3. august 2016 (Leder) – Et hemmeligt kort blev i denne uge forelagt Det Hvide Hus og dernæst lækket til NBC, som udlagde det på deres webside, og som viste »fremskridtet« i Obamas krig mod ISIS i løbet af de seneste to år. ISIS og hermed tilknyttede organisationer er, viser kortet, nu aktive i 18 lande, hvor det i 2015 drejede sig om 13 lande og kun 7 i 2014. Mon det overbeviste kriger-præsidenten om, at hans politik var en fiasko, og at han burde acceptere præsident Putins gentagne forslag om at bringe verdens nationer sammen for at bekæmpe den fælles terroristfjende?

Selvfølgelig ikke. I stedet lancerede Obama endnu en krig mod Libyen og bombede byen Sirte (Gaddafis hjemby) i mandags og tirsdags, angiveligt for at forhindre ISIS i at konsolidere en base i landet. Obama gik på Tv tirsdag for at sige, at krigen var »afgørende« for at hjælpe Libyens nationale samlingsregering med at bekæmpe ISIS, og at krigen ville fortsætte så længe, det måtte være nødvendigt.

Der er, som sædvanligt, flere løgne involveret. Den nationale samlingsregering er ikke en national samlingsregering, men en pseudo-regering, der er håndplukket i FN og udskibet til Tripoli med den opgave at »invitere« USA til at påbegynde en bombekampagne ved hjælp af amerikanske specialstyrker på jorden som spejdere. Obama hverken bad om eller fik beføjelse fra FN, og heller ikke fra USA’s Kongres, til at lancere endnu en krig og beviste endnu engang ægtheden af sine akkreditiver som krigsforbryder. Og så er der lige det, at ISIS selvfølgelig slet ikke ville have været der, hvis Obama ikke havde bombet landet tilbage til stenalderen og dræbt dets anti-terrorist-leder i 2011, som, sammen med G.W. Bush’ lignende behandling af Irak i 2003, udgør vor tids største krigsforbrydelser, som er ansvarlige for det internationale terroristkaos og den uhyrlige flygtningekrise i hele Sydvestasien og Europa.

Førende bankierer, inklusive investeringsbankierer, advarer nu om, at intet, undtagen en omgående afslutning af »universalbankmodellen« (dvs., en genindførelse af,  eller en indledende, Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling i hele det transatlantiske område) vil standse det fremstormende kollaps af det vestlige banksystem. En tidligere højtplaceret direktør i Goldman Sachs og embedsmand i EU-kommissionen, Paul Goldschmidt, skrev, at enhver fremgangsmåde, med undtagelse af en »afskaffelse af universalbankpraksissen«, ville forårsage ikke alene en sammenbrud af det finansielle system, men også en »destabilisering af fundamentet for europæisk demokrati« – dvs., ville føre til fascisme.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, der netop er hjemvendt fra Kina, bemærkede i dag, at kineserne faktisk er klar over faren for et kollaps af det vestlige finanssystem og de følgevirkninger, det ville få for Vesten og for verden. Det er dette finansielle sammenbrud, der er drivkraften bag Obamas gale fremstød for en militær konfrontation med Rusland og Kina, og som sætter verden på randen af en atomkrig.

Løsningen er klar og kan omgående iværksættes. Det kan ikke overdrives, hvor meget det haster med omgående at gennemføre Glass-Steagall i USA og Europa. LaRouche-bevægelsen, der har hovedansvaret for at få Glass/Steagall-lovforslagene fremstillet og støttet i den amerikanske Kongres, samt indføjet i begge partiers valgplatform ved de nylige partikonventer, har mobiliseret sin bevægelse til at inspirere den amerikanske befolkning til, på dette historiske tidspunkt for transformation, at række ud efter stjernerne, at genetablere den engang almene tiltro til videnskab, fremskridt og nationens opbygning, og til at bringe Wall Street-herrerne og krigsherrerne, med samt disses redskab, Obama, til fald, før det er for sent.

Kina, Rusland og næsten hele verden er parat til at handle sammen med et rekonstrueret USA for at opnå en ny tingenes tilstand, på vegne af hele menneskeheden.  

