

SARE: Well, I would just say that Trump has expressed his intent
to spend $1 trillion on infrastructure in the United States. Now
I understand that the Chinese think we need about $8 trillion in
investment; which is probably more accurate. But $1 trillion is
certainly a good start. But how do you do this? Where does it go,
if the Prime Minister of Japan, Abe, who was just here, wants to
invest $150 billion to build high-speed rail? Number one, if you
have a banking system where any savings can be used as collateral
for bailing out derivatives obligations, who would want to put
their investments through such a system? Two, we don't have a
national bank; we don't have the Treasury under the control of
the Congress in a sense as it should be. We've got the Federal
Reserve that's done $31 trillion worth of bail-outs. So, in order
for this to succeed, LaRouche's Four Laws, starting first and
foremost with Glass-Steagall, is absolutely urgent.
Glass-Steagall alone is not sufficient; but it's the first step.
I would say that if Trump fails to go with Glass-Steagall, and to
go with this approach, it's a great vulnerability; because unless
the government of the United States actually acts to rein in this
gigantic bubble of speculative debt, and to put up that firewall
between the investment banks and the commercial banks, then when
the system implodes — which it inevitably will; it {must}.
        Everyone should just consider, what have we done, in terms
of physical productivity, commensurate with the amount of money
that is now in circulation? Nothing. The physical productivity
has collapsed. This is Mr. LaRouche's famous Triple Curve
function that looks like a trumpet bell; with a hyperbolic curve
going up and a hyperbolic curve going down. We're at the break
point; the system will crash. We must have Glass-Steagall in
place. If that is not done, it creates a potential for
extraordinary chaos in this country and globally. But then too,
you want a system of banking; a national system of banking that
allows the necessary credit to flow into drivers of the whole
economy. Which emphatically means funding for the development of
thermonuclear nuclear fusion energy, to elevate the entire
platform of how we function; the space program. Instead of just
little pockets of high-speed rail, we actually need a
trans-continental railroad. As I've said before, if we're going
to cross the Hudson River, we should make sure we cross the
Bering Strait at the other end. These are only possible with a
sane banking system; so I think it's just very urgent that we not
leave this vulnerability open. Everybody who's involved in
watching this or your friends, your neighbors, get these
petitions circulating, signed, and get them to your Congressman
or your Senator or send them back to us. I know we delivered 2300
signatures for this to the Trump White House, and we're going to
be doing a lot more. We should do it very quickly.

        OGDEN: And then the one thing you also were pointing out
yesterday, is that despite the media propaganda, that everybody
at these town hall meetings is just there to defend the Obamacare
or something like that, and are just enraged protesters. When you
go with this message, "This is how we're going to rebuild the
United States; and we need Glass-Steagall. And we need
Hamiltonian economic policies, and we need jobs and
infrastructure." The response is extraordinary. And in fact,
despite the efforts of Soros and some of these other Obama for
America, stay behind kind of organizations, the American people
want to be united to constructively work together; and wish they
did have a President who was serious about this kind of question.
When you say "This is the agenda, and this is what we should be
doing," it has an extraordinary effect of unifying people. I
don't know if you want to say anything more about that.

        SARE: Yeah, you said it; that's absolutely the case. But it
is counterintuitive; because the media would have you believe
that every one of these protesters is some screaming, irrational
fanatic. And it's simply not true. You have to remember, why did
Trump win the election? Because the US economy is finished.
Because out of 320 million Americans, over 90 million who are
eligible to work are not employed; they're not part of the
workforce. So, that is the reality, whatever the news media wants
to say about it. Then, when we approach these demonstrations,
everyone was very struck; and I think they were in Boston on this
Day of Action. The openness we're getting is extraordinary;
people are thoughtful, they want solutions. They want a program;
we have that. You can very quickly pull people into sanity on
that principle.

        OGDEN: Exactly. So, let me just say, in conclusion, the
State of the Union speech obviously is next Tuesday. Over the
course of this weekend, there are extraordinary opportunities for
people who are viewing this broadcast to go and circulate this
petition at these town hall meetings. You can also circulate this
dossier, which is very important; get people's hands on this and
encourage other people to print it out and circulate it
themselves. Again, let me put up on the screen the address where
you can get this dossier; and we'll make this available in the
description of this YouTube video also. But it's
https://lpac.co/ukraine-dossier. The video montage that you saw
earlier in the broadcast today, we will also make available as a
separate item in order to circulate this.
        Let me just conclude by saying that Helga LaRouche wanted to
make it known that the International Day of Truth should not be
limited to merely one day, or to one week. That this has got to
be an ongoing campaign; we've got to keep the pressure going.
This is something that President Trump should respond to, and
should be called upon to respond to. The propaganda that has been
peddled about the Ukraine situation has been the major wedge
driven between the perspective of cooperation of the United
States and Russia. As President Trump said in his press
conference a week ago, "The Russia thing is a ruse." And people
should recognize that the Ukraine thing is also a ruse. In
discussions this week, we pointed out that the kind of campaign
that was waged about the 28 pages and the truth behind what
happened on 9/11, with the financing by the Saudis of these
hijackers and the campaign that LaRouche PAC led to get the truth
out about the 28 pages, was a victorious campaign. But it was one
that had to be continuously run; and it was a lot of long-term
pressure that resulted in the victory of the declassification of
the 28 pages. And the passage of the JASTA vote, which was a
major defeat for Obama during his last few months in office. This
is a very similar question. Oliver Stone has called for President
Trump to release the documents on the US involvement in this coup
on the Maidan. That would be a very constructive thing to do; and
he has the authority to do that. But this is an International
Week of Truth; but it should just be an International {Campaign}
of Truth. It must be in parallel and in the context of the
recognition that we are at an extraordinary moment in history,
where the age of geopolitics can be ended; and the United States
can decisively join this New Paradigm of economic development and
great projects that China is leading with the New Silk Road.
        So, thank you very much Diane; I know that you were
interviewed by numerous media outlets during the rally yesterday
up in New York. So, we'll probably look forward to more coverage
of that in various international media outlets over the next few
hours and days. We will be joining you again on Monday for our
discussion with the Policy Committee; and obviously that will
occur on the eve of the State of the Union address next Tuesday.
So, please stay tuned to larouchepac.com; please circulate this
dossier as widely as possible. Please continue to get petition
signatures and send them in to us. Please subscribe to our email
list if you have not already. Thank you very much and we will see
you soon.         

     




Video: En Ny Æra for USA:
LaRouches Fire Love.
Fuld dansk tekst

Forestil jer, at vi lever i et samfund, der har forpligtet sig til at opnå fusion og implementere dens fordele.

Hvordan ville det, at være en del af et sådant samfund, forme dets borgeres selvopfattelse? Et menneskeliv har konsekvenser og betydning, der varer ud over den fysiske død – i det mindste potentielt. Ved at vedtage en mission for opnåelse af fusion, omsætter vi et af Hamiltons mål i praksis, hvor han skriver, at, »at værdsætte og stimulere det menneskelige intellekts aktivitet gennem at mangfoldiggøre objekterne for foretagsomheden, er ikke blandt de mindst betragtelige af de midler, ved hvilke en nations rigdom kan fremmes. Selv ting, der i sig selv ikke er fordelagtige, bliver det undertiden gennem deres tendens til at fremprovokere en anstrengelse. Enhver ny scene, der åbnes op for menneskets geskæftige natur for at vække det og hævde sig, udgør en tilgang af ny kraft til lageret af bestræbelse.« – Få det til at ske!

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Et øjeblik for storhed

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 23. februar, 2017 – De første rapporter om vores Internationale Sandhedens Dag på treårsdagen for Obama/Soros nazi-kuppet i Ukraine, viser amerikanere og andre, der responderer til os på uventet rationelle og fornuftige måder, og ofte med spontane, dybe og vidtrækkende diskussioner. Og dette uafhængigt af politisk tilhørsforhold. (Dette er især bemærkelsesværdigt midt i hadet og løgnene, der hældes ud af næsten alle medier.) Dette er en del af deres indledende reaktion på en totalt ny, international situation uden fortilfælde, skabt af Vladimir Putins præstationer, komplementeret af den gigantiske udfoldelse af Kinas Nye Silkevejspolitik under præsident Xi Jinping, og nu, med valget af Donald Trump – selv, hvis de mennesker, der oplever dette, stadig ikke er bevidste om årsagen. Foreløbig fornemmer de det blot snarere, end at de ved det. Men de frø, der hen over mange årtier er blevet sået af Lyndon og Helge LaRouche, medvirker nu til at skabe et i sandhed »stort øjeblik« i historien. Efter alle det tyvende århundredes og enogtyvende århundredes til dato trængsler og rædsler, er et øjeblik kommet, i hvilket menneskeheden, så længe, dette øjeblik varer, virkelig kan vælge en helt anden og langt bedre fremtid for os selv, og for vores eftertid.

Dette enestående øjeblik, der markeredes af den nationale højtidsdag for dr. Martin Luther King, jr., den 16. januar, må bringe i erindring den tale, som dr. King holdt den 3. april, 1968, den sidste aften, før han blev gjort til martyr, og ofte kaldt »Bjergtop-talen«, som Dennis Speed for nylig genkaldte i EIR. Dette var en mand, som Lyndon Larouche sagde, skulle have været præsident – og dette sagt af Lyndon LaRouche, der selv har unikke kvalifikationer for præsidentskabet. Det er umagen værd i dag at genlæse, eller bedre endnu, se og høre denne tale. Det ville være absurd at forsøge at opsummere talen her, kort, som den var.[1] Men, som Dennis Speed genkaldte det, så bevidnede dr. King, at, hvis han fik valget mellem at leve sit liv i alle æraer, så ville han vælge netop dette øjeblik at leve i, på grund af den enestående mulighed, det tilbød for fremskridt og forbedring for hele menneskeheden. (Foto: Dr. Martin Luther King holdt sin sidste tale, »I have been to the Mountaintop« – »Jeg har stået på bjergets top« – den 3. april, 1968. Han blev myrdet den 4. april, 1968.)

Denne løfterigdom druknede i dr. Kings og Kennedybrødrenes blod. Amerikanere, der burde være blevet ledere, valgte i stedet at træde et skridt tilbage og forblive små efter disse mord – men ikke i al evighed! Det lykkedes for Lyndon LaRouche at gribe en lejlighed, der tilbød sig senere med Reagan-administrationen; han opnåede permanent fremskridt for menneskeheden – men denne chance blev så atter forpurret af mordforsøget på Ronald Reagan, og senere af nærmordet på, og de falske, retslige anklager imod, Lyndon LaRouche. Andres middelmådighed og kompromisser gjorde det muligt at forpasse denne chance.

Indtil i dag. Nu har vi et øjeblik for sand storhed.

Foto: Medlem af LaRouchePAC's politiske komite, Diane Sare, organiserer på den internationale Sandhedens Dag, her i New York, den 23. februar, 2017. 




Introduktion til EIR’s rapport,
»Obama-Soros ’farvede
revolutioner’; Nazi-kup i
Ukraine, 2014; USA, 2017?«
Hele rapporten som pdf

For tre år siden i denne uge besatte en folkemængde på Kievs gader, bevæbnet med molotovcocktails, regeringsbygninger og udførte voldshandlinger og drev nationens retmæssigt valgte præsident ud af embedet, og ud af landet. De førende grupper i denne folkemængde viftede med portrætter af Stepan Bandera, Adolf Hitlers kollaboratør i Ukraine under Anden Verdenskrig.

I dag forsøger de samme britiske og amerikanske efterretningsorganisationer, og mange af de samme personer, at gentage processen, men denne gang er målet den demokratisk valgte regering i selve USA. Tankegangen er den samme: Imperiet må bevare opsplitningen af verden i konkurrerende blokke, Imperiets del-og-hersk-politik helt tilbage til Det romerske Imperium. Opsplitningen Øst versus Vest kollapsede næsten, da Sovjetunionen kollapsede i 1990’erne og gjorde det af med undskyldningen med Den frie Verden vs. Gudløs Kommunisme, som af briterne var blevet brugt til at ødelægge Franklin Roosevelts partnerskab med Rusland for at besejre fascismen.

(Det følgende er introduktionen til EIR’s 17 sider lange rapport med ovenstående titel, der publiceres i det kommende nummer af EIR. Efterfølgende findes Forpremiere af rapporten som pdf.)

22. februar, 2017 – For tre år siden i denne uge besatte en folkemængde på Kievs gader, bevæbnet med molotovcocktails, regeringsbygninger og udførte voldshandlinger og drev nationens retmæssigt valgte præsident ud af embedet, og ud af landet. De førende grupper i denne folkemængde viftede med portrætter af Stepan Bandera, Adolf Hitlers kollaboratør i Ukraine under Anden Verdenskrig.

I dag forsøger de samme britiske og amerikanske efterretningsorganisationer, og mange af de samme personer, at gentage processen, men denne gang er målet den demokratisk valgte regering i selve USA. Tankegangen er den samme: Imperiet må bevare opsplitningen af verden i konkurrerende blokke, Imperiets del-og-hersk-politik helt tilbage til Det romerske Imperium. Opsplitningen Øst versus Vest kollapsede næsten, da Sovjetunionen kollapsede i 1990’erne og gjorde det af med undskyldningen med Den frie Verden vs. Gudløs Kommunisme, som af briterne var blevet brugt til at ødelægge Franklin Roosevelts partnerskab med Rusland for at besejre fascismen.

Lyndon og Helga LaRouche fremlagde på tidspunktet for Sovjetunionens kollaps ideen om den Nye Silkevej, der ville forene Europa og Asien via nye, højhastighedsjernbane-udviklingskorridorer igennem Rusland og Centralasien, og forene verden på basis af gensidig udvikling og kulturel dialog. Dette ville Imperiet ikke tillade.

Obama-administrationen, og London, hilste ikke alene det voldelige kup i Ukraine i 2014 velkommen, som et middel til at retfærdiggøre målet med en fornyet, militær NATO-oprustning imod Rusland, men de skabte det snarere. Obama og hans talspersoner meddelte stolt, at USA havde finansieret og orkestreret de organisationer, der deltog i demonstrationerne på den offentlige plads, Maidan. Obamas direkte kupagent, viceudenrigsminister for europæiske og eurasiske anliggender, Victoria Nuland, aflagde flere gange ophavsmændene til optøjerne besøg, hvor hun uddelte cookies på Maidan samtidig med, at hun nægtede at indrømme, at der, ud over fredelige demonstranter, der var bekymret over korruption og økonomiske strabadser, var åbenlyst neofascistiske bander, der anførte en bevæbnet opstand imod den valgte regering.

Desuden blev Nuland taget i en telefonaflytning og -optagelse, hvor hun instruerer den amerikanske ambassadør til Ukraine i, præcis, hvem der skulle gøres til premierminister i den nye regering.

Resultatet af kuppet for det ukrainske folk har været ubetinget rædsel. Den velstand, som de blev lovet, ville fremkomme til gengæld for at underskrive en frihandels-associeringsaftale med den Europæiske Union (EU), har ikke materialiseret sig; i stedet har der været ond nedskæringspolitik (’nøjsomhedspolitik’), massive budgetnedskæringer og afskedigelser, alt imens udenlandske statsborgere blev udpeget til at køre økonomien. Militære regeringsstyrker og neonazistiske militser udfører uophørligt krigsførelse imod landets Donbass-region, der nægtede at underkaste sig det ulovlige kup.

Den myte blev bragt til torvs i Vesten, at Rusland forårsagede problemet ved at modsætte sig en fredelig opstand imod deres (russernes) marionetregering i Kiev; ved at annektere Krim og ved at invadere Donbass, alt imens de angiveligt skulle være i gang med at planlægge en erobring af Ukraine, de baltiske lande og muligvis endnu andre lande, med den hensigt at genoprette Det sovjetiske Imperium.

Og således også i dag udbredes den myte af de slagne Obama- og George Soros-kredse, og ad nauseam – ’til kvalmegrænsen’ – i mainstreammedierne, at Obama/Hillary-valgkampagnen kun blev slået, fordi Rusland stjal valget med det formål, at russernes marionet Donald Trump skulle vinde valget. Uden nogensinde at fremkomme med så meget som antydning af bevis (det er alt sammen tophemmeligt, ved I nok), opfodres massehysteriet imod Putin og Rusland af læk fra de samme, neokonservative efterretningsnetværk, der er oversiddere fra Obama-administrationen. Trump har identificeret disse kriminelle og nævnt elementer i FBI og NSA og undlod kun lige at identificere deres handlinger som forræderiske. Præsidenten har ret.

Putin selv har udtrykt sig meget klart om det, der foregår i USA. Forespurgt, under en pressekonference den 17. januar, om det anti-russiske hysteri i amerikansk presse og i visse politiske kredse, sagde Putin:

»Efter min mening er der flere mål; nogle af dem er indlysende. Det første mål er at underminere den valgte, amerikanske præsidents legitimitet. I øvrigt vil jeg i denne forbindelse gerne bemærke, at, hvad enten folk, som gør dette, ønsker det eller ej, så beskadiger de i høj grad USA’s interesser. Det synes, som om de trænede til dette i Kiev og nu er rede til at organisere et ’Maidan’ i Washington, for at Trump ikke skal indtage præsidentembedet. Det andet mål er at binde den nyvalgte præsident på hænder og fødder, med relation til hans implementering af sine aflagte valgløfter til det amerikanske folk og det internationale samfund.«

I mellemtiden opfordrede dr. Natalia Vitrenko i Ukraine, der i flere valg har været præsidentkandidat for Ukraines Progressive Socialistparti, i et brev til præsident Donald Trump efter han var blevet valgt, at han ændrede Obamas katastrofale politik for Ukraine: »Vort folk lider svært under krig, ekstrem fattigdom, korruption, politisk undertrykkelse og neonazisters hærgen. Den aftrædende amerikanske administration blev ved med at oppiske det ukrainske folk imod Rusland og tilskyndede herved til en krig mellem vore to broderfolk – en krig, der uden for enhver tvivl truer med at udløse en Tredje Verdenskrig.«

De fascistiske elementer i den ukrainske regering har orkestreret angreb fra voldsmænd imod Vitrenko og hendes parti, beslaglagt partiets hovedkvarter og truer med at læge sag an mod hende for forræderi – for den forbrydelse at identificere regeringens og de neonazistiske militsers åbenlyst fascistiske handlinger.

Og i USA er Obama den første præsident i USA’s historie, der anfører en indsats for at vælte den regering, der afløste ham. Under Obama udførte USA evindelige krige imod lande, der ikke udgjorde nogen trussel mod vores nation; han udførte droneangreb imod enkeltpersoner, som var blevet personligt udvalgt af Obama uden en antydning af retslig proces, og Obama fremprovokerede næsten en krig med Rusland, en krig, der næsten med sikkerhed ville være blevet en atomkrig, og som ville have været næsten sikker, hvis Obamas klon, Hillary Clinton, var blevet valgt.

Den idé, at Trump kunne afslutte imperiepolitikken og gå sammen med Rusland og Kina, som Franklin Roosevelt gjorde det for at besejre fascisme, om et nyt paradigme for nedkæmpelse af terrorisme og for opbygning af infrastruktur og agro-industriel fremgang for nationer i hele verden, som en del af den Nye Silkevejsproces, ville betyde enden for selveste ideen om Imperium, én gang for alle. For at forhindre dette, vil briterne og deres aktiver i USA, anført af Obama og hans sponsor George Soros, så vel som deres neokonservative fæller på den Republikanske side, ikke sky noget middel. Det amerikanske folk er i stigende grad bevidste om denne ondskab, men må handle hurtigt for at afsløre den og knuse den.

Denne rapport er delt i fire afsnit, med links til dokumenterende artikler i slutningen.

  1. Den strategiske situation i Ukraine fra det neonazistiske kup i februar 2014 og denne nations kollaps, og frem til det økonomiske og strategiske kaos i dag.
  2. Den neonazistiske oprindelse til de ledende grupper og personer i regimeskifte-kuppet i Ukraine i 2014.
  3. En kronologi af selve kuppet, fra november 2013 frem til februar 2014.
  4. En profil af den farvede revolutions politiks oprindelse og metoder, som blev sat ind i kuppet i Ukraine, og i USA i dag. Dette viser den britiske/CIA-orkestrering af undergravende regimeskifte i nationer, der nægter at følge det angloamerikanske finansoligarkis diktater.

Potentialet for, at verden kan lade æraen med imperiemagt bag sig og gå ind i en ny æra for civilisationen – præcis ligesom Renæssancen afsluttede æraen med feudal tilbageståenhed – er i dag inden for vores rækkevidde. Det påhviler hver eneste borger i USA, og hver borger i verden, at sikre, at dette øjebliks enorme potentiale bliver til virkelighed. 

(Foto: Sceneri fra Maidan, Ukraine.)   

Download (PDF, Unknown)




International Aktionsdag 23. februar:
Kup i Ukraine 2014; i USA 2017?
EIR udgiver 17 sider lang Rapport,
“Obama and Soros Color Revolutions
—Nazis in Ukraine, 2014; USA, 2017?”

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 21. februar, 2017 – »Sæt Obama i fængsel for forræderi«; sådan vil hovedbanneret lyde på LaRouchePAC Aktionsdag, der finder sted kommende torsdag, 23. februar. Den landsdækkende mobilisering markerer treårsdagen for det Soros-Obama-støttede, nazistiske kup i Ukraine, og den vil mobilisere befolkningen til at stoppe live-operationen for at lancere en tilsvarende, nazistisk »farvet revolution« imod Trump-administrationen i USA i dag.

Tirsdag sagde Lyndon LaRouche til medarbejdere, at, i tilfældet Ukraine, »tog nazisterne over med et Hitler-program. Vi må sige det klart: de var nazister, støttet af Obama og Soros«. Han tilføjede, at en sådan klarhed vil være nyttig for den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin og hjælpe ham med at få ryddet ud i roderiet, hvilket han gerne vil gøre. LaRouche sagde udtrykkeligt, at briterne står bag Obama-Soros-planerne for USA i dag; at de omgående må lukkes ned; og at LPAC’s Aktionsdag har til formål at gøre præcis dette. Flyvebladet, der skal uddeles på denne aktionsdag, findes her (engelsk) https://larouchepac.com/sites/default/files/20170222-ukraine-final.pdf

Med dette formål for øje – at lukke Obama-Soros-planerne for USA ned – har Executive Intelligence Review netop bebudet udgivelsen af et dramatisk dossier om spørgsmålet, med følgende pressemeddelelse:

EIR’s Nyhedstjeneste udgav i dag en specialrapport, "Obama and Soros Color Revolutions—Nazis in Ukraine, 2014; USA, 2017?", som bliver udgivet i EIR’s faste ugentlige nummer.

Den 17 sider lange forpremiere på rapporten falder samtidig med treårsdagen for kuppet, den 22. februar, 2014, i Ukraine, og har til formål at præsentere sandheden om Maidan-processen fra november 2013 til februar 2014: at det var en forud planlagt omstyrtelse af regeringen, som involverede ukrainske neonazister – der bagefter blev installeret i Kiev-regeringen; og at den havde aktiv støtte fra mangeårige, angloamerikanske efterretningstjenester og Obama-administrationen.

Denne treårsdag for det pronazistiske kup i Ukraine falder samtidig med, at de selv samme netværker, kontrolleret af Det britiske Imperium, finansieret af Soros og tilknyttet Obama, angriber det netop indsatte Trump-præsidentskab, der, i lighed med den afsatte ukrainske præsident Janukovitj, har givet udtryk for sin hensigt om at få en arbejdsrelation med Rusland.

Myten om Maidan som en opstand på basis af »folkemagt«, der afsatte Ukraines regering, er præcis det – en myte. I realiteten var det en krigsførelse gennem ’farvet revolution’, der blev begået for at konfrontere Rusland og anstifte igangværende destabilisering. Dette var målet for London/Wall Street-aksen bag Obama-Soros-aktionerne til støtte for Maidan, og som var et fremstød for at forpurre den eurasiske, strategiske alliance for udvikling, der hastigt er i færd med at vokse frem mellem Rusland, Kina, Indien og andre nationer, og som nu udtrykkes som »den Nye Silkevejs«-udvikling. I maj måned vil Kina være vært for et globalt topmøde mellem nationer om dette – Bælt-og-Vej-initiativet.

Rapporten vil fuldt ud dokumentere de anklager, der er anført ovenfor, og vil blive vidt cirkuleret i hele USA i denne uge, både i elektronisk form og på tryk. Der bliver offentlige møder i Boston og New York, så vel som i andre byer, på torsdag, den 23. februar, hvor rapporten vil blive uddelt.

De fem afsnit i den nye rapport (plus links til dokumentation):

  1. Den strategiske situation i Ukraine, fra Maidan neonazi-kuppet og frem til denne nations kollaps ind i økonomisk og strategisk kaos i dag.
  2. Den neonazistiske oprindelse til de ledende grupper og personer i regimeskifte-kuppet i 2014.
  3. En kronologi over selve kuppet, fra november 2013 til februar 2014.
  4. En profil af den ’farvede revolutions’ oprindelse og metoder.
  5. Appellen udstedt af dr. Natalia Vitrenko, præsidentkandidat fra Ukraines Progressive Socialistparti, til EU den 10. februar, 2017, om at standse Kiev-regimets igangværende undertrykkelse.[1]

Foto: Den amerikanske senator, John McCain i Kyiv, hvor han betragter kuppet, kørt af USA’s Udenrigsministerium, imod Ukraines demokratisk valgte regering, 14. december, 2013. (Foto: USA’s Ambassade, Ukraine)

[1] Se: Nazistisk Kiev-regime forsøger at gøre Vitrenko tavs med falske anklager; Appel til EU 10. februar, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17922

 

 

 




Sæt Obama i fængsel for forræderi

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 20. februar, 2017 – Efter otte års massedrab med droner og krige for »regimeskifte«, med folkemord til følge, nægter Barack Obama at trække sig tilbage fra sin forræderiske rolle, men anfører nu en opstand imod den demokratisk valgte præsident, der solidt slog hans klon, Hillary Clinton, ved valget i november.

»Obama er faktisk særdeles sårbar«, bemærkede Lyndon LaRouche i dag. »Han har afsløret sig selv som værende en forræder af USA.« I sin regeringstid mødtes Obama stolt med sin CIA-chef, John Brennan, hver tirsdag eftermiddag for at udfærdige ugens »drabsliste« – dem, som »Kong Obama« vælger at myrde af egen fri vilje – uden domsafsigelse, uden lovmæssig retssag – sammen med dem, der nu tilfældigvis befandt sig sammen med Obamas mål, da dronen ramte.

LaRouche bemærkede, at New York Times for længe siden afslørede historien om Obamas tirsdags-drabsmøder, ikke, fordi de ønskede at afsløre hans dræberkarakter, men for at få den amerikanske befolkning til at acceptere det – til at ringeagte sig selv ved at tolerere en massemorder som deres præsident, uden protest.

EIR vil i denne uge udgive et dossier med titlen, »Obama og Soros farvede revolutioner – Nazistisk kup i Ukraine, 2014 – i USA, 2017?« Den 21. og 22. februar er treårsdagen for Obamas omstyrtelse af den demokratisk valgte, ukrainske regering i 2014 i en voldelig pøbelaktion, der var direkte finansieret og dirigeret af Obama og hans personlige agent for regionen, Victoria Nuland. Optøjerne, centreret omkring den centrale Maidan-plads, indbefattede angreb med molotovcocktails mod politiet og regeringsbygninger og anførtes af organisationer, der åbenlyst promoverede Stepan Bandera, Adolf Hitlers ukrainske, nazistiske partner.

EIR-dossieret viser, at Barack Obama, sammen med sin sponsor George Soros og andre britiske og amerikanske agenter for »projekt demokrati«, nu retter deres ’farvede revolution’-skyts mod selve USA – og af samme grund: Det britiske Imperium nægtede at lade Vesteuropa og Rusland arbejde sammen for fred og udvikling, og kørte derfor et antirussisk kup, udført af ukrainske nazister af den gamle skole, med det formål at bære nyt ved til bålet for det gamle, nazistiske had mod Rusland. Således også i USA: Obama-slænget er i gang med den utroligt patetiske bestræbelse, der går ud på at overbevise amerikanerne om, at præsident Trump har begået en forbrydelse ved at ønske at forhindre en krig med Rusland, og i stedet samarbejde med Rusland – og Kina og Indien og Japan – om at bringe fred og udvikling til verden, inklusive til USA. Alt imens der er tåber i USA, der vil sluge dette bras, så er flertallet af befolkningen i en tilstand af oprør imod dette psykotiske nonsens, hvad enten det kommer fra politikerne eller fra medierne.

Obama og Hillary Clinton havde bragt verden helt ud på randen af en termonuklear krig med Rusland. Denne fare er blevet dramatisk skåret ned af Hillarys nederlag. Og dog kræver Obama/Soros-slænget en rigsretssag eller et sagsanlæg for kriminel aktivitet mod Trump, der indgår fred med Rusland, idet de hævder, at det er farligt at Trump »har fingeren på atomknappen«!

At afslutte denne hæslige ironi kræver, at Obama stilles for retten. Hans mange forbrydelser som præsident forværres nu af hans åbenlyse kampagne for at vælte USA’s regering – en åbenlyst forræderisk handling.

Obama elskede i den grad den britiske dronning og det britiske system, at han tjente som dets loyale aktiv med at genoprette den tidligere britiske kolonis underdanighed over for det britiske system – monetarisme og kolonikrige. I dag kræver Financial Times, talerør for Londons og Wall Streets finansoligarki, åbenlyst en voldelig opstand mod opkomlinge-præsidenten, der truer med at gøre en ende på Det britiske Imperiums »del og hersk«-opsplitning af verden. Chefen for FT’s afdeling i Washington, Edward Luce, advarer om, at, hvis Trump ikke væltes, vil han vælte »systemet«.

Det kunne han meget vel gøre, og det ske! Trump har fremført, at USA bør acceptere forslagene fra Putin – at USA og Rusland skal arbejde hånd i hånd for at besejre terrorisme – og fra Xi Jinping – at USA bør tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevejsproces for global udvikling. For Trump at lever op til dette forpligtende engagement, betyder det enden på Imperiet. Det er en inspireret befolknings ansvar at sørge for, at dette smukke resultat virkeliggøres, og denne inspiration udtrykkes bedst gennem Lyndon LaRouches 50 år lange lederskab. Dette er vores øjeblik, hvis vi griber det, for at virkeliggøre det, Helga Zepp-LaRouche har kaldt »menneskehedens modne alder«.[1] 

[1] Helga Zepp-LaRouche: »Nu har menneskeheden muligheden for at blive voksen«, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17777




Om »Deep State« – ’Staten i Staten’ – og George Soros

20. feb., 2017Af Barbara Boyd. Hvad menes der med udtrykket ’Staten i Staten’ (eng. »Deep State«) i de mange avisoverskrifter, der i øjeblikket forekommer, og som erklærer, at det aktuelle øjeblik beherskes af en krig mellem Donald Trump og ’Staten i Staten’? Forskellige britiske medier har spekuleret, f.eks. gårsdagens Financial Times, at dette er en krig, som Trump ikke kan vinde – at Deep State enten vil kontrollere ham, eller dræbe ham.

Udtrykket ’Deep State’ blev oprindelig opfundet af den tidligere professor ved Berkeley, Peter Dale Scott, for at forklare transformerende samfundsmæssige begivenheder, såsom mordet på Kennedy, og ud fra hvilke begivenheder det permanente establishment kom tilsyneladende uskadt, uagtet udbredt folkelig tvivl om de absurde forklaringer, man gav offentligheden. Scott fastslår, at han mener, i første instans, statens hemmelige organisationer såsom efterretnings- og sikkerhedstjenesterne, militæret, men vigtigst af alt, den lyssky sammenhæng mellem disse tjenester, visse politikere og organiseret kriminalitet. Dets rækkevidde er international, finansieres af både statslige og kriminelle kilder som narkohandelen, og er tungt influeret af angloamerikanske store penge. Alt imens Scotts definition er brugbar, så er hans analyse af dens nuværende indflydelse det ikke.

Det ’Deep State’-apparat, der i øjeblikket agerer i en opstand imod præsident Trump, er selve Det britiske Imperium, som det repræsenteres af de angloamerikanske efterretningstjenester, storbankerne i Wall Street/City of London og narkohandelen. Fokusér ikke så meget på aktionerne i gaderne, demonstrationerne arrangeret af en koalition af det Demokratiske Partis politiske aktionskomiteer og små grupper, som alle i årevis er blevet finansieret af George Soros og Democracy Alliance, og som nu opererer under banneret for ’modstand’. At følge pengene endeløst ind i disse grupper giver ikke resultat mht. at forstå dynamikken eller den sag, som det drejer sig om.

Siden Barack Obamas valg i 2008 er et apparat af uddannede organisatorer blevet skabt og finansieret for at lære Saul Alinskys metoder – agenten fra Chicagos Universitet og Rockefeller/Field Foundation, der uddannede både Hillary Clinton og Barack Obama i oprørsmetoder. Disse organisatorer bliver nu sat ind eller gennet ind som resultat af skabelsen af en særdeles følelsesfuld, men falsk narrativ om Donald Trump, som udtales af ’Deep State’ og gentages i det uendelige i de kontrollerede transatlantiske nyhedsmedier. De har, i lighed med deres sponsorer, absolut intet at sige om at genopbygge økonomien og skabe produktive jobs for amerikanere – de virkelige løfter, som folk fandt i Donald Trump. Det moderne Chicago med dets bander, narkotika og mord er arven efter Alinskys metoder – de leder ingen steder hen rent politisk og fører til død, en kendsgerning, der først blev vist af Chicago-journalisten Roy Harvey og LaRouche-bevægelsen helt tilbage i 1979. (Se: EIR-serien: ’Chicago Gangs, Who Benefits?’[1])

Den dødbringende trussel, som Trump udgør mod ’Deep State’ / Det britiske Imperium, er intet mindre end muligheden for, at USA samarbejder med Rusland og Kina – de muligheder, der udgøres af og er indbygget i Kinas Bælt-og-Vej-initiativ for en hurtig opbygning af hele verdens økonomi, inklusive USA’s økonomi. Fokus for en optrævling af kuppet involverer en afsløring af netop de dele af ’Deep State’, der har afsløret, at de er i opposition til denne politik, og som i USA først og fremmest begynder med National Endowment for Democracy og hermed forbundne politikere, financierer og institutioner. Sagt på en anden måde, så vil denne kurs vise, hvorfor det ikke var noget tilfælde, at John Podestas e-mails blev hacket, hvorfor John McCain og Lindsey Graham fortsat er ’plakat-drenge’ for Tredje Verdenskrig, og hvorfor Madeline Albright kørte Hillary Clintons udenrigspolitiske shop og også overvågede det berygtede Grasso abrazo.[2]

Mere følger i de kommende dage.

[1] Interesserede læsere kan henvende sig til Schiller Instituttets kontor om denne serie.

[2] Se En sejrrig strategi for at vinde krigen mod narkotika kræver Glass-Steagall, Mike Billington, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=17860

 

 




RADIO SCHILLER den 15. februar 2017:
Vestlige efterretningstjenster modarbejder Trump

Med formand Tom Gillesberg




Glass-Steagall er det første afgørende skridt; men resten af
LaRouches Fire Love må følge efter for at redde USA og verden!
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast, 3. feb., 2017; Leder

Ben Deniston: Velkommen … Vi vil omgående gå i gang med denne brandvarme situation lige nu, hvor – på trods af alle de falske nyheder; det er korrekt at kalde det for bandekrigsagtig form for operation, som splitter det amerikanske folk. Hvor man får folk til at fokusere på mange sidespørgsmål og små spørgsmål, og meget følelsesladede spørgsmål med meget lidt substans. Men der er i realiteten kun ét eller to nøglespørgsmål på forhandlingsbordet i øjeblikket, som er afgørende for den retning, USA vil gå i, for hvilken retning, denne administration vil gå; og hvordan dette vil udspille sig i den umiddelbart forestående tid.

I front og centrum for denne kamp er spørgsmålet om Wall Street og i særdeleshed spørgsmålet om Glass-Steagall. Vi vil begynde diskussionen i dag med nogle meget dramatiske udviklinger i løbet af den seneste uge, de senest par dage, de seneste par timer, og som understreger, at dette er det spørgsmål, som det drejer sig om. Hvis I vil gøre noget, der har indflydelse på amerikansk politik, på USA’s retning og på historien på dette tidspunkt, så må I kæmpe sammen med LaRouchePAC om spørgsmålet om Glass-Steagall som indledningen til LaRouches Fire Love for et fuldt, økonomisk genrejsningsprogram, og omgående; mens I ser dette program og i de nærmest forestående timer og dage. Dette er absolut afgørende.

For blot at sætte fokus nogle af disse udviklinger, vil vi om et øjeblik vise et klip; et lovforslag for genindførelse af Glass-Steagall er blevet genfremsat i Repræsentanternes Hus i denne uge, anført af [kongresmedlem] Marcy Kaptur – som har kæmpet for dette lovforslag i mange år. Hun holdt en fælles pressekonference med tre andre kongresmedlemmer; og, så vidt vi har kunnet se, så er LaRouchePAC den eneste kanal, der har en fuld dækning af denne pressekonference i sin helhed. Den kan ses på LPAC-websiden; vi vil afspille et kort uddrag af denne 40 minutter lange pressekonference om nogle få minutter. Men dette typificerer en tværpolitisk støtte i Kongressen til dette Glass/Steagall-lovforslag. Disse kongresmedlemmer erklærede ganske klart under pressekonferencen, at de er rede til at arbejde sammen med Trump-administrationen om dette afgørende spørgsmål. De vil ikke lade sig indfange i dette vanvittige, venstre-højre, dette eller hint spørgsmål, denne retorik og de falske nyheder, og virkeligt vanvittige, opsplittende propaganda, som har oversvømmet de amerikanske medier; det ligner i virkeligheden den form for politik for »farvede revolution«, som er blevet britisk og – under Obama – amerikansk politik for at vælte regimer, som de ikke ønsker, i hele verden. Det har præcis samme formål her i USA, med denne bandekrigs-lignende propaganda over sidespørgsmål, som totalt distraherer folk bort fra hovedspørgsmålene.