2. august 2016 – Med en bekræftelse af, at Wall Street er drivkraften bag og stedet for modstand mod en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall i Kongressen, har et Wall Street-rådgivningsselskab trommet en undersøgelse sammen, over de virkninger, der kan forventes at komme ved en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall. Rapporten af Keefe, Bruynette og Woods (KBW) er en direkte respons på fremkomsten af Glass/Steagall-’planker’ i begge de politiske partiers platforme til præsidentvalget. Undersøgelsen blev rapporteret på Wall Street Tv-kanalen CNBC den 1. august under overskriften »Glass-Steagalls tilbagevenden truer Wall Street«.

KBW finder, at den genindførte Glass-Steagall ville gennemtvinge »straffe« for alle de store banker, og mest alvorligt for JPM Chase, Citigroup og Bank of America (som ville miste Merrill-Lynch).

Og de forstår rent faktisk, hvad loven ville gøre »En genindførelse af Glass-Steagall som lov kunne omfatte en total opsplitning af investeringsbanker og kommercielle banker, en begrænsning af kommercielle bankers filialer til kun at underskrive statslige værdipapirer, et forbud for investeringsbanker mod at modtage almindelige indsættelser, samt et forbud mod overlappende roller mellem investeringsbanker og kommercielle banker for direktører eller administratorer. Med andre ord, så ville loven omstøde en masse ting, der har ændret sig i bankverdenen.«

KBW advarer også om, at »investorer« ikke bør forvente en forøgelse af værdien af de spekulative operationer, som bliver udskilt fra de kommercielle banker – tværtimod.

Kendsgerningen – som de ikke indser – er den, at de fleste af disse spekulationsbutikker ville gå bankerot under det nuværende økonomiske og finansielle kollaps.  

Banner: LPAC's 'Glass/Steagall-spøgelset over Wall Street'

2. august 2016 – Den tidligere italienske finansminister Giulio Tremonti er ved at gøre politisk comeback i sammenhæng med en reorganisering af den konservative blok. Tremonti har skabt en ny tænketank ved navn »Fondazione Iustus«, sammen med Stefano Parisi, den mand, som Berlusconi udpegede til at reorganisere partiet Forza Italia og udarbejde udkastet til en valgstrategi for en mulig regeringskrise og snarlige valg.

Samtidig gør Tremonti reklame for sin nye bog, Mundus Furiosus, i interviews på TV og i aviser, og ved offentligt optrædende. Glass-Steagall, afvisning af bail-in og et skift i det europæiske system er blandt de mest fremtrædende emner. For eksempel kalder Tremonti, i et interview den 25. juli med avisen Libero, bail-in for en »afsindig lov: det er ligesom, at, for at standse en forrykt bilist, så, i stedet for at sætte fartgrænsen ned, hæver man prisen for hans bilforsikring. Med den ekstra detalje, at forsikringspolicen ikke betales af bilisten, men af forsikringsinvestorer«.

Tremonti siger, at hans regering blev væltet af »et tavst statskup« i 2011, fordi han og premierminister Silvio Berlusconi var imod den græske bailout. »Tyske og franske banker havde en dramatisk eksponering i Grækenland og Spanien, og de havde brug for en bailout, der inkluderede italienske penge. Den italienske regering var modstander af en check til alle over én kam.«

Tremonti nævnte også telegrammer fra den amerikanske ambassade, som siden er blevet offentliggjort af WikiLeaks, og som kritiserede hans »uortodokse tanker om globalisering og nye finansielle love«. Den ortodokse anskuelse »var Lehman Brothers-anskuelsen«, siger Tremonti polemisk.

I et andet interview den 1. august med online-avisen Linkiesta, sammenligner Tremonti EU med det kollapsende Romerske Imperium, »en dynamik, der udspilles på to niveauer og med to kurver: på den horisontale kurve udstrækker Rom sig for meget, næsten ud over naturens grænser. Den vertikale kurve er tabet af [moralske] værdier«.

I den nuværende verden ville den romerske kejser »Heliogabalus[1] passe meget fint ind, med sit særlige sæt af moralske værdier og livstil«. Dette forfald i moralske værdier kan i særdeleshed forklares med »tidens forsvinden. Tidligere var man inden for tidens dimension ansvarlig over for fremtidige og forgangne generationer. I her-og-nu-æraen er