Men under denne pressekonference så vi en afgørende demonstration af, at højtplacerede, tænkende personer, ledende personer, er villige til ikke at blive indfanget i dette Soros/britiske sindssyge show og i stedet fokusere på reelle, vægtige spørgsmål. De vil lægge betydningsfulde spørgsmål frem på bordet og sige, at dette er et område, hvor vi kan samarbejde omkring at gå frem for et positivt resultat for de spørgsmål, som vi ved har betydning for hele landet. Demokrat, Republikaner, ’blå stat’, ’rød stat’, uanset hvad; det centrale USA, og kyststaterne i USA. Dette er hovedspørgsmålet, det første skridt i at adressere virkeligheden med sammenbruddet af USA, og som den eneste måde, hvorpå man kan opfylde de løfter, der er afgivet, om at genopbygge den amerikanske infrastruktur, om at genskabe jobs i USA på en meningsfuld, reel, substantiel måde. Det kan ikke lade sig gøre, med mindre Glass/Steagall-loven vedtages, og Wall Street lægges i tømmer, og dette system reformeres. Denne pressekonference – igen, det handler ikke blot om at genindføre Glass-Steagall, men også om at erkende og åbent arbejde på vigtige spørgsmål, og ikke blive indfanget i disse vanvittige sidespørgsmål, er absolut afgørende. Vi afspiller klippet om et øjeblik.

Men ligeledes i den forgangne uge deltog William (Bill) Jones, korrespondent for Lyndon LaRouches magasin Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), i en diskussion under en pressekonference i Det Hvide Hus, og han fik lejlighed til direkte at spørge pressesekretær Spicer, »Støtter præsident Donald Trump stadig Glass-Steagall?« Og, efter at havde vævet lidt omkring, stillede hr. Jones et meget direkte spørgsmål; og han fik et meget direkte »Ja«. Og Trumps officielle repræsentant Spicer sagde, »Vi er forpligtet på vore valgløfter. Ja.« Dette er en bekræftende udtalelse på vegne af præsident Trump om, at han stadig støtter denne lovgivning. Så potentialet er klart til stede; men vi ønsker at gøre det klart her i denne diskussion, at dette på ingen måde er et afgjort løb. Det er på ingen måde absolut. Jeres rolle som tilhængere af LaRouchePAC, som støtter af LaRouchePAC, og som LPAC-aktivister, er umiddelbart, absolut afgørende. Vi må sikre os, at denne lov gennemføres.

I de næste timer og minutter venter vi i øjeblikket på resultaterne af et par eksekutive ordrer, som præsident Trump har underskrevet tidligere på dagen – midt på fredag eftermiddag, lige efter frokost. En af disse handler om, hvordan han har til hensigt at strukturere reformen af Dodd/Frank-loven. Dette er et afgørende spørgsmål, for, som enhver ved, så var Dodd/Frank en total vittighed; det var et totalt forsøg på at lade som om, at de lagde Wall Street i tømmer samtidig med, at de fuldstændig overgav sig til Wall Street og lod Wall Street skrive størstedelen af loven, der består af henved titusinder af sider – det er sindssygt. Så der forelægger et juridisk grundlag for at skrotte Dodd/Frank og indføre en ægte reform, som ikke består i en regulering, en bunke bestemmelser om regler, men som er en virkelig strukturreform med Glass/Steagall. Det behøver slet ikke være titusinder af sider; det er en meget klar fastlæggelse af et princip (lov). Man har kommerciel bankaktivitet, og så har man spekulationsbankaktivitet; de skal være [totalt] adskilte, og sådan er dét. Man har ikke brug for 40.000 sider til at erklære dette; det er en principiel erklæring, det er et spørgsmål om strukturen, og det er ganske klart. Det er ikke minutiøse, detaljerede regler om hvert eneste aspekt af hvert eneste, finansielle instrument. Det er en særdeles klar principerklæring. For slet ikke at tale om det faktum, at Dodd/Frank også grundfæstede forsøget med bail-in (ekspropriering af visse typer af bankindskud).

Der er altså juridisk støtte til og grund til at støtte reformen og fjernelsen af Dodd/Frank; men, dette kan stadig væk gå i mere end én retning. Et spørgsmål, som er af interesse, og som vi må undersøge nøjere, er den rolle, som Jamie Dimon spiller; han er ikke blot en førende Wall Street-bankier; han er også en person, der har været aktivt involveret, i udstrakt og intens grad, udtrykkeligt imod Glass-Steagall og imod LaRouche-bevægelsen og vores aktiviteter for at kæmpe for Glass-Steagall. Han nævnes nu som del af et team, der skal rådgive Trump eksplicit i spørgsmålet om, hvordan Dodd/Frank skal reformeres. Hvilken vej, det vil gå, er ikke klart; vi har endnu ikke set denne eksekutive ordre, så vi ved ikke, hvad den siger. Vi venter på det. Vi ved selvfølgelig, at Trump før har afvist folk; han er ikke bange for at udtale sin klassiske sætning, »Du er fyret!« og komme af med folk. Han har erklæret sin støtte til Glass-Steagall, men dette rejser nogle juridiske spørgsmål.

Den pointe, vi ønsker at fastslå her i dag, er, at intet af dette er afgjort; men det viser det, vi har forventet. Og hvis I er med, bør I også have forventet det. Et totalt slagsmål over amerikansk politik, over spørgsmålet om at lægge Wall Street i tømmer med Glass-Steagall, er i front og centrum for denne kamp.

Vi vil nu afspille et par minutter af højdepunkterne af denne pressekonference; diskussion var betydningsfuld, med særdeles gode pointer, og dette typificerer den lovgivende grens (Kongressens) åbenhed og beredvillighed. Her kommer klippet:

Uddrag af kongresmedlemmers Pressekonference om tværpolitisk støtte til genfremsat Glass/Steagall-lovforslag.

(Se hele pressekonferencen her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFH1MwhxOQk)

Marcy Kaptur: I år markerer vi, at det er 9 år siden, vi havde den største, finansielle krise i en generation. Vi er alle gamle nok, og vores hukommelse er stærk nok, til, at vi kan huske dette. Denne økonomiske katastrofe vær tæt ved at forårsage ødelæggelsen af hele landets finansielle infrastruktur og førte til det, historien nu kalder Den store Recession (økonomiske nedgangstid). I løbet af disse ni år, hvis vi ser tilbage og husker, så har Wall Street-bankerne haft succes og i realiteten tjent rigtig mange penge. I mellemtiden har mange, mange amerikanere – bogstavelig talt millioner – fortsat oplevet det, vi ville benævne med »finansielt nederlag, fiasko«. JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs og Morgan Stanley har alle rapporteret om profitter under denne recession og de efterfølgende år. I løbet af disse seneste ni år har Wall Street genvundet al sin rigdom fra før krisen, med renter, alt imens ’Main Street’ – den almindelige amerikaner – endnu ikke har set noget til en reel, økonomisk genrejsning, i lokalsamfund efter lokalsamfund, fra kyst til kyst.

For blot at nævne et par tal: For 15 år siden udgjorde landets seks største bankers aktiver omkring 17 % af vores totale produktion – Bruttonationalprodukt, BNP – 17 %. I dag oppebærer disse seks topbanker aktiver for $10,1 billion (med 12 nuller); over halvdelen af vore BNP. Dette er alt for meget magt i alt for få hænder. Så ikke alene har de haft en smuk profit, men de er også kommet til at kontrollere, regere over, vores økonomis mest betydningsfulde kontrolcentre.

Tiden er inde til, at Kongressen sikrer, at disse fiaskoer i vort banksystem aldrig vil blive gentaget. Det er grunden til, at vi er her i dag, og jeg takker mine kolleger dybt for at gå sammen med mig. For at bygge på dette momentum og tage skridt til at genindføre Glass-Steagall, for at adskille ’klog og fornuftig’, kommerciel bankvirksomhed fra spekulation.

Tulsi Gabbard: Vi ser fortsat konsekvenserne af ophævelsen af Glass-Steagall på første hånd i lokalsamfund som mit eget, og i lokalsamfund i hele landet; hvor Wall Street-banker har fået lov til at udføre deres risikable investeringspraksisser med det amerikanske folks penge. De har fået lov til at fortsætte til fordel for deres regnskabsresultat og deres profit, på ryggen af det amerikanske folk. Dette er uacceptabelt; dette er ikke et partipolitisk spørgsmål, dette er et spørgsmål, som er vigtigt for det amerikanske folk, og grunden til, at I nu ser støtte på tværs af partipolitisk tilhørsforhold for denne vigtige lovgivning.

Jeg har længe været fortaler for at genindføre Glass-Steagall-loven, og jeg ser frem til at kunne fortsætte arbejdet sammen med allierede og partnere her i Kongressen, i Det Hvide Hus og vigtigst af alt, sammen med det amerikanske folk; hvis stemme må høres.

Tim Ryan: Walter [Jones] nævnte ordet »synd«, og jeg mener, at denne ophævelse [af Glass-Steagall, 1999] var det oprindelige syndefald i vores økonomis nedadgående spiral, som førte til, at hele nabolag i min valgkreds, og i hele delstaten og landet, blev totalt tilintetgjort. Denne lov er en måde – som vi [sic] katolikker ville sige – hvorpå vi kan skrifte og få fjernet denne plet fra USA’s politiske institutioner, og forhåbentlig begynde at genoprette en grad af sund fornuft i vores banksystem.

Kaptur: Siden sidste sommer har 15 delstatskongresser introduceret resolutioner, der kræver, at den nationale Kongres genindfører Glass-Steagall; og Demokrater og Republikanere har nedfældet støtte til Glass-Steagall i deres respektive politiske programmer, hvilket var en enorm præstation på vegne af jer alle, og af alle andre i hele landet, der har arbejdet på dette i meget lang tid. Vi har en lang hukommelse. Selv præsident Trump har erklæret sin støtte til en ny Glass/Steagall-lov, og vi har en forpligtelse til at arbejde sammen med ham for at skabe dette.

Walter Jones: Jeg er glad for, at hun refererede til Donald Trump. Jeg vil oplæse en sætning, og dernæst afslutte.

Den Republikanske præsidentkandidat Donald Trump krævede i onsdags en version for det 21. århundredes Glass/Steagall-lov, der kræver en adskillelse af kommerciel bankaktivitet og investeringsbankaktivitet; en ændring, som det Republikanske Parti ligeledes støttede i sit partipolitiske program i 2016. Jeg har til hensigt at være meget pro-aktiv; jeg har til hensigt, så snart Det Hvide Hus får sig organiseret lidt bedre, at henvende mig til hans rådgivere i kommercielle anliggender og minde dem om det standpunkt, som han og mit parti har indtaget med hensyn til en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven.

Jeg ønsker, at du, Marcy, skal vide, at jeg er så forpligtet på dette spørgsmål som noget, jeg nogensinde har været forpligtet på. Jeg er jeres ’half-back’; og jeg vil være derude og tage ethvert skridt til, hvad så siden der skal gøres. Men, som hun sagde, og dette er min afslutningsbemærkning, »I er nøglen i dette spørgsmål«. Amerikanerne må forstå det angreb og den skade, der er forvoldt imod dem, gennem den kendsgerning, at vi ophævede Glass-Steagall. Lad os gøre dette til en sejr for året 2017. Tak.

Her følger resten af webcastet på engelsk:

DENISTON:  So, as you saw there, there is motion. People are
ready to act; but, again, this is an open fight. Before we get
into the discussion, I want to call on our audience to sign the
LaRouche PAC petition for Trump to commit to the original
official Glass-Steagall Act, in his first official address to the
Congress, which the last we have heard, is scheduled for Feb. 28.
That's less than one month from now for a mobilization to build
the signatures for this petition.
        This, as I think we will get to in the discussion, has
already been an effective tool in mobilizing the legislature,
people in the Congress, for the support of this initiative of
Glass-Steagall, of this Bill. But it's not just going to come
from the Congress alone. This activity of rallying local
communities, community groups, organizations across the nation,
is absolutely critical. This can't just be some direct lobbying
of Congress. This has to be a unified national mobilization,
where these Members can get the support and, when necessary, the
kick in the rear end, to get behind this issue. So, that is
absolutely critical.
        You can sign the petition on-line at lpac.co/trumpsotu. We
now also have the ability for text. You can receive more
information directly via text on your mobile phone. If you text
gsact to 202-524-8709, you'll immediately receive more
information about the petition. You can read it right there on
your phone, and you can sign it. We're asking you, again, to do
this yourself, if you haven't done it; but mobilize others. Get
your community, look for local groups, look for organizations,
look for your neighbors, your friends, your family. This is an
absolutely critical issue.
        Just to underscore one last point, Helga Zepp-LaRouche made
very strongly in recent days' discussions: Right now, this is not
just about vengeance against Wall Street, or something. This is
not just about getting payback for what Wall Street did to the
American people since the bail-out, or for the years prior, even.
That's true. But beyond that, this is critical. The system is
poised for a larger blow-out than 2008. Nothing was solved by the
bail-out process. The fundamental issues of the crisis were made
worse; much worse. This entire speculative bubble was supported,
it was inflated more, and you had more crazy instruments and
attempts created to prop up a system that is fundamentally
unsound, has no connection to the physical economy, is purely a
parasite on the actual economy. That process has wound itself
around to the point where it is ready to blow out again.
        So, Glass-Steagall is {absolutely}, again, {absolutely} the
central issue, the Number One issue that everyone needs to be
fighting on now. This discussion today should be an appeal for
you to get more involved, or get involved immediately in that
fight.
        Diane might have more to say. We can mention some activity
that we've had recently in Washington, D.C., also in New York
City, that underscores the type of mobilization we're leading;
but I'll just open it up with that.

DIANE SARE:  I'd like to remind all of our listeners why we are
at the point we are at; and remind people the kind of fake news
and despicable propaganda preceding the election, where we heard
over and over again how the population was divided. We had George
Soros pumping in his money to various organizations to create an
appearance of that. But, what the American people demonstrated is
that we are not divided, in a couple of major areas; which Ben
referenced at the beginning. No. 1: Americans do not think that
we should have a thermonuclear war with Russia; that this was one
of the main reasons why people, particularly Democrats — Bernie
Sanders supporters and others — turned away from Hillary
Clinton, because she was seen as perpetuating the war and murder
policy of President Barack Obama, who, so far, is the biggest
killer-President that we have yet had in the United States. And,
as President Putin warned, "Obama seems to be the kind of
President that says goodbye, but then doesn't go; he keeps
reappearing." I think it's important that Americans not forget
that.
        The other major issue for the American people, who have
experienced the worst collapse in the standard of living and life
as measured in terms of life expectancy, employment, and so on
since the Great Depression, is that people do not think that it's
just for Wall Street billionaire crooks to have their feet on our
necks as they steal everything we own to bail themselves out for
their own bankrupt policies. Again, Hillary was seen as the
darling of Wall Street.
        If there were a "mandate" for the Trump Presidency, these
two areas are absolutely crucial. What we know, so far, is that
Trump did have a phone conversation with President Putin which
was close to an hour; which indicates a certain type of potential
there. We also know the relationship with China, given what Xi
Jinping is doing, is very important. We know Trump's appointed
Ambassador to China, Terry Branstad, has just released a
statement promoting a kind of win-win collaboration with China;
which is promising. We know, as was mentioned, that President
Trump did call for reinstating Glass-Steagall when he was
campaigning, just a couple of weeks prior to the elections.
        We know — which I find very interesting, because sometimes
the best way to figure out what the potential might be, is to
look at what your enemies are saying. Yesterday there was a very
freaked out article in CNN Money, with the headline "Will Trump
Break up the Big Banks?" They announced that Jamie Dimon,
[chairman, president, and CEO of JPMorgan Chase] was rushing to
Washington, D.C. to meet with Trump today, and that Trump is
planning on "do a big number … on Dodd-Frank." As Ben said, we
don't have the text yet of Trump's Executive Orders. We know
various matters, and frankly, Jamie Dimon is not a very promising
character.
        What the article says, in a very hysterical tone, is "But
Trump did bash big banks before the election, especially Goldman
Sachs. Breaking up the banks would appeal to Trump's populist
message of draining the swamp by uprooting the establishment. The
new President could also argue it solves the 'too big to fail'
problem that the 2008 financial crisis exposed. Plus, it's
something that Republicans like John McCain and liberals such as
Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders broadly agree on.
Glass-Steagall was even included in the official Republican Party
platform during Trump's convention."
        As I'm reading this article I can hear the pitch of the
speaker rising to a shriek. Then they freak out that Stephen
Bannon said, "You really need to go back and make banks do what
they do: Commercial banks lend money, and investment banks invest
in entrepreneurs and to get away from this trading." And the
writer says, "That sounds a lot like Glass-Steagall." The writer
says, "It's not totally clear where Trump stands on this right
now." And you heard from Ben what Spicer said, so our point is
that this is an open fight; it is an open debate. What we have
learned in the last days, is you really cannot rely on the news
media, the so-called "non-fake" news seems to be more fake, or at
least as fake, as the fake news.
        The moment is not to sit back and try and figure out what
exactly is the policy, but to intervene to {make} policy; which
is why it's so important that every single person here get
involved. I'd also like to say, the potential has not been missed
on the few desperados who are clinging with their fingernails to
the bankrupt trans-Atlantic partnership and the European Union.
People may have heard that Donald Tusk, who is the President of
the European Council, said that the United States on Donald Trump
is as big threat as the newly-assertive China, an aggressive
Russia, and wars, terror, and anarchy in the Middle East.
        So, here's this guy, lumping China, which has just lifted
700 million people out of poverty and is reaching out to the
whole world for a program that would benefit mankind. Putin, who
has successfully prevented Barack Obama from plunging us into
thermonuclear war, and took very effective measures in the
direction of eradicating ISIS and al-Qaeda in Syria, and so on.
And he's saying that's the same thing as ISIS and now the US is
part of that.
        This is what I'm getting at; that you just have so much
insanity being promoted. I would maintain, from our organizing in
the streets of Manhattan, where we have had a very interesting
response, that Americans frankly are much more thoughtful than
this. People don't want to be at each other's throats. They
certainly don't want war. They are cautiously optimistic that
there is a hope for a turn in direction; and it is really for us
at LaRouche PAC to be able to indicate the direction, because
otherwise you're just not going to get it. Think about what Mrs.
LaRouche was doing in China in 1996 on the World Land-Bridge,
these kinds of programs. People don't have the full picture.
        What people {can} do at this moment, is absolutely mobilize
for Glass-Steagall. Don't expect to hear more. We know a couple
of things. We know that the British have said that they would
consider Glass-Steagall being reinstated in the United States a
casus belli, an act of war, because it will wipe out trillions of
dollars of crazy speculative crap. Which will be good riddance
for most of us, but for some people, not. And we know that some
people have commented that Glass-Steagall being reinstated could
be the biggest deal since Jesus Christ crushed the Roman Empire.
        In other words, itâs a revolutionary, giant change. So don't
expect that it's just going to somehow come along in an
off-handed way, and exist. Obviously, there's going to be a fight
for this; and we need every single American involved.
        The last thing I want to say, is that part of the
effectiveness on Capitol Hill was this group, the Ohio
Revolution, which has been circulating the petition. Their
thinking was not simply to just go to everyone to get signatures,
but to organize leaders in the community; whether it's ministers,
labor union officials, state legislators, mayors, councilmen. In
other words, not only do we want you to simply sign the petition,
but we need you to organize and to get everybody who has any
clout or who represents a constituency, to get on board in this
fight, and we should really move. I would say, if CNN is freaked
out enough to have an article asking whether Donald Trump is
going to go with this or not, we should presume that indicates a
possibility; and we should do everything we can to take advantage
of the opening and move on it.

MEGAN BEETS:  I think, Diane, what you're bringing up is
critical; that this is an absolute paradigm shift. What we're
doing is shutting down a system of finance which has been at the
core of the British Empire for hundreds of years. Now what are we
going to replace it with? That's the big question, and that's why
we and our supporters, all of you listening out there, have to
take the responsibility to know and study the principles of
physical economics which are the core of Lyndon LaRouche's
discoveries in the science of economics.  How are we going to
rebuild the country?  You go back to LaRouche's core writings:
{So, You Wish to Learn All About Economics?}; his papers on the
issue of infrastructure not as an object which costs money like
the bridge you pay to drive over, but infrastructure as creating
a core economic platform which transforms the potential of every
process in your economy.  How do we raise the physical wealth,
how to we increase the living standard for billions of people
across the planet and create the potential for mankind to
industrialize the Moon?  These are the questions that people have
to study.  And it is that process of the American citizenry
choosing to adopt a higher identity of a more developed, more
mature mankind in the future beyond this currently collapsing
system.  Then organizing our fellow citizens to understand how
we're going to do that; beginning with the reinstatement of
Glass-Steagall.  Shutting down this bankrupt financial system;
then following that up with the establishment of a national bank
so that we can utter productive credit to the things which will
increase the productivity of the population and allow us to take
those next steps of development.  Like a crash program for the
development of fusion; like a crash program to get our
capabilities of our space program back, to re-adopt the policies
of colonizing the space between the Earth and the Moon and then
developing and industrializing the Moon.  This really is the
vision that people who are organizing with us have to begin to
adopt.  That really is our sense of authority in demanding that
we shut down this bankrupt, evil Wall Street system with
Glass-Steagall.

        DENISTON:  Absolutely!  And we should maybe highlight for
our viewers that yesterday we had a very useful discussion led by
Jason Ross, our colleague in the Science Team, taking up just
this subject.  I think that's definitely critical; getting at the
issue of value.  What is real economic value?  As was cited in
this press conference, the largest banks' share of so-called GDP
has actually been skyrocketing; and now represents over 50% of
supposed GDP.  That is not real value; monetary figures are not
— so you have this explosion of monetary assets, monetary
figures.  But if you take the physical standard living of the US
population as an entirety, it's down, down, down.  That's this
complete disconnect between the so-called monetary system, which
should be a functional credit system, and the actual real
economy; the thing that actually keeps people alive, improves
people's living standards, and actually supports the society —
the physical processes of economy.
        As Mr. LaRouche identified with his Triple Curve diagram in
the '90s, defining the principle in this breakdown; those have
been diverging at a more and more rapid rate.  That defines a
process that's unsustainable and as we've said, there's nothing
else that can work other than a Glass-Steagall — in its original
form — revival to separate out that monetary system.  Cut that
off; you can't go both ways.  Only then can you actually invest
in real value again. That's where the discussion needs to go, and
that's what the country absolutely needs at this point; is a real
recovery program like what Kennedy tried to do, what Franklin
Roosevelt was able to do.  That level of reform of the current
policy and investment in these higher levels of productivity
outlined in LaRouche's Four Laws is the program needed now.
Glass-Steagall is that first step.
        So, I think that's absolutely clear for our listeners what
our challenges are and what our mission is right now in the
immediate period ahead.
        So, I know we're definitely awaiting this executive order; a
sense of what's going to come out of that.  Diane, I don't know
if you have more, but I think we have a pretty clear orientation
in the immediate days — or I would say hours ahead, to move on
this thing.  We have a less than one month deadline on this
petition; but a lot can be decided between now and then, before
then even.  So, every day counts.  As Diane emphasized, that was
very important; the role of mobilizing the population and
institutions in the population, community leaders, leading layers
in the population out of this craziness that the media is
spinning out there, and into these real substantial issues is
{decisive} at this point.  Getting those people on board and
fighting with us for this Glass-Steagall reform, for this
economic reform, is critical.  {YOU} play an absolutely
indispensable role in doing that.
        So, I think we have a challenge and a mission before us.
Unless we have anything else to add today, I think this is a very
clear focus; and I think we should really get to work.  So, with
that again, people have the information for the petition;
circulate that, get the signers on that.  If you haven't signed
yourself, do it immediately; but get other people on.  You should
have a goal of getting 10, 100 people added to that thing on a
daily basis at this point.  That's our orientation, that's our
action.  We'll be back in the coming days with more; and we look
forward to speaking with you then.

 

                




Kongresmedlemmers Pressekonference
om tværpolitisk støtte til genfremsat
Glass/Steagall-lovforslag. Uddrag

Marcy Kaptur: I år markerer vi, at det er 9 år siden, vi havde den største, finansielle krise i en generation. Vi er alle gamle nok, og vores hukommelse er stærk nok, til, at vi kan huske dette. Denne økonomiske katastrofe vær tæt ved at forårsage ødelæggelsen af hele landets finansielle infrastruktur og førte til det, historien nu kalder Den store Recession (økonomiske nedgangstid). I løbet af disse ni år, hvis vi ser tilbage og husker, så har Wall Street-bankerne haft succes og i realiteten tjent rigtig mange penge. I mellemtiden har mange, mange amerikanere – bogstavelig talt millioner – fortsat oplevet det, vi ville benævne med »finansielt nederlag, fiasko«. JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs og Morgan Stanley har alle rapporteret om profitter under denne recession og de efterfølgende år. I løbet af disse seneste ni år har Wall Street genvundet al sin rigdom fra før krisen, med renter, alt imens ’Main Street’ – den almindelige amerikaner – endnu ikke har set noget til en reel, økonomisk genrejsning, i lokalsamfund efter lokalsamfund, fra kyst til kyst.

For blot at nævne et par tal: For 15 år siden udgjorde landets seks største bankers aktiver omkring 17 % af vores totale produktion – Bruttonationalprodukt, BNP – 17 %. I dag oppebærer disse seks topbanker aktiver for $10,1 billion (med 12 nuller); over halvdelen af vore BNP. Dette er alt for meget magt i alt for få hænder. Så ikke alene har de haft en smuk profit, men de er også kommet til at kontrollere, regere over, vores økonomis mest betydningsfulde kontrolcentre.

Tiden er inde til, at Kongressen sikrer, at disse fiaskoer i vort banksystem aldrig vil blive gentaget. Det er grunden til, at vi er her i dag, og jeg takker mine kolleger dybt for at gå sammen med mig. For at bygge på dette momentum og tage skridt til at genindføre Glass-Steagall, for at adskille ’klog og fornuftig’, kommerciel bankvirksomhed fra spekulation.

Tulsi Gabbard: Vi ser fortsat konsekvenserne af ophævelsen af Glass-Steagall på første hånd i lokalsamfund som mit eget, og i lokalsamfund i hele landet; hvor Wall Street-banker har fået lov til at udføre deres risikable investeringspraksisser med det amerikanske folks penge. De har fået lov til at fortsætte til fordel for deres regnskabsresultat og deres profit, på ryggen af det amerikanske folk. Dette er uacceptabelt; dette er ikke et partipolitisk spørgsmål, dette er et spørgsmål, som er vigtigt for det amerikanske folk, og grunden til, at I nu ser støtte på tværs af partipolitisk tilhørsforhold for denne vigtige lovgivning.

Jeg har længe været fortaler for at genindføre Glass-Steagall-loven, og jeg ser frem til at kunne fortsætte arbejdet sammen med allierede og partnere her i Kongressen, i Det Hvide Hus og vigtigst af alt, sammen med det amerikanske folk; hvis stemme må høres.

Tim Ryan: Walter [Jones] nævnte ordet »synd«, og jeg mener, at denne ophævelse [af Glass-Steagall, 1999] var det oprindelige syndefald i vores økonomis nedadgående spiral, som førte til, at hele nabolag i min valgkreds, og i hele delstaten og landet, blev totalt tilintetgjort. Denne lov er en måde – som vi [sic] katolikker ville sige – hvorpå vi kan skrifte og få fjernet denne plet fra USA’s politiske institutioner, og forhåbentlig begynde at genoprette en grad af sund fornuft i vores banksystem.

Kaptur: Siden sidste sommer har 15 delstatskongresser introduceret resolutioner, der kræver, at den nationale Kongres genindfører Glass-Steagall; og Demokrater og Republikanere har nedfældet støtte til Glass-Steagall i deres respektive politiske programmer, hvilket var en enorm præstation på vegne af jer alle, og af alle andre i hele landet, der har arbejdet på dette i meget lang tid. Vi har en lang hukommelse. Selv præsident Trump har erklæret sin støtte til en ny Glass/Steagall-lov, og vi har en forpligtelse til at arbejde sammen med ham for at skabe dette.

Walter Jones: Jeg er glad for, at hun refererede til Donald Trump. Jeg vil oplæse en sætning, og dernæst afslutte.

Den Republikanske præsidentkandidat Donald Trump krævede i onsdags en version for det 21. århundredes Glass/Steagall-lov, der kræver en adskillelse af kommerciel bankaktivitet og investeringsbankaktivitet; en ændring, som det Republikanske Parti ligeledes støttede i sit partipolitiske program i 2016. Jeg har til hensigt at være meget pro-aktiv; jeg har til hensigt, så snart Det Hvide Hus får sig organiseret lidt bedre, at henvende mig til hans rådgivere i kommercielle anliggender og minde dem om det standpunkt, som han og mit parti har indtaget med hensyn til en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven.

Jeg ønsker, at du, Marcy, skal vide, at jeg er så forpligtet på dette spørgsmål som noget, jeg nogensinde har været forpligtet på. Jeg er jeres ’half-back’; og jeg vil være derude og tage ethvert skridt til, hvad så siden der skal gøres. Men, som hun sagde, og dette er min afslutningsbemærkning, »I er nøglen i dette spørgsmål«. Amerikanerne må forstå det angreb og den skade, der er forvoldt imod dem, gennem den kendsgerning, at vi ophævede Glass-Steagall. Lad os gøre dette til en sejr for året 2017. Tak.                  




Kun princippet er virkelighed; resten er tom snak

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 2. februar, 2017 – Kongresmedlem Marcy Kapturs pressekonference i går, hvor hun genfremsatte et lovforslag for Glass-Steagall, fandt sted samtidig med Trump-administrationens gentagelse af sin forpligtelse til at indføre Glass-Steagall, i besvarelse af et spørgsmål fra EIR-korrespondent Bill Jones. For dem, der så den, markerer denne pressekonference et totalt brud med den syndflod af ætsende hyper-partipolitik, der ledes af selveste den afsatte morder Barack Obama, og som næres af millioner af dollars af George Soros’ narkopenge. Her var der i stedet patrioter, der søgte at forene Repræsentanternes Hus, og forene det med Senatet og præsidentskabet, på vegne af et afgørende, omgående skridt af vital, national interesse, og i realiteten, af vital interesse for verden.

Lyndon LaRouches forudsigelse, på sin 90-års fødselsdag i 2012, af afslutningen af topartisystemet, er nu i realiteten sket. (Husk, at de amerikanske vælgere lige så meget besejrede det Republikanske som det Demokratiske Parti i det nylige valg.) I stedet for repræsentanter for partier, så var det, vi så på gårsdagens pressekonference, simpelt hen ledende personer – individuelle ledere – uden hensyntagen til partitilhørsforhold. Marcy Kaptur indledte pressekonferencen med at hilse præsident Trumps støtte til Glass-Steagall velkommen og meddele, at de ville arbejde sammen med ham for at få loven vedtaget. Kongresmedlem Tulsi Gabbard havde haft et møde med nyvalgte (men endnu ikke indsatte) præsident Trump, til dels, fordi hun ved, at spørgsmålene simpelt hen er for vigtige til at afvise at mødes med en person, der kunne fremme en løsning. Kongresmedlem Walter Jones fortalte den gribende historie om sine to største fejltagelser: hans stemme til fordel for en ophævelse af Glass-Steagall i 1999, og hans efterfølgende stemme til fordel for den anden Irakkrig. Da det først gik op for ham, hvor dybt forkert, begge disse handlinger havde været, helligede han resten af sit liv til at rette disse fejltagelser, eller få tilgivelse for disse synder.

Som Aleksandr Solsjenitsyn engang skrev: »Der er intet, som i den grad er med til at vække alvidenhed i os, som vedvarende tanker om vore egne overtrædelser, fejl og fejltagelser.«

Meningen og formålet med denne enhed i Kongressens to huse og præsidenten og folket rækker længere end til Glass-Steagall, der blot er det første, uopsættelige skridt. Meningen og formålet er LaRouches »Fire Love« fra juni, 2014. Disse Fire Love er en uadskillelig enhed. De udgør det princip, uden hvilket intet vil virke; denne nation kan kun reddes af mænd og kvinder, der ledes af et princip – og dette er princippet. »Det er det virkelige«, som LaRouche sagde i dag. Resten er tom snak.

Tidligere embedsmand i Reagan-administrationen Paul Craig Roberts, der med rette har støttet præsident Trump imod Obamas bagvaskelser og Soros’ golem’er, skrev i en artikel for nylig, at Trump-administrationen måske ikke vil være i stand til at udføre sine planer. Det ville være sandt, havde det ikke været for eksistensen af Lyndon LaRouche og hans Fire Love – sammen med de nye, skabende opdagelser, som LaRouche vil introducere for fremtiden. Som han for nylig sagde: »Jeg har gjort dette før, og jeg kan gøre det igen.«

Under sin pressekonference fik kongresmedlem Kaptur overrakt 7.000 Ohio-borgeres underskrifter på brevet med en appel til præsident Trump om at genindføre Glass-Steagall, og som hun vil viderebringe til ham. I dag aftaltes det pr. telefon med Lyndon og Helga LaRouche, at alle LaRouche-aktivister opfordres til at uddele et udskrift af denne appel (fra LaRouchePAC-websiden; dansk udskrift fra vores hjemmeside her), således, at mange flere tusinde underskrifter fra hele landet kan blive overrakt præsident Trump gennem kongresmedlem Kaptur og andre nationale kongresmedlemmer.

Og sluttelig, om lederskab: Vi minder om, at det kun vil kræve ÉN amerikansk senator (fra den nationale Kongres) til at sætte Steven Mnuchins godkendelse til finansminister på »venteposition«, for at stoppe godkendelsen. Ikke enoghalvtreds; blot én enkelt.

(Pressekonference med Marcy Kaptur et alia kan ses her)  

Foto: Kongresmedlemmerne Walter Jones, Tim Ryan, Tulsi Gabbard (ved podiet) og Marcy Kaptur, introducerede »Loven om en Tilbagevenden til Klog og Forsigtig Bankpraksis«, H.R. 790, som kræver genindførelsen af Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov. [instagram/Tulsi Gabbard]




UDKAST TIL LOV OM GENETABLERING AF USA’s OPRINDELIGE NATIONALBANK

Vi genudgiver her Udkast til Lov om Genetablering af USA's Oprindelige Nationalbank.

(Det oprindelige, engelske udkast, som er fra marts 2013, kan ses her: https://larouchepac.com/031113/draft-legislation-bank-us

Download (PDF, 31KB)




Tillykke med 260-års fødselsdagen,
Alexander Hamilton!

»At værdsætte og stimulere det menneskelige intellekts aktivitet ved at mangedoble områderne for foretagsomhed, gennem hvilke en nations rigdom kan fremmes.«

– Alexander Hamilton (11. jan., 1757 – 12. juli, 1804).

»Sammenhængen mellem intellektets opdagelser og forøgelsen af arbejdskraftens produktive evne, er kernen i Det amerikanske, økonomiske System. Det, jeg har præsteret, er at vise, at det er muligt at forudsige rent matematisk raterne af den forøgede, fysisk-økonomiske vækst, som vil blive resultatet af en faktisk anvendelse af en specifik form for intellektuel produktion af ny teknologi. På denne baggrund har jeg været i stand til at levere et nyt, stærkere, videnskabeligt bevis for de grunde til, at Hamiltons Amerikanske System fremmer depressionsfri, økonomisk vækst, og grunden til, at Adam Smiths doktrin altid vil føre en nation ud i nye katastrofer.«

– Lyndon LaRouche, »In Defense of Alexander Hamilton«, 1987.

Læs hele Lyndon LaRouches artikel her:

http://larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2017/2017_01-09/2017-02/pdf/32-42_4402.pdf




RADIO SCHILLER den 9. januar 2017:
USA efterretningsrapport har ingen beviser om russisk hacking af valget//
Obamas militære provokationer

Med formand Tom Gillesberg




Gør 2017 til året for LaRouches ideer!
Ændr jeres opfattelse af, hvad der er muligt!
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast,
6. januar, 2017; Leder.

Vi befinder os i en nedtællingsperiode; vi er i de sidste to uger, før overgangen til det nye præsidentskab. Om præcis to uger fra i dag er det indsættelsesdag, den 20. januar, og vi vil have en ny præsident i dette land. Som I ved, hvis I var med i går på Fireside Chat på LaRouchePAC’s hjemmeside, og hvis I har fået vore daglige og ugentlige e-mailopdateringer, så er vi engageret i en stor mobilisering. Det er vores ansvar, og jeres ansvar, at skabe dagsordenen for dette tiltrædende præsidentskab. Det må være vores holdning, at 2017 er året for den Nye Silkevej, året for det Nye Paradigme internationalt, året for en genoplivelse af Alexanders Hamiltons ideer, og for Lyndon LaRouches ideer. I USA betyder det, at Glass-Steagall omgående må vedtages; må sættes på dagsordenen; må underskrives og sættes i kraft som lov af den nye præsident. Dette vil ikke ske af sig selv; der er intet internt momentum, der vil gøre det muligt for dette at ske, mens vi læner os tilbage og kigger på. Som det hele tiden har været tilfældet, så vil dette kun ske på baggrund af en ekstraordinær mobilisering fra aktivisters side, i hele USA. Et meget vigtigt initiativ er blevet taget af en gruppe aktivister fra det nordlige Ohio; og LaRouchePAC vil udgive et åbent brev eller en pamflet, som skal forstærke og opmuntre mobiliseringen omkring dette initiativ.

Jeg vil indlede vores udsendelse med at læse LaRouchePAC’s introduktion i denne pamflet, og derefter oplæse lidt af teksten i dette åbne brev. Det lyder som følger:

»Dette brev blev oprindeligt omdelt af en gruppe ved navn, ’Vores revolution i det nordvestlige Ohio, med et forpligtende engagement til at forene hele nationen. De har udstedt en opfordring til alle grupper – for eksempel, Tea Party, Republikanere, Demokrater, fagforeninger og erhvervslivet – til at komme sammen omkring det nødvendige, første skridt, som er vedtagelsen af Glass/Steagall-loven. Da deres indsats er i overensstemmelse med LaRouchePAC’s mål, cirkulerer vi det, som en del af en national mobilisering for en omgående vedtagelse af Glass/Steagall-loven i Repræsentanternes Hus og Senatet, og underskrevet og sat i kraft af præsident Trump.

På dette grundlag anmoder vi alle borgere om at samles omkring dette økonomiske program, som den eneste, reelle måde, hvorpå både den alvorlige, økonomiske og finansielle krise, efter årtiers ødelæggende politik, kan adresseres, såvel som også muligheden for storslået udvikling – som vi nu ser det i hele Asien og videre, med Kinas initiativ for den Nye Silkevej.«

Dernæst anmoder brevet:

»Underskriv denne appel; omdel den til jeres venner, familie og netværk. Hvert underskrevet eksemplar vil blive personligt overbragt til jeres kongresmedlem og senatorer. Som præsident Franklin Roosevelt erklærede i sin første indsættelsestale: ’Denne nation kræver handling, og handling nu.’«

Teksten til dette åbne brev er som det følgende. Jeg læser det i sin helhed, fordi vi støtter dette initiativ. Det bærer titlen, »Åbent brev til Donald Trump og til alle medlemmerne af Kongressen«; dato januar 2017.

»Underskriverne af dette brev føler stærkt, at det er nødvendigt at beskytte vores økonomi fra endnu et unødvendigt markedssammenbrud og en recession som den, vi oplevede i december, 2007. Med Deres indtræden i embedet er omstændighederne for et kollaps alt for lig dem, der eksisterede i 2007: stigende værdi af værdipapirer, sammen med en manglende adskillelse af bankvirksomhed, der er beskyttet af FDIC, og så højrisiko-investeringsaktivitet.

Vi bifalder [præsident Trumps] kampagneudtalelse i Charlotte, North Carolina, 26. okt., 2016, hvor han støttede et krav om ’En Glass/Steagall-version for det 21. århundrede’, og om en genindførelse af en moderne Glass/Steagall-lov. Vi har tillid til, at De forstår, at en stabilisering af erhvervsklimaet og en sikring af de værdier, der er adskilt fra Wall Streets spekulation, er af afgørende betydning for velstand under Deres administration.

For at slå tonen for drøftelser i Kongressen i 2017 an, anmoder vi om, at [præsident Trump] gentager [sin] støtte til Glass/Steagall-loven i sin Tale til Unionen.

De kan være forvisset om, at, med denne handling, vil De finde fælles fodslag med både Republikanere og Demokrater; siden begge partiers politiske programerklæringer indeholder støtte til en banklovgivning, der adskiller forsikrede konti fra Wall Street spekulation, i de respektive partiers politiske programmer.

Vi takker Dem for Deres respons til krav fra borgere, folk fra erhvervslivet, bankierer og kongresmedlemmer, på vores vej frem. [Med en opfordring til, at Glass/Steagall-loven vedtages i både USA’s Repræsentanternes Hus og Senatet, og at loven underskrives og sættes i kraft af den tiltrædende præsident, Donald Trump, underskriver de følgende personer:]«

Så igen, dette er en appel, der cirkuleres af en gruppe aktivister; mange af dem var oprindeligt tilknyttet Bernie Sanders kampagne i det nordlige Ohio. Men det er en tværpolitisk gruppe ved navn »Vores revolution« med hjemsted i det nordlige Ohio, og som nævnt i pamflettens indledende afsnit, så er LaRouchePAC enige i dette initiativ; og dette er ét aspekt af vores nationale mobilisering for at tvinge Glass-Steagall på dagsordenen i de 14 dage, der er til indsættelsen af den nye præsident. Dette må selvfølgelig ske i sammenhæng med den fulde vedtagelse af programmet for LaRouches Fire Love; dette adresseredes af en resolution, der blev vedtaget af staten Illinois’ delstatskongres i juni sidste år, 2016, med titlen, »Appel til Kongressen om at vedtage Loven om Amerikas Økonomiske Genrejsning«, og som nævner de fire elementer i LaRouches Fire Økonomiske Love – Glass-Steagall; statslig bankvirksomhed efter Hamiltons princip; statslige kreditter til forøgelse af den produktive arbejdsstyrke i USA; og en tilbagevenden til et forceret rumprogram, med videnskab som drivkraft, og et forceret program for opnåelse af fusionsteknologi, og så fremdeles.

Så jeg siger det ligeud, at vi har 14 dage; vi befinder os i en nedtælling. Obama-administrationen er for afgående, og den nye administration tiltræder. Som vi ser på mange fronter, så befinder USA sig virkelig i et opgør netop nu om, hvad det nye præsidentskab vil blive; intet er afgjort. Vi ved dog, at der er hysteri mange steder, som de ses af de deciderede angreb på den tiltrædende præsident fra førende medlemmer af efterretningssamfundet; virkelig et uhørt niveau af angreb, giftigheder fra James Clapper og andre i deres beretninger for kongressen. Jeg tror ikke, vi har set dette tidligere i historien; og det står klart, at hysteriet opstår omkring den kendsgerning, at der er udsigt til et dramatisk skift i vores udenrigspolitik. [Dette skift] defineres mest af den kendsgerning, at den tiltrædende præsident har erklæret, at vi ikke vil indtage en holdning med krigskonfrontation med Rusland; hvilket har været de sidste otte års politik med Obama, hvis ikke mere. Så der er et stort potentiale mht. USA’s forhold til et paradigmeskift, til en dynamik, der er under forandring, på verdensscenen; men meget er fortsat uafgjort. Det er vores ansvar at tvinge Glass-Steagall/Hamilton-programmet på dagsordenen i løbet af de næste 14 dage.

For at kunne gennemføre dette, har vi brug for et langt dybere niveau af forståelse hos den amerikanske befolkning som helhed, og især hos de ledende borgeraktivister i dette land, en forståelse af, hvor Lyndon LaRouches økonomiske politik kommer fra, og hvad den større dybsindighed bag denne politik er. Vi erklærer hermed, at år 2017 vil blive et år, hvor disse ideers større dybsindighed bliver udviklet og forstået; meget lig den måde, hvorpå vi i løbet af de seneste måneder har haft en aktivering omkring en forståelse af Alexander Hamiltons ideer, med en tilbagevenden til hans politik, hans originale rapporter [til Kongressen] om statsbankvirksomhed, om producenter og så videre. Det er denne form for fordybelse og undersøgelse af den fysiske økonomis grundlæggende principper, der vil gøre dette initiativ succesfuldt og gøre det muligt for os at hæve niveauet mht. vores involvering i skabelsen af dette Nye Paradigme på verdensscenen.

Det vil Ben [Deniston] uddybe lidt nærmere; men dette er i realiteten en appel om handling og om mobilisering for at komme godt i gang med dette i det nye år.

(Her følger udskrift af hele webcastet på engelsk):

 MAKE 2017 THE YEAR OF LAROUCHE'S IDEAS! CHANGE YOUR CONCEPT OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE!

LaRouche PAC International Webcast, January 6, 2017

        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening; it's January 6, 2017. Happy
New Year! This is our first Friday evening webcast of the new year from larouchepac.com.

My name is Matthew Ogden, and joining
me in the studio is Ben Deniston from the LaRouche PAC Science
Team; and two members of our Policy Committee joining us over
video. Kesha is joining us from Houston, Texas; and Rachel is
joining us from Boston, Massachusetts.
        We are in a countdown period; this is the final two weeks of
the Presidential transition.  Exactly two weeks from today is
Inauguration Day, January 20th, and we will have a new President
in this country.  As you know, on the LaRouche PAC website, if
you were on the activist call last night, the Fireside Chat, if
you've been receiving our daily and weekly email updates; we are
engaged in a major mobilization.  It is our responsibility, and
it is your responsibility, to shape the agenda of this incoming
Presidency.  We have to have the attitude that 2017 is the year
of the New Silk Road, the year of the New Paradigm
internationally, the year of the revival of Alexander Hamilton,
and the year of the ideas of Lyndon LaRouche.  What that means
immediately in the United States is that Glass-Steagall must
immediately be adopted; must be put on the agenda; must be signed
into law by the new President.  This is not going to happen on
its own; there is no internal momentum which is going to allow
this to happen while we sit back and watch.  Just as has been the
case all along, this is only going to happen from an
extraordinary mobilization by activists from all across the
United States.  A very important initiative has been taken by a
group of activists in northern Ohio; and LaRouche PAC is issuing
an open letter or leaflet which is meant to amplify and encourage
the mobilization around this initiative.
        I'm going to begin our broadcast by just reading the
LaRouche PAC introduction, and then some of the text of this open
letter.  This reads as follows:
        "This letter was originally distributed by a group entitled
'Our Revolution' in northwest Ohio, with a commitment to unify
the whole nation.  They have issued a call to all groups — for
example, the Tea Party, Republicans, Democrats, labor, and
business — to rally around the necessary first step of passing
Glass-Steagall legislation.  As their effort is consistent with
the aims of LaRouche PAC, we are circulating this as part of a
national mobilization for the immediate passage of Glass-Steagall
legislation by the House and the Senate; to be signed into law by
President Trump.
        "On this page, we are asking every citizen to rally around
this economic program as the only effective way to address both
the dire economic and financial crisis after decades of
destructive policies, as well as the potential for great
development — as we now see throughout Asia and beyond, with
China's New Silk Road initiative."
        So it asks, "Sign this petition; share it with your friends,
family, and networks.  Each signed copy will be hand-delivered to
your Congressman and Senators.  As President Franklin Roosevelt
stated in his first inaugural address, 'This nation asks for
action, and action now.'"
        Now the text of this open letter is as follows.  I'm going
to read it in full, because we're encouraging this initiative.
It is entitled "Open Letter to Donald Trump and to All Members of
Congress"; dateline January 2017.
        "We the undersigned strongly feel the need for protecting
our economy from another unnecessary market crash and recession
like the one experienced in December of 2007.  As you take
office, the conditions for a collapse are too similar to those of
2007: rising asset values together with a lack of separation
between FDIC insured banking and risk-investment brokering.

        "We applaud [President Trump’s] campaign statement in
Charlotte, North Carolina, October 26, 2016, endorsing a call for
'A 21st Century version of Glass-Steagall,' and reintroducing a
modern day Glass-Steagall Act.  We trust that you understand that
stabilizing the business climate and securing the assets as
separate from Wall Street speculation is a key to prosperity
during your administration.

        "To set the tone of discourse in Congress 2017, we ask that
[President Trump] restate [his] support for a Glass-Steagall Act
during [the] State of the Union address.

        "Be assured in doing so, you will find common ground with
both the Republicans and the Democrats; since both party
platforms have the support of banking legislation that separates
insured accounts from Wall Street speculation in their respective
platforms.

        "Thank you for responding to the call from citizens,
businesspersons, bankers and legislators as we move forward. [In
urging that Glass-Steagall legislation be passed in both the
House and the Senate of the U.S. Congress, and signed into law by
incoming President Donald Trump, we are the undersigned:]"

        So again, this is a petition which is being circulated by a
group of activists; many of whom were originally associated with
the Bernie Sanders campaign in northern Ohio. But it's a
non-partisan group called "Our Revolution" based in northern
Ohio, and as we said in the introductory paragraph, LaRouche PAC
finds common cause with this initiative; and this is one aspect
of our national mobilization to force Glass-Steagall onto the
agenda in the 14 days between now and the inauguration of the new
Presidency.  Of course, this also has to go along with the full
enactment of the LaRouche Four Laws program; this was addressed
by a resolution which was adopted by the Illinois state
legislature in June of last year, 2016, which was called "Call
Upon Congress to Enact the American Recovery Act" and this cites
the four elements of LaRouche's Four Economic Laws — Glass
Steagall; national banking in a Hamiltonian form; Federal credit
to increase the productive labor force in the United States; and
a return to a crash science driver program for space, fusion
technology, and so forth.
        So again, I'll just say right off the bat, we have 14 days;
we are in a countdown.  The Obama administration will be exiting
and the new administration will be coming in.  As we can see on
many fronts, the United States is really in a showdown right now
for what the new Presidency will be; nothing is defined.  We {do}
know that there is hysteria in many quarters, as can be seen by
the outright attacks on the incoming President by the leading
members of the intelligence community; really an unprecedented
level of attack, vitriol from James Clapper and others in
Congressional testimony.  I think this has not been seen before
in history; and it's clear that the hysteria is coming around the
fact that there is a dramatic change in our foreign policy on the
horizon.  Defined mostly by the fact that the incoming President
has declared that we will not be in a war-confrontation posture
with Russia; which has been the policy of the last eight years of
the Obama administration if not before.  So, there's a lot of
potential in terms of the relationship of the United States to a
changing paradigm, to a changing dynamic on the world stage; but
a lot remains undefined.  It's our responsibility to force the
Glass-Steagall Hamiltonian program onto the agenda in the next 14
days.
        Now in order to do that, we are going to require a much
deeper level of comprehension among the American population as a
whole, and especially among the leading citizen-activists of this
country, of where Lyndon LaRouche's economic policies come from
and what the deeper profundity is behind this policy.  We are
declaring that 2017 is going to be a year in which the deeper
profundity of these ideas is developed and understood; much in
the way that we had an activation around understanding the ideas
of Alexander Hamilton in the last few months with a return to his
policies, his original reports on national banking, on
manufactures, and so forth.  It's this kind of delving deep and
researching the essential principles of physical economics which
is going to make this initiative successful and allow us to raise
the bar in terms of our involvement in creating this New Paradigm
on the world stage.
        So, I think Ben might have a little more to say on that
subject; but we're really approaching this as sort of a call to
action and a mobilization to get the new year off to this kind of
start.

        BENJAMIN DENISTON:  The key point is that Mr. LaRouche has
defined the scientific standard for a recovery of the United
States; that's true, but more fundamentally, for the future of
mankind.  His work in defining a more rigorous science — he
definitely drew upon the work of Hamilton and followers of
Hamilton — but he made a completely revolutionary discovery in
terms of what is the actual hard, physical science underlying
human progress, underlying economics.  One area that we're doing
some work on, this is kind of a critical convergence point in the
fight around understanding these issues, is what people call
infrastructure.  It's become a kind of hot, popular word;
everyone just says it.  Republicans say it, Democrats say it;
it's become kind of a buzz word as some people have said.  It's
as American as apple pie at this point; everyone talks about how
great infrastructure is.  I think Schwarzenegger even struggled
to pronounce it once or twice in California.  But do people know
what it actually means?  That's a fight that Mr. LaRouche has
waged in the recent years, that people don't understand what the
real significance of full-scale, integrated infrastructure
systems is.  You're not going to define what's needed in terms of
the next level of infrastructure if you're not operating from the
standpoint of an insight into the role this actually plays in
revolutionary economic progress.  You can have a lot of
discussions about how we need to rebuild this, this is decaying,
our water systems — the American Society of Civil Engineers I
think it is, puts out this report card, and you can just run
through it on the infrastructure systems and it's just
horrendous.  The water leakage, the transportation systems being
run down, the power systems, the locks and dams that are ready to
bust.  But the issue is not just repairing all of those things;
the issue is infrastructure mediates a process by which mankind
is able to initiate completely unique and revolutionary
self-transformations in mankind's very nature of his relationship
to the natural world, so-called.  Mr. LaRouche pioneered key
metrics of this with his work on potential relative population
density, for example; and actually examining how we can quantify
and understand the fundamental nature of human economic progress.
One starting point might be if you just take the standpoint of
ecology; ecology is a general idea of studying a species'
relation to an environment.  If you apply that to species, you're
able to define certain characteristics of what that species is;
not just by its color, or size, or mass, but by how it relates to
the natural world — to the biosphere around it.  That as much
defines that species as its other characteristics.
        So, it's a general study for life that has validity.  But
what happens when you apply that to mankind?  You don't get any
fixed metric; mankind is not defined by any particular ecological
relationship to the environment.  What you see that distinguishes
mankind is something fascinating; that mankind actually changes
those metrics.  Mankind's very nature is the fact that he can
fundamentally change his relationship with the natural world
through his own actions and the actions of society.  You can
measure this in terms of what Mr. LaRouche defined as the metric
of potential relative population density.  If you take any animal
species, you can have some idea of a carrying capacity, a maximum
potential population that could be sustained for that species in
an environment in the biosphere as a whole, for example.  You can
apply similar studies for mankind, and you can define — maybe in
broad strokes — certain boundary conditions for the number of
people the planet can sustain.  But those change; and that's the
most fascinating thing.  Mankind changes those characteristics.
Today, we have 7-8 billion people on the planet; hopefully
increasing now that we have some order in the world moving in a
better direction.  You go back to society 1000 years ago, you
could not have supported that level of population in the
conditions of human society back at that time.  Today, you can;
and if we win, tomorrow we'll be able to support a whole lot
more.
        What drives that? This concept is critical right now,
because especially in the West in the United States, people have
really gone full on board with this zero-growth idea. The very
fundamental concept of completely revolutionizing our society as
a whole to support an order-of-magnitude higher population,
completely revolutionary technological development — that should
be natural; that's not in most people's minds today.
        But that's infrastructure! That's what infrastructure is.
Infrastructure is an expression of defining how mankind creates a
system by which he relates to the natural world. I think some of
Mr. LaRouche's work on this is really worth digging into a lot
more. He took his understanding of potential relative population
density to some degree to a new level with this concept of the
physical-economic platform, as a proper understanding of what
"infrastructure" really is. He laid out this amazing insight into
the arc of human development as expressed in a motion between
successive physical-economic platforms. He said go back as far as
we have records of civilized humanity, to what is sometimes
called "pre-history," and certain insights into very ancient
intercontinental ocean maritime civilization that was very
sophisticated. It could travel the world much earlier than most
modern academics admit.
        The very nature of that society was defined by mankind's
relation to the ocean systems and to the coastal regions. That
kind of defined a certain boundary condition for the potential
relative population density, the state of the society globally at
that time. And then you had a complete revolution with the
beginning development of inland water systems. That became a
means by which — and the technologies associated with being able
to do that, and the energy-flux densities associated with being
able to do that — that defined a means by which an entire region
of the planet, of the natural world, which was just not
accessible to human development, became accessible to human
development. People could go to these places; you could walk
inland, but you couldn't support a city there. You couldn't
support society there, you couldn't support a growing population
there; it wasn't part of the domain of the influence of mankind.
With the development of these inland waterway systems — and Mr.
LaRouche points to the work of Charlemagne in particular as
really pioneering this — this was a revolution in mankind's
ecology (if you want to call it that), in his ability to interact
with the natural world in a completely new way.
        But it didn't end there! Then you had the development of
rail systems. Now you're not just limited to certain rivers and
man-made canal systems and waterways. Now you can bring, with
rail — and again, the associated leaps in physical-chemistry,
materials sciences, energy-flux density obviously with moving
into new fuel sources: steam engines and these sorts of things —
now you open up the inland territories in a completely new way,
in a way that was never …

        OGDEN: Rail corridors are almost like artificial rivers —
places where you didn't have the means of navigation, but now all
of a sudden you have this rail corridor which allows you to open
up areas that are not even accessible through water.

        DENISTON: Yeah, absolutely! Once again, you have a complete
transformation in what territories, what areas are accessible to
real human development. Mr. LaRouche said the next step is really
high-speed rail systems; magnetic levitation, other advanced
high-speed rail; also inter-continental connections. You're
integrating the whole world in a very high-speed transportation
system; which is being pursued now by what China's leading, with
the New Silk Road program. We could spend hours going through all
the spin-offs of that that are really taking us closer and closer
to this full World Land-Bridge proposal. But that is really the
pursuit — the development of this next platform that Mr.
LaRouche had defined. The next one, really beyond that, is space,
and we should be looking to that.
        But the thing is, people have to understand infrastructure
is not something you measure just by the payback you get from it
itself. It's not a cost you have to pay for by the direct
immediate service. It pays you! It pays society. It's what
supports the ability, for again, these kind of revolutionary
changes. These issues are usually banalized by discussions, just
by using the term "infrastructure." Take transportation systems.
When mankind goes through revolutionary changes in his
transportation systems, people reduce it to "just getting
somewhere quicker." You're literally changing the physical
space-time relationship of mankind; individuals, but also
productive processes. A day means something completely different
in the context of an integrated high-speed rail system, maglev
system, than it did in the prior platform. What does "one day"
mean? It means now you can have access to a much greater
territory, various types of productions, various specialized
regions that were not accessible in that same timeframe, or maybe
for the same processes. Now they become accessible to you.
        You're talking about revolutionary leaps in the very
fundamental character of mankind's interaction with the natural
world. That has to be the standard. We're not going to have a
recovery by rebuilding what we had before. We need to fix things
that need to be fixed; but it needs to be done in the process of
creating this next higher stage that's going to support, again, a
completely new level of existence. We have a critical role in
elevating the discussion to that level. Because you take
transportation, you take water management — another key issue —
it's pretty obvious and simple. Mankind takes desert regions and
then they become flourishing, green bastions of life. The
greenies out there don't like water projects, they don't like
green; they don't want to actually have increased plant growth.
It's insane. If you look at the kind of water management systems
we can be developing, you take entire territories that are just
devoid, pretty much, of life; and we could make them into very
productive, accessible regions. You combine that with a real
driver for fusion power, nuclear power, a full nuclear economy;
and you're defining a future of mankind which can have the same
relation to how we view society presently, as we might look back
to the 1850s or something.
        That's how we should be thinking! That also defines the
space program on a completely new level. Space doesn't always
have to be this super-expensive niche area that only a few things
can be done in, but it's left to this exciting side-part of
society. It's going to become an integrated part of human
activity more and more, if we pursue these natural qualities of
human progress.

        OGDEN: What you said in the beginning about these platforms
of infrastructure being measured, not by the money that it
returns, or the tax revenue, or something, but by, literally, the
metric of how have you changed your carrying capacity, how have
you changed your potential relative population density for a
given area.
        You can think about that in the negative. If you didn't have
that sort of transportation infrastructure to bring the food to
the cities, if you didn't have the sanitation infrastructure, if
you didn't have the water management, if you didn't have the
electricity infrastructure; think about how quickly your
population your population level would collapse. Think about how
quickly you would lose the current carrying capacity of a given
land area; and how you would move backwards in what you were able
to support in terms of population density.
        That is the metric for any given platform, and how you
quantify one platform to the next. It needs to be seen as that
sort of metric of potential relative population density. The
other thing to think about is the fact that over the last 40-50
years, we've had access to technologies which really should have
revolutionized our economy, but for one reason or another, have
not. We have yet to reach full saturation, in terms of nuclear
power. We have yet to reach full saturation, in terms of
high-speed rail — rail for that matter — but high-speed rail.
We have yet to fully exploit even what our capabilities were, in
terms of space exploration. Coming up in two years, in July 2019,
we're going to be observing the 50th anniversary of man landing
on the Moon, and we haven't even been back to the Moon for 45
years; let alone have we gone where we should have gone, as was
envisaged at the time that Kennedy created the mission to put a
man on the Moon. We have yet to exploit and yet to follow
through, even on the level of technology that we had {then}, let
alone using that as the diving board to leap off and to get to
the next platform of what we should have achieved.

        KESHA ROGERS: What you're talking about, what we're speaking
about, is not just inter-continental development; we're talking
about inter-galactic development. I think it's important to go
back to, again, making 2017 the year of Lyndon LaRouche's ideas,
which have completely shaped and transformed the planet, to this
very point. I think it's important that we really draw out the
conception that what Lyndon LaRouche's Four Laws and the
foundation of his work behind those Four Laws, really do, is to
take away the power of the oligarchy and of this British imperial
system which has been involved in the destruction of nations and
of bringing down the potential for real scientific progress of
mankind to flourish. LaRouche's Four Laws takes away the power of
the oligarchy to push through their policy of population
reduction.
        The idea that Mr. LaRouche has founded his science of
physical-economy on, is, in essence, to take the idea from
Genesis 1:28. That is, the prerogative of mankind to multiply and
subdue and replenish the Earth. This is what the oligarchy has a
problem with; this is what the British imperial system doesn't
want to see happen. I think that what Mr. LaRouche has continued
to define — even before the question of infrastructure came out
— he really coined and developed this conception of a true
science of physical-economy, which is the basis of what was
established and what was really at the center of the human
creative mind of Alexander Hamilton's works — the definitions
that were defined in Hamilton's understanding of a national
banking policy and a credit policy.
        But even with that, it's not as understood as what Mr.
LaRouche has been able to take up, as you just said, Ben, in the
beginning. How is it that society has been able to get to a point
where we have over 7 billion people on the planet? Without the
breakthroughs in technological and scientific leaps of making new
discoveries and bringing new principles into the domain of the
organization of society, we would not have ever gone from a
coal-burning society. We would not have ever developed the
capability where right now, despite the fact that the British
oligarchy and their puppets like Obama want to hold mankind back
from the development and the complete breakthroughs which are
necessary in fusion technologies, in advancing mankind into
taking up a new leap in fusion development; we are now on the
verge of doing that, because of what has been set forth in the
potential for international cooperation and relations.
        So, I think we're saying we are now in an urgent
mobilization to put on the table the immediate economic solutions
that the newly-elected President Donald Trump must take up.
First of all, there has to be a crash educational on getting the
American people and getting the leadership of this nation —
Congressional leaders and others — to understand that economics
is not what you were taught in your 101 classes in college, of
macro- and micro-economics and following the charts of the Wall
Street market status of where the markets were taking you.  The
question of economics is on this question of the power of the
individual human mind to make new discoveries that are going to
increase and actually develop new capabilities for replenishing,
multiplying, and creating a more fruitful society.  I think
that's what has been missing, now that the buzz-words that are
thrown around as you said — "infrastructure" — they don't have
a real human foundation to go with them.  How are you going to
build infrastructure if you don't have a productive labor force?
This is what Mr. LaRouche has laid out in some of the
fundamentals and the foundations of his educationals in
economics.  The power of labor and the science of physical
economy start with the fact that at the core of economics is the
human mind, and are human beings.  The productive capabilities of
human beings which have been destroyed.  That's going to be the
challenge to President-elect Trump; and what he really has a
challenge of doing right now, which is something which has not
been done in a very long time.  Not really since the foundation
of our nation under Alexander Hamilton.  What Hamilton, what
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had to create, was really a new
economic system; that's what we're challenging and educating on.
This is not just about passing a piece of legislation and
separating the banking system by putting forth Glass-Steagall.
LaRouche has laid out the metrics to create a new economic system
that is going to be a system based on the development of the U.S.
potential for increasing our productivity and productive powers
of labor in collaboration with international relations which are
absolutely fundamental right now.  It's not going to happen, as
has been pointed out in many cases already, without very concrete
and prominent cooperation with leading nations such as Russia and
China.  We can come back to some of that, but I just wanted to
make those points at present.

        RACHEL BRINKLEY:  Listening to this discussion and
participating in it, it's just very fresh and optimistic compared
to what you hear everywhere else in the media.  I think it's just
there for 2017 — we're entering a new year — to take it upon
ourselves, for every person viewing this webcast to take it upon
themselves to really live these ideas and grow by it.  To see
your life not just as trying to pay the bills and survive in a
British mode of existence in our current culture; but to realize
that this is the way the Universe operates.  I think it's just
very fresh and exciting; people should not just view it as
something that they watch and support; but really figure out how
you can do more yourself as a person to make this happen.  It's
not just going to come from Trump.  We support what he's done in
the positive, and he deserves all support of the population at
this time; but we also have to look at this from LaRouche's work,
as has been discussed.  And as Helga LaRouche has really
emphasized, this has to really be the year of LaRouche's ideas.
We need to recognize that we're in a cycle of history which is a
larger arc of history, which is created by ideas which actually
had no physical existence — had no color, had no weight — but
are having an effect.
        Just for the sake of this idea of the Year of LaRouche, I'll
just read a short section from his paper from 2006 called "Saving
the U.S. Economy".  He says:  "The most common failure of
economists and others today is their inclination to view economic
and cultural cycles incompetently from the standpoint of
Cartesian or Cartesian-like mechanistic statistical projections.
That method is easily recognized as the common failure of
generally-accepted economic forecasting today.  However, a still
deeper problem presents itself.  Actual cycles in history are
never determined in the way which mechanical, statistical methods
tend to imply.  Actual cycles of importance are, as I have said,
dynamical rather than mechanistic; and may be compared on that
account with the notion of astronomical cycles as Johannes Kepler
first, uniquely, introduced those conceptions into modern
physical science in his {Mysterium Cosmographicum} and {The New
Astronomy}.  The proper term for astronomical-like cycles in
history is again, Riemannian.  The notion of a Riemannian rather
than a statistical conception of forecasting of economy is of
crucial importance for those among us engaged in providing a
genuine physical economic recovery from those quicksands of
misery which the alleged reforms of the 1971 to 2006" — or you
could say now, 2016 — "interval have dumped upon especially the
lower eighty percentile of our income brackets today."  Then he
adds:  "Hey, Congress!  Tell us; tell the lower eighty percentile
of our citizens what have you done to the U.S. Constitutional
General Welfare principle's superior role in the making of our
law?  Without a fair comprehension of the issues associated with
that distinction, no competent legislation could be crafted for
the presently onrushing crisis."
        So, I think it's true; we have to look to LaRouche's history
and ideas for this period.  Just on that, we were in Congress
this week, discussing Glass-Steagall; and the current Congress
does not view Glass-Steagall as a priority.  Many Congressmen are
exactly what LaRouche refers to here — still thinking in
statistical modes or basically looking at economy the same way a
Wall Street banker does.  They say they're against Wall Street,
or trying to rein it in, but they're doing the exact same thing,
in effect.  There's no change.  It is going to be up to us and
the population to demand this idea of a resurgence of the U.S.
Constitutional principle of the General Welfare.  The only way
that can be done, is with Glass-Steagall.
        This system is absolutely ready to go.  There are two
components of that.  One is the level of bankruptcy, of the
derivative debt and the leverage ratio; and the second is the
interconnection of the system, of U.S. banks to European banks,
and different sectors of the economy all tied in together also.
Insurance with hedge funds, with banks, with commercial banks;
it's all interconnected.  The system can't be saved in its
current form; it has to be Glass-Steagall joined with the rest of
LaRouche's Four Laws.  So, that's the urgent call to put this
legislation on Trump's desk; it's what we have to do.

        DENISTON:  Absolutely.  The point is, we have to make clear
with people that this is what Glass-Steagall opens up.  Just
clean out the system; cut out the speculation; and use money and
credit in the financial system for what its intended purpose is
— to facilitate this kind of process.  Some of the difficulty
comes when people compartmentalize these laws as distinct things.
But money doesn't mean anything outside of the context of the
physical economy.  The Four Laws are really one entity and I
think making that point, if people want a recovery, if they want
living wages, if they want their infrastructure rebuilt, if they
want water that's not going to kill them and make them sick; you
need Glass-Steagall so you have a system that can facilitate the
kind of long-term investment and growth that will enable these
things to happen.  I think breaking this totally ridiculous idea
of market economics and the way people think about these things
today, shattering that with this real physical conception is
critical.
        Just to come back to the global picture also, the world is
moving in this direction; you have a potential now.  That's
what's so exciting about this period, the potential.  A lot is
not decided, a lot is unclear; but we have an opening that hasn't
existed for — you could say the past 16 years, you could say
back to Truman coming in and completely overthrowing the Franklin
Roosevelt vision and orientation for the post-war world.  All of
that is now up in the air; and you have now the openness where
serious people in power are honestly thinking, "What do we do to
move mankind forward?"  Instead of people like Prince Phillip,
who are saying "What can I do to kill as many people today before
I go out for lunch?"  This is the time when you need to have this
full outreach orientation and make these ideas the dominant
conception in the American population today.
        So, I think what's been referenced in terms of this call to
action is really critical.  Everyone watching this should be
taking to heart the responsibility we all have right now at this
current historical moment to make this a reality.  This is not
something that comes and goes frequently, these kinds of
opportunities.

        OGDEN:  Yeah, and I just want to reiterate that.  The
responsibility lies on the citizens of the United States that
decide to take that responsibility on.  Nobody should be under
any impression that somehow everything is just going to fall into
place, or that even this administration is necessarily positive
on its own merits.  Everything that has been created as an
opening has been forced as such by years and years of activism
among people in the United States and a shifting global dynamic;
something that the LaRouches have been right in the middle of.
It's true that Trump has definitely overturned a bunch of chess
boards and has made a lot of enemies among the neo-cons and the
anti-Russia crowd and so forth.  But on economics, it is our
responsibility to set the agenda.  It's very unclear what that
policy is going to be.  The only thing that is clear is that
there is a core group of people among the activist-citizens in
the United States who have made a decision to say, "We are going
to hold him to Glass-Steagall; and we are going to force the
agenda around this policy."  That's why we are highlighting this
initiative that's been taken by the group of activists out of
Ohio and others who are now coming in on that.
        But people do have to have a sense of a broader sweep of
history.  What is it that makes a President great?  In the
history of the United States, especially, you can actually go
back to every great President and associate with them a
seriousness about moving mankind to the next level of economic
achievement.  What Hamilton did for the Washington
administration, creating the ability to have the United States
become a manufacturing country; a lot of that was done through
inland navigation, canals.  Water power was a major aspect of
what we were able to accomplish in the first few decades of our
existence as a country.  John Quincy Adams built more of those
canals, but also initiated the age of the railroad in the United
States.  And of course, Abraham Lincoln took that to its logical
next step through the construction of the Transcontinental
Railroad in the midst of the Civil War; but he understood this
was the next economic platform for the United States.  Franklin
Roosevelt — I mean, this was the age of mass power generation.
At that time, it was hydroelectric power; look at the Grand
Cooley Dam, look at the TVA.  But also, Franklin Roosevelt
understood that electrification was not just something for the
urban areas; even though it was not something that you were not
going to get a monetary return from immediately, Roosevelt
understood that you needed electrification for the whole country.
The Rural Electrification Administration used the power of the
Federal government to extend that financing, to extend that
credit, to do something that was not immediately profitable in
monetary terms, but was necessary to move the country to the next
level economically.  Then, of course, that was the time of the
exploration of the harnessing of the power of the atom with the
Manhattan Project.  Then, John F Kennedy, in his very short time
in office, became the champion of the space program, which was
the next step.  What is it that makes a Presidency great?  It's
moving the country and the world to that next platform in terms
of economic achievement; and that's what Lyndon LaRouche has been
defining for 30 years.  The breakthrough in fusion, the
breakthrough in space exploration, and technologies that we don't
even know exist yet.  But forcing the mind of man to push the
envelope in terms what we know and what we are able to imagine.

        DENISTON:  Sounds like a fun year to me.

        ROGERS:  Yes, and I think that what you just laid out, Matt,
has to be seen with all of these breakthroughs and continued
developments, is that the impact that it had on increasing the
level of productivity not just of the United States, but of the
entire world economy.  What Franklin Roosevelt did with his
programs around the TVA, the rural electrification, wasn't just a
project for a certain southern part of the United States.  People
came from all over the world to be inspired and to come to
understand the science and the metrics that went into this
development and the understanding of the policies of Franklin
Roosevelt.  Today, the question still remains; what are going to
be the unique contributions of the United States working in
collaboration and cooperation with other nations to increase the
productivity of the world economy?  We are in a global system,
where the question right now is really to find an increase in a
new paradigm which is going to effect the common aims of all
mankind.  The best expression of that is some of the beautiful
expressions that we're getting back from the space program.
Those in cooperation with participating in the International
Space Station from all over the world right now, and the
continued idea is that the nature of man goes beyond any kind of
war, conflict, or borders.  The identity of the increasing of the
productivity of society is really the basis for all human
progress.  I think that continues to be the point right now.  We
have a unique shift that's happening globally, which honestly is
freaking the oligarchy and the empire out.  They don't know what
to do about the fact that they have lost all control; that's what
you're dealing with right now.
        As we were discussing before the show a little bit, this is
not necessarily about attacks on President-elect Trump himself;
this is not Trump vs. those forces who want to go against him —
such as the intelligence community and so forth — because they
don't like the way he's talking to them.  It goes a little bit
deeper than that, because you now have the emergence of a new
system coming into being right now, of cooperation that the
British Empire and financial oligarchy and Wall Street interests
have been trying to keep separated and keep tabs on for a long
time.  They've lost control and they've lost power.  As we
continue to say, with 60-plus nations joining with the New Silk
Road and the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, this is what
we're talking about bringing the United States into; and
Glass-Steagall will be the first step in bringing the United
States into this global alliance and international cooperation
that breaks the back of the financial oligarchy and destroys this
Wall Street control.  That is what people have to look forward to
— their role in the galactic system of the Universe in creating
something more profound.

        OGDEN:  Helga LaRouche, when we were speaking with her
earlier, cited the fact that President Xi Jinping of China always
talks about this in terms of a future of shared destiny among
mankind as a whole.  This is the same thing that Dr. Edward
Teller talked about in the 1980s, and Mr. LaRouche has cited, as
the common aims of mankind.  This is how you have to think about
international cooperation; nations have their own self-interests,
but it's in the interest of all mankind to achieve this future of
shared destiny, or these common aims of mankind.  That doesn't
mean that there aren't differences between nations, and that
there aren't different policies; but the higher principle which
unites the contradictions through which you can resolve these
conflicts or contradictions among peoples is through this idea of
a vision for the future.  This has to be what defines our
relationship with China; this has to be what defines our
relationship with Russia.  Some of the more sober people have
begun to realize that the only way we can defeat terrorism — as
can be seen in Syria — is through collaboration with Russia.
        But there are other positive programs that have to be
pursued; and you can see a lot of potential right underneath the
surface.  Last week we talked about how the memorial to the
Alexandrov Russian choir, many of whom died in the tragic plane
crash on their way to Syria, the Schiller Institute went to the
Russian consulate in New York City and sang a memorial for these
individuals.  This has become an overnight sensation on the
internet, on YouTube; this video already has over half a million
views.  This is the kind of relationship among peoples that we
have to pursue.  On that subject, there will be another memorial
by the Schiller Institute Chorus in New York City, who will be
visiting the 9/11 Teardrop Memorial in Bayonne, New Jersey; which
is right across the Hudson River, looking at downtown Manhattan.
This memorial to the victims of 9/11 was contributed by the
Russian people to the people of the United States.  This is being
highly anticipated; the press release has been circulated widely.
The Committee for East-West Accord has posted the announcement of
this on their website.  The very beginning of this press release
is as follows, and we're going to be watching this tomorrow.
        "Christmas Remembrance of the Alexandrov Ensemble of the
Victims of 9/11.  On Saturday, January 7, 2017 at 10AM, the
Schiller Institute New York City Chorus will be singing the
'Star-Spangled Banner' and the Russian national anthem at a
wreath-laying ceremony at the Teardrop 9/11 Memorial in Bayonne,
New Jersey.  The chorus will be joined by: the NYPD Ceremonial
Unit Color Guard, as well as FDNY representatives; Ms. Terry
Strada, the chairman of the 9/11 Families United for Justice
Against Terror, and others will make brief remarks."
        I think this is just one of many initiatives that can guide
us into this New Paradigm as we begin the new year.  We have to
realize that a lot has changed; this is not business as usual.  A
lot of the ideas of what was possible and what was pragmatic
under the former rules of the game, and so forth, have got to be
changed.  Members of Congress who might have supported
Glass-Steagall in the past, but said, "Oh, there's too much
opposition; the Republicans won't let it pass"; or "The Wall
Street bankers are too powerful."  All of those parameters have
changed now; and it's up to us to tell people, "This is a changed
world; this is not business as usual.  You have to renew your
commitment to what you think what must be done, and you have to
change your concept of what is possible."
        So, I think with that said, I'll go back and cite that
petition we presented earlier in the show.  This is obviously the
initiative over the next few days.  We have 14 days until the
inauguration; the countdown of this transition to a new
Presidency.  The only thing that is assured is what you decide to
do; the mobilization that you engage in, and the responsibility
that you take over the coming days, in order to set the agenda
for the future of the United States.
        Thank you for tuning in today.  Please sign up to the
LaRouche PAC email list if you haven't already.  Over the next
two weeks, you will receive daily emails which will be essential
in terms of marching orders in this mobilization.  And subscribe
to the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel if you haven't already.
Thank you for joining us, and thank you to Ben, Kesha, and
Rachel.  Happy New Year to you.  Please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.

 




POLITISK ORIENTERING den 5. januar 2017:
Farvel til 2016, Obama og det gamle paradigme.
Se også 2. del.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg:

Lyd: 




NYHEDSORIENTERING DECEMBER 2016:
Helga Zepp-LaRouche i København:
Donald Trump og Det Nye Internationale Paradigme

Den 12. december 2016 var Helga Zepp-LaRouche – Lyndon LaRouches hustru, Schiller Instituttets grundlægger og en international nøgleperson i kampen for et nyt globalt udviklingsparadigme – særlig gæstetaler ved et Schiller Institut/EIR-seminar på Frederiksberg med titlen: »Donald Trump og det Nye Internationale Paradigme«. Blandt deltagerne var diplomater, aktivister og repræsentanter for diverse danske og internationale organisationer.

Arrangementet blev indledt med fremførelsen af en kendt traditionel kinesisk sang, Kāngdìng Qínggē (Kangding Kærlighedssang), af Feride Istogu Gillesberg (sopran) og Michelle Rasmussen (klaver). Dernæst introducerede formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, som på smukkeste og mest optimistiske vis førte publikken igennem en tour-de-force af den nuværende politiske situation med såvel befolkningens afvisning af det nuværende paradigme gennem Brexit, Hillary Clintons valgnederlag til Donald Trump og det italienske ”Nej”, som et forsøg på at skabe kaos (og krig) inden Donald Trumps indsættelse den 20. januar. Dertil kom en fremstilling af det nye globale paradigme, som allerede er ved at overtage verden, illustreret ved Kinas politik for Den Nye Silkevej – som den kommende amerikanske administration skal finde sin plads i – og den videre udvikling, der er nødvendig, hvis menneskeheden skal finde sin sande identitet. Hele talen og den efterfølgende diskussion kan ses, høres og læses på: www.schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=16773.

 

Download (PDF, Unknown)




Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale på
Schiller Instituttets og EIR’s
seminar i København:
Donald Trump og det nye
internationale paradigme.
ENGELSK udskrift af tale
samt Spørgsmål og Svar

København, 12. december, 2016 – I dag var Helga Zepp-LaRouche særlig gæstetaler ved et Schiller Institut/EIR-seminar i København, med titlen, »Donald Trump og det Nye, Internationale Paradigme«. Otte diplomater fra seks lande deltog, inklusive to ambassadører. Nationer fra Vesteuropa, Sydvestasien, Vest- og Østasien var repræsenteret, samt fra Afrika. Desuden deltog henved 30 af Schiller Instituttets medlemmer og kontakter, såvel som også et par repræsentanter for diverse danske og internationale organisationer.

Arrangementet indledtes af en forestilling, hvor Feride Istogu Gillesberg og Michelle Rasmussen fremførte en kinesisk kærlighedssang. Dernæst introducerede formand for Schiller Instituttet i Danmark, Tom Gillesberg, Schiller Instituttets stifter og internationale præsident, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, ved at beskrive den historiske rolle, hun har spillet i skabelsen af politikken med Den Nye Silkevej.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche indledte sin meget inspirerende og dybtgående tale med den revolution imod globalisering, som Brexit, Trumps valgsejr og Nej-resultatet i den italienske folkeafstemning udgør. Hun kom med en vurdering af potentialet i nogle af Trumps hidtidige erklæringer og udnævnelser og gik dernæst videre med en detaljeret diskussion af de to, modstridende paradigmer, der eksisterer i verden i dag. Dernæst opløftede Helga tilhørerne med Krafft Ehrickes og Nicolaus Cusanus’ skønne ideer. Hun konkluderede med en appel til de tilstedeværende om ikke at handle som tilskuere på historiens scene, men derimod, sammen med os, at gå med i kampen for det nye paradigme.

Helga Zepp-LaRouches tale, der varer omkring 1 time og 20 minutter, kan høres ovenover eller her:

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/helga-zepp-larouche-in-copenhagen-donald-trump-and-the-new-international-paradigm-1

En dansk oversættelse af talen kommer på torsdag. 

Herefter fulgte en intens, timelang diskussion, hvor der kom spørgsmål fra alle de forskellige grupper, der var repræsenteret. Helga afsluttede mødet med at udfordre tilhørerne til at beslutte, hvad de ønsker at bruge deres liv til; hvilket mærke, som vil være til gavn for hele menneskeheden langt ud i fremtiden, ønsker de at sætte? Et udskrift af Helgas svar vil ligeledes snarest blive udlagt her på hjemmesiden.

Helgas tale og efterfølgende diskussion havde en dybtgående virkning på alle de tilstedeværende. 

Diskussionen findes kun som engelsk udskrift (se nedenfor).

—–

English: Introductory article

Helga Zepp-LaRouche Keynotes Copenhagen Seminar on `Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm'

COPENHAGEN, Dec. 12, 2016 (EIRNS) — Today, Helga Zepp-LaRouche was the special guest speaker at a Schiller Institute/{EIR} seminar in Copenhagen entitled, "Donald Trump and the New International Paradigm." Eight diplomats from six countries attended, including two ambassadors. There were nations from Western Europe, Southwest Asia, Western and Eastern Asia, and Africa. In addition, there were around 30 Schiller Institute members and contacts, as well as a few representatives of various Danish and international institutions.

The event was opened by the presentation of a Chinese love song performed by Feride Istogu Gillesberg and Michelle Rasmussen. Afterwards, Tom Gillesberg, the chairman of The Schiller Institute in Denmark, introduced Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, describing her historical role in bringing about the New Silk Road policy.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche's very inspiring, in-depth speech began with the revolution against globalization represented by the Brexit, the Trump election, and the Italian No vote. She gave an evaluation of the potential represented by some of the statements and appointments Trump has made so far, and then proceeded with a detailed discussion of the two conflicting paradigms in the world today. Zepp-LaRouche then uplifted the audience with the beautiful ideas of space scientist Krafft Ehricke and Renaissance philosopher Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. She concluded with an appeal to those present not to act as spectators on the stage of history, but engage in the battle for the new paradigm with us.

Her speech, about 80 minutes long, may be heard above, or at: https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/helga-zepp-larouche-in-copenhagen -donald-trump-and-the-new-international-paradigm-1

Afterwards, there was an intensive hour-long discussion, with questions from all of the different groups represented. Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche ended by challenging the audience to decide what they want to do with their lives, what mark they will make to benefit all humanity, far into the future.  

Zepp-LaRouche's speech and discussion had a profound effect on all present. 

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Discussion:

(There is no video or audio of the discussion period, only this transcript.)

Helga Zepp-LaRouche in Copenhagen December 12, 2016
Discussion
(To facilitate free discussion, the questioners are not identified, and the questions are summarized. The answers are complete.)
Question: Can we be optimistic about Trump’s presidency, because he is skeptical about climate change, is for trade war with China and Mexico, opposes the free trade deals, and has called for tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: I said earlier that the potentialities for change are there, but it depends, to a very large extent, upon us – what we do. When Trump got elected, my first response was, this is what I call the ‘dog pull-tail, let-go feeling.’ What I mean by that is that when you pull the tail of a dog, which you should never do, naturally, and you let go, the pain stops. When you pull, there is pain, and when you stop pulling, the pain goes away.
So, in a certain sense, the election of Trump was the tail let-go feeling, because we were on an immediate course toward WWIII, and that was really the primary point, because if Hillary Clinton would have been elected — unfortunately, Hillary Clinton, when she was in the Obama administration, transformed from being a relatively OK person, she was never great, but in 2008, she was relatively decent, compared to what she became, because she capitulated to Obama, and when she made this terrible statement, for example, in Libya, about the murder of Gadaffi, “We came, we saw, and he died.” This is barbarism.
Her behavior in the Ben Ghazi case. There were so many things where she became worse than Obama, almost. So the immediate thing was that that big danger, that she would have continued the policies of Bush and Obama, in the confrontation with Russia and China, that that was stopped is, already, for the survival of civilization, the most important step.
Now, on these other points. Naturally, there is climate change. There is no question about it. But the question is, what is the cause of it? And the Schiller Institute had several conferences where we invited extremely important scientists who presented, beyond a doubt, that if you look at the last 500 million years in the history of the Earth, you have a continuous cycle of ice ages, of warming periods, of small ice ages, and the man-made component of climate change is absolutely negligible. It’s a big fraud, for example, it’s a big business. To sell CO2 omission quotas, is like selling indulgences in the Middle Ages.
Obviously, there are climate changes, and some countries which have low coasts are very much affected, but then you have to adapt to these climate changes with modern technology, and you cannot solve the problem by going to electric cars, or going to decarbonization of the world economy. This is a big fraud, and I am not saying that Trump is saying this for all the right reasons, but the idea to impose measures implied with the “great transformation” Schellnhuber is talking about – I mean these people do not want development.
We have been on this case for the last — as a matter of fact, we, the LaRouche movement, had a conception about the development of the world really starting at the end of the sixties.
I joined Mr. LaRouche because I went to China, Africa, other Asian countries, and I saw the horrible, horrible underdevelopment. So I came back from this trip, and I said, ‘I have to become political, because I want to change this.’ I could give you a long, long story of the many observations, because I went with a cargo ship, and when you go to these countries with a cargo ship, you get a quite different idea than if you go on a 5-star cruise, and hotels. You see how the poverty affects people in their real lives. And I came back, and I looked at all the political movements, and I saw that LaRouche was the only one who said, ‘We have to have Third World development. We have to have technology transfer. We have to alleviate this poverty.’
And we had a positive conception already in the seventies, and therefore, when the Club of Rome appeared, we immediately said, ‘This is a fraud.’ Because the Club of Rome said, ‘There are limits to growth. We have reached equilibrium. Until the year 1972, you could develop, but now, we have reached equilibrium, and we have to have sustainable development. We have to have appropriate technology.’ These notions did not exist before, because before, you had the idea of a UN Development Decade, where each decade, you would overcome the underdevelopment by qualitative jumps. And when we recognized this propaganda by the Club of Rome, we immediately said, ‘This is a complete fraud,’ and the people who wrote the book “Limits to Growth,” Meadows and Forrester …
Q: A followup about the Paris climate summit.
A: I would like to give you written documentation afterwards of the studies that were made by these geologists, which are, without question, the explanation of climate change is not man-made. The anthropogenic aspect of it is so miniscule. Climate change has to do with the position of the solar system in the galaxy, which goes in cycles around a certain axis, and you can see that over 500 million years, the data confirms that you have these wide changes. Greenland is called Greenland, because it was green. There used to be vineyards. You had ice ages which completely covered the Earth, and the reason why I went into this longer history, is to show how the environmentalist movement was created with the attempt to keep development down, and climate change is just another expression of the same effort.
If you look at which firms which are investing in solar parks, in wind parks, who is controlling the CO2 emission trade, you have all the top hedge funds in London and Wall St. I can give you a lot of documentation about it, which does not mean that climate change is not real, because you have the rise of the oceans, and you have climate change, you have extreme weather, but that has been happening for hundreds of millions of years.
And, on the other points you raised, obviously, from our standpoint, the cancellation of NAFTA, is a good thing, because NAFTA did not allow development for Mexico. As a matter of fact, NAFTA is the incarnation of the cheap labor production model of free trade. What you need is – especially countries which are not developed, you need protective tariffs for their own good. They have to develop a domestic market first. The booklet which I emphasized, which you should please read, “Against the Stream,” is one of many, but it is very condensed, and a very good book.
The question is, ‘What is the source of wealth?’ Is the source of wealth cheap labor, to buy cheap raw materials, produce cheaply, and sell expensive? Is that the cause of wealth? No.
The only cause of wealth is the increase in the creativity of labor power. And a good government is, therefore, investing the maximum amount into education, into sponsoring the creativity of youth, of labor, and the more people in the labor force, by percentage, are engineers, scientists, the more productive the economy becomes.
And the free trade system, of which NAFTA is just one example, did exactly the opposite. China, which was part of this in the beginning — the reason why China today has so many environmental problems, like smog, like a large amount of groundwater being contaminated, is the result of the fact that China, in the beginning of its industrialization, accepted being a cheap labor production place for the U.S. and for Europe. When I was in China, even in 1971, I visited some factories which were horrible. They were absolutely horrible. The working conditions were terrible, the labor force, which produced electrical devices for radios, it was horrible. They worked for 18 hours. No health system. It was just terrible. And that is how China developed in the first phase.
But then China, with Deng Xiaoping, started to recognize that that is the wrong way. So China is now on a completely different track. They are putting the maximum emphasis on science and technology, the increase of excellence. Last year, they produced 1 million scientists. That’s double of what the U.S. produced. Obviously China is a larger country, but still. What will finally be decisive is the number of people who are creative. And that is why China, right now, has the best education system, because they have understood that the source of wealth is not raw materials. Is not trade conditions. It is the creativity of their own people. And that it a good thing. If we go to a system where we have a certain amount of protectionism, to protect the development of the domestic market, it is a good thing.
There is no danger of cutting [countries off from one another], because all of these infrastructure projects are connectivity. The world will be more connected than ever before. But this whole myth of free trade is really a very bad thing. It has been coined by the people who profit from it. That’s why the world is in the condition it is right now, where the rich become richer, and the poor become poorer. The middle class is being destroyed all over the world. And I would really like to communicate with you so that we can deepen this dialogue.
On the Iran thing, I don’t think he will break it, but that is my hope. I don’t know.
So, I’m not saying he’s a – as I said, Baron von Knigge would get a heart attack when he hears Trump’s speeches, but the world was in such a grip of evil, satanic evil, that it is a good thing that there is a break, and the unfortunate thing, is that Europe is still in this grip.
You can see it. Von der Leyen, the German Defense Secretary, had the funniest reaction. The day after the election of Trump, she said ‘I am deeply shocked,’ about this election result, because nobody thought this would happen. Now, this same lady is now parading in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Bin Salman Al Saud, and she isn’t shocked. So, I don’t know what’s wrong with her. I think that that would be a good place to be shocked, or not even go there.
So, I have come to the conclusion that a lot of the Europeans who react this way to the defeat of Hillary, are obeying another power in their head, and that power I call The British Empire, which is still in place, and it dominates Europe, and that is why they feel – I was asking myself, how come all of these politicians are so arrogant towards the new president of the U.S.? Because they were the boot-lickers of Washington until yesterday, and they would immediately do everything Washington would say and do, so I asked myself, ‘Where is this sudden self-assertedness coming from?’ And the only explanation I came up with, was to say, they must have an idea that there is another power which is more powerful than Trump, otherwise, they wouldn’t have this sudden arrogance.
And it is the British, because you will see tomorrow, because tomorrow, there will be a federal press conference in Berlin, where a number of people will present their contribution to the German chairmanship of the G-20, which will take place in July in Hamburg. This will be Joachim Schellnhuber, the head of the WBGU (German Advisory Council on Global Change), this is the scientific advisory organization advising the German government. He put out this paper about ‘the great transformation,’ which we wrote about. You can look in the archive. He is the head of the idea of a decarbonization of the world economy.
Now, if you decarbonize the world economy, without having fusion, that would be one thing, to have fusion power in place. Then you can talk about getting rid of fossil fuels, but without having fusion, and being against nuclear energy, fission, it means that you will reduce the world’s population to 1 billion or less, because there is a direct correlation between the energy-flux-density, and the number of people you can maintain. Schellnhuber said that the carrying capacity of the Earth is maximum 1 billion people. He didn’t say that he wants to do with the 6 billion who are already there. If he would be consequent, he should hop away from this planet.
And they will announce a sinister plan, to try to use the fact that many countries have environmental problems, to sneak in their anti-development programs. People should not be naïve, because not everybody thinks that population growth is a good thing. There are many people who think that each human being is a parasite, destroying nature. That is the image of man which many people have. The greenies, for example.
We look at it in a different way. We think that the more people you have, the greater longevity you can have, division of labor, and a modern scientific society needs many people with a long life span. Because if you are in the Third World, and you die, and you have an average life expectancy of 40 years, or less, you cannot have scientists, because the production of a scientist takes 30-35 years, and if people then die right away, then you can’t have a modern society.
So the more creative people you have, the better. Each human being is an incredible addition, because we are creative.
Tom Gillesberg: Schellnhuber, for his services, was appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE), and for him, he personally has said, that the highpoint of his existence was that the British Queen, personally, gave him the Order of the British Empire, for his efforts to reduce the possibility for mankind’s survival, you could say, so it is connected with what you said.
Q: This is the best speech I have ever heard in my life.
Is this a second American Revolution, and will the Federal Reserve, which is privately owned, be closed down, and will money be created for the benefit of all people, and not just the private Fed?
A: I don’t know, because, as I said, there are so many unknowns about Trump, and what he will do, and how it will play out. All I can say is, if Trump does not fulfill his promises, the same people who caused his election, will topple him. Because I don’t think that this process, which is now underway, where ordinary people have just had it — If you think about the declaration of Independence, it has this formulation that you will not bring down a government system for light reasons, but, if for a long time, the common good is being violated, I don’t know the exact text, then, people have the right and duty to replace this government with a rightful one, and that idea I call natural law.
It’s the same idea that Friedrich Schiller had in Wilhelm Tell. This is a play he wrote, which takes place in Switzerland. There, the Hapsburg oligarch is also trampling on the rights of the Swiss people, then they unite with the Rütli Oath. There is this beautiful formulation which says, ‘When the rights of people are trampled upon, they have the right to reach out to the stars, and take from the stars those rights which are eternally embedded in these stars. (I am not saying it as beautifully as Schiller does.)
If you compare these two texts, the Declaration of Independence, and the Rütli Oath from Schiller’s play, they are almost identical, and it’s very clear that Schiller was inspired by the American Revolution when he wrote that play, because in his plays, there are many ideas which resonate with the American Revolution, and he actually wanted to immigrate, at one point, to America.
So I think that if Trump turns out to be another fraudster, which we don’t know yet, I think that this process of revolt will continue, because I only mentioned some elements.
I could mention that there are many countries now in realignment. for example, the Philippines, Duterte. This was supposed to be the playground for the conflict with China in the South China Sea. Now Duterte sent his Defense Secretary, Lorenzana, to Russia and China, to buy weapon systems from Russia and China, and to establish a friendship with China, and he said, ‘The Philippines is no longer the colony of the U.S.’
Then you have Japan, which was the junior partner of the U.S. in the Pacific. Abe went to Sochi, meeting with Putin. In three days from now, Putin will go to Japan to have a state visit. They are talking about a peace treaty between Russia and Japan.
All of these are new alignments. There is a shift in the strategic situation, and I don’t think that that shift can be reversed.
Q: About Russia hacking the U.S. election. Why doesn’t the U.S. have anti-hacking measures? Can you explain that?
A: I cannot explain that, for the same reason that I cannot explain why the NSA is surveilling everyone, all their phones, their communications, worldwide. They can observe all of these things, but they don’t know about terrorism. They don’t know about drug trafficking. They don’t know about money laundering. Either their system is not so good, or they are looking in the wrong direction. I can’t answer your question.
Q: Will the result of the Brexit be positive for Europe, to enable continental Europe to become stronger, and to improve cooperation with the eastern parts of Europe?
A: I think that the EU is not functioning, and I think it is not just the Brexit. The “No” in Italy is a reflection of the same dynamic. Now you have Gentiloni, the new prime minister, and they will probably go for new elections. Right now, in the polls, you have the 5 Star Party leading. If they win, and form the new government, they have already said that they would leave the EU, and leave the Euro, and, in a certain sense, it is not functioning.
The reason I was against the introduction of the Euro from the beginning, was because we said that it cannot function. You cannot have a European currency union in something which is not an optimal economic space. You cannot put advanced industry together with an agrarian country, with completely different tax laws, pension laws, and you don’t want a political union, because Europe is not a people. You don’t have a European people. I don’t know what the Danes are saying. I don’t know what is in the Danish newspapers. The people of Slovenia have no inkling of what is happening in Alsace-Lorraine, and so forth, and so on. You don’t have a European people. Esperanto doesn’t function. You have 28 nations, 28 histories, 28 cultures.
That doesn’t mean that you can’t work together. I think that the idea of Charles de Gaulle to work together as an alliance between perfectly sovereign fatherlands, that is a correct idea. And all these fatherlands can adopt a joint mission, like to develop Africa, or other things.
I just think that this European Union is not going to stay forever.
Q: (followup) Will it be easier for Germany and France to promote this development, as the leading countries?
A: Everybody says that Germany is the biggest beneficiary of globalization, the EU, and the Euro, but that’s not really true, because, if you look at it more closely, then you can say that since the introduction of the Euro, the domestic market of Germany has completely stagnated. And the number of people who became poorer has increased.
Q: (followup) What about regarding the dialogue with Russia.
A: Oh yes, that would be much easier.
I do not think that this EU bureaucracy is capable of reform, because by their self-understanding, they are the local pro-consuls of this empire, and I think that it would be much better if Germany, France, and other countries have individual relations. And I don’t think that – this whole idea that you need a European Empire to compete with Russia and China and other emerging countries – The EU, by definition, is an empire. They have said it themselves. Robert Cooper, who has some kind of advisory function [currently serving as EU Special Advisor with regard to Myanmar], he said that the EU is the fastest expanding empire in history. It’s a bad idea.
And the Russians for – I noticed this since the beginning of the year 2000, that the Russians did not make a difference anymore between the EU and NATO. They said that it’s the same thing. And it is the same thing.
Q: You said that the One Belt, One Road was stripped of commercial interests from the Chinese side, as opposed to the IMF, World Bank. On what basis do you say that it is less interest-driven than the Bretton Woods institutions?
A: Well, because, the question is not that I’m saying that China is perfect. I’m not saying that. But when you look at anything, you have to look at the vector of development, is it going upward, or is it going downward? And from that standpoint, I had the advantage that I was in China in 1971, which was in the middle of the Cultural Revolution. This was so different than China today.
The Cultural Revolution was horrible for the people. The Red Guards would take people out of their homes, put them in jail, send them to the countryside, and people were distraught.
And now, people in China are happy. If you talk to students, or to young people, they are optimistic. They say, ‘Oh. I will do this in the future. I have these plans.’ I talked to a group of students in Lanzhou two years ago, and they said, ‘We will go to Africa. We will develop Africa.’ I have never heard a German student say this. Yeah, when I was a student, but that’s a long time ago.
I think that it is very worthwhile to read the speeches of Xi Jinping. There is a book, “The Governance of China,” but that only has about 60 speeches, and there are many, many more. For example, you should read the speeches he gave when he went to France, to Germany, and to India.
For example, when he went to India, he made a speech which was really incredible, because he said that he loved Indian culture from his early youth, and then he gave so many examples of the high points of Indian culture, the Gupta period, the Upanishads, the Vedic writings, Rabindranath Tagore, many predicates which prove that he really knows what he is talking about. He is not just one of these politicians who have a PR advisor about how to make nice bubbles in your speeches, but you could really see that he means it. And the same for Germany. He came to Germany and he emphasized Schubert and Heine, things which I also appreciate about Germany, and he did the same thing in France.
And I don’t think that the Chinese leadership would agree with me when I say this, but I think that they are less communist than Confucians. They probably would not admit that, because they are officially the Communist Party, and that’s OK, but, I come from Trier, and Trier is the birthplace of Karl Marx, so I have studied Karl Marx, and I think that they are still socialist, or communist, or whatever, but they always said that they are communist with Chinese characteristics, and these Chinese characteristics are Confucianism.
And the Confucian idea of man is lifelong learning, lifelong perfection, that everyone should be a Jinzi, a wise man, a noble man, and Confucius said, if the government is bad, then the Jinzi, these wise people, should replace the government. Also the idea that you have to have an harmonious development, starting with the family, continuing in the nation, and then, larger, among the nations.
China is the only country that has not made wars of aggression, colonial wars, in its 5,000 years of history. It was invaded many times, the Opium War, and things like that, but China is not an aggressive nation, at all.
And if you look at what they are doing in practice, the IMF and the World Bank have prevented Third World development, and China is going from one country to the next, building science cities, helping with space cooperation, bringing in developing countries in the most advanced areas of science, in order to not prevent their development. I think this is a completely different approach.
I think that the Chinese have come up with a new model of government, which I have not seen in any place in Europe, the U.S. ever, and it’s a model which is overcoming geopolitics, which is, if you say, ‘I have a win-win for cooperation. Everybody can join.’ Then, if everyone joins, then you have overcome geopolitics.
And geopolitics is the one thing that caused two world wars, and in the age of thermonuclear weapons, we cannot have geopolitics anymore. So I think that these are very important differences.
Sure, China has its own interests. Win-win means that China also has an interest. China has advantages, but, for example, if you ask people from Africa, ‘Would you rather have deals where China gets raw materials for long periods of time, but they build infrastructure for Africans.’ They like that much better than Europeans who come and say, ‘Oh, you should obey democracy,’ and do nothing.
Q: Statement about Chinese infrastructure projects in Morocco. Both are winners, as opposed to projects 20 years ago run by other countries. The Chinese there have learned Arabic. The projects have greatly reduced the travel time. They have a different perspective than the French, and Europeans had.    
Tom Gillesberg: Do you have final remarks?
A: I would just say that people should not just believe, or not believe, what I am saying, but take an active attitude to try to find out what the truth is, for themselves. Because the world is not helped by replacing one ideology by another. The only way you can be certain, is that you become a truth-seeking person yourself. Because the whole question about what went wrong, is that people forgot what it is to be an honest truth-seeking person, taking the truth not as something you reach finally, but something you always improve.
Schiller had this beautiful writing about universal history, where he said that the philosophical mind is the first one to take his own system apart, to put it together more perfectly again.
I think that that quality – and, also, we had two days ago in Berlin, a very important event, which was also about the dialogue of cultures, and every – we had a very important presentation, which you can soon see on our webpage, where we had a double bass player who spoke about the importance of Wilhelm Furtwängler as a conductor, and he gave some musical examples, and he compared the performances of Furtwängler with some modern conductors, and the difference is so unbelievable. The music of Furtwängler is transparent. It is beautiful. It is absolutely overwhelmingly uplifting, and many of the other conductors are just playing along, with no respect for what the composition is.
And he really described, with many quotes from Furtwängler, that what is needed is this inner quality of truthfulness. That you don’t fake it, because if you’re not truthful – for example, you cannot recite poetry, if you’re not truthful. You cannot sing beautifully, if you’re not truthful. Sure, you can sing brilliantly, you can do all kinds of tricks, and it impresses people, but to really produce art, you have to be truthful. You have to try to understand the poetical idea, the musical idea. You have to step back with your ego behind what the composer or the poet wrote. And that’s what is wrong with modern theater. In Regietheater, they just say, ‘I don’t care what Schiller wrote, or what Shakespeare wrote. I just make my modern interpretation. I put Harley Davidson’s into Shakespeare, and it doesn’t matter.’ And that is not art.
And I think the question is, ‘What do you do with your life?’ That is really the question. Are you becoming a creative person, devoted to that with your life, you contribute to enable mankind to move on a little step further, and become better.
Or, are you just eating three tons of caviar, and have 3,000 Porsches. And then, when you die, they write on your gravestone, ‘He/she ate three mons of caviar, and had 3,000 Porsches,’ and that was it.
No, you should try to be an honest person, trying to make human society better with what you do. And, once you do that, you become happy. Then you are free. This inner freedom, is what you should try to find. And that is the only way that we will win that battle. It’s not Trump. It is, can we get enough people to be innerly free.
And then we win.
End of discussion




Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love for produktivitet

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 24. november, 2016 four-laws-widget-gsLaRouches Fire Love udgør én samlet politik, der tilsigter en forøgelse af menneskelig produktivitet.

Tag for eksempel i betragtning den umiddelbare fremtids samlede, internationale rumprogram, hvor et genoplivet NASA vil integrere sine bestræbelser med Kinas ledende rolle; med et genoplivet russisk program, baseret på den nødvendige genoplivelse af russisk videnskab; med Europa; og med mange andre lande, der netop nu begynder at kaste deres blik ud i rummet. Og snart vil dette globale rumprogram udvides til at inkorporere industrialiseringen af Månen, som den store Krafft Ehricke har forudsagt. Snart vil videnskabelige, tekniske og industrielle aktiviteter på Månen tilsammen udgøre en uerstattelig del af hele rumprogrammet – ikke længere blot et globalt rumprogram, men ét, der allerede inkorporerer det umiddelbart omkringliggende rum.

Ikke alene det: det forcerede program for fusionskraft, som er LaRouches Fjerde Lov, vil i sig selv blive integreret i det globale rumprogram. Menneskets udforskning af Solsystemet kræver fusionskraft, hvilket igen betyder, at fusionskraft må indarbejdes i hele indsatsen lige fra begyndelsen – tænk f.eks. på, hvordan alle trækkene ved det nu forældede rumfartssystem, som vi hidtil har benyttet os af, alle er blevet formet af trækkene ved det kemiske system for fremdrift, vi har brugt.

En undersøgelse af det 20. århundredes tyske, russiske og amerikanske ballistiske missilprogrammer, der gik forud for og lagde fundamentet til de efterfølgende rumprogrammer, viser os historiens mest storstilede, vertikale og horisontale integration af mange tusinde menneskers bestræbelser inden for talrige videnskabelige, tekniske og industrielle discipliner og områder. Og dette glidende, integrerede design, den tekniske udarbejdelse, produktion og afprøvning, blev alle fundamentalt baseret på nye, fysiske principper. De kulminerede alle i et unikt system – aldrig før set – utroligt komplekst, bestående af tusinder af dele, og som alligevel ikke tolererer selv én eneste fiasko.

Da missilprogrammet gik over i rumprogrammet – da menneskeheden tog det første skridt ud i rummet, begyndende med Sovjetunionens opsendelse af Sputnik i 1957 – udvidedes den fornødne skala og kompleksitet, der kræves i den samlede rumindsats, uden sammenligning, selv, når man sammenligner med den forudgående revolution med de ballistiske missiler. For eksempel skrev Boris Chertok, i sin fire binds store, banebrydende førstehåndsberetning om det sovjetiske rumprogram: »Jeg vil påstå, at Koroljov [S.P. Koroljov, den største leder af det sovjetiske program] nok var den første, der forstod, at rumteknologi krævede en ny organisation … For Koroljov, hans stedfortrædere og nære medarbejdere blev dette gigantiske, nye system til pga. et bredt syn på rumteknologi, ved at kombinere grundforskning, anvendt videnskab, specifikt design, produktion, opsendelse, flyvning og flykontrol, snarere end ud fra et specifikt rumfartøj. Dette enkeltkredsløbsarrangement begyndte at operere i 1959 og 1960. Hundreder og senere mange tusinder videnskabsfolks og specialisters beherskelse af dette kredsløb gjorde det muligt for menneskeheden at indlede Rumalderen i det 20. århundrede.«

Man kunne se topingeniører og designere i intens diskussion med maskinarbejdere i mange af værkstederne; disse tekniske arbejdere rådslog igen jævnligt i komiteer, og i mere intime sammenhænge, med de mest berømmede ledere af teoretisk videnskab. Den horisontale integration gennem dusinvis af institutioner og fabrikker var lige så intens. Det er forbløffende, at dette overhovedet kunne finde sted under Sovjetunionens system med centralplanlægning – som Anden Verdenskrigs hårde skole havde nødvendiggjort – men det er en anden historie. Men det begyndte alt sammen at falde fra hinanden efter en stor, tragisk ulykke i 1960, og dernæst raserede Det britiske Imperiums agenter for Thatcher-politikken alt, hvad der var tilbage af sovjetisk videnskab i 1990’erne.

Det, der behøves for den umiddelbare fremtids rumprogram, er LaRouches kreditsystem i Hamiltons tradition, centreret omkring og dirigeret af en Nationalbank, som er et fleksibelt, almengældende system, der støtter alle dele af denne massivt komplekse produktionskæde, fra top til bund og fra den ene ende til den anden, og som i sig inkorporerer det, som afdøde Charles de Gaulle kaldte »indikativ planlægning«. Og vi taler naturligvis ikke kun om rumfart her, men om forøget, menneskelig produktivitet af enhver form og farve. Vores seneste oplevelse af dette er de midler, hvorved Franklin Roosevelts anvendelse af Hamiltons kreditsystem gjorde USA til et demokratiets arsenal for Anden Verdenskrig, og til langt den største, økonomiske magt, verden nogen sinde havde set. Med øjeblikkelige lån med lav rente til kontrakter om produktion til forsvaret, fra øverst til nederst i hierarkiet, gjorde Roosevelts system det muligt for denne massive struktur at ’vende på en tallerken’. At ’vende på en tallerken’ imod helt nye, netop introducerede højere niveauer af videnskab og teknologi. Det er præcis, hvad vi nu har brug for – og hvad vi må opnå gennem LaRouches Fire Love.

Foto: 14. maj, 2010 – Et af NASA’s sidste rumflyvninger, rumfærgen Atlantis besøger den Internationale Rumstation for vedligeholdelse og montage.

 




NYHEDSORIENTERING november 2016:
Donald Trump og det nye paradigme

Etablissementet i både USA og Europa er rystet over Donald Trumps valgsejr, men rystel­serne ender ikke der. I lighed med Reagan efter valget i 1980 vil han indtage Det Hvide Hus med sit helt eget team og egne nye rådgivere. Derfor er en helt ny politik mulig, hvor USA finder sin naturlige plads i et samarbejde med Rusland og Kina – og forhåbentlig dropper Bush/Cheneys og Obamas krigs- og konfrontationspolitik. Danmark og Europa skal dermed også finde en helt ny udenrigspolitik frem. Samtidig kommer Trump så til at skulle slås med et finanskrak større end i 2008, men hvis han lytter til Lyndon LaRouche, som Reagan del­vist gjorde det i 1981, så er der med LaRouches Fire Love en vej ud af moradset. Dette er en redigeret udgave af en tale, Tom Gillesberg, Schiller Instituttets formand, holdt den 21. november 2016, og som kan høres på www.schillerinstitut.dk.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 




RADIO SCHILLER den 14. november 2016:
Efter Trumps valg: Skab en USA-Rusland alliance,
gennemfør Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling

Med formand Tom Gillesberg




POLITISK ORIENTERING 10. nov., 2016:
Donald Trump! Hvad det betyder,
og hvad LaRouche-bevægelsen nu må gøre.
Se også 2. del.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Video 2. del:

Lyd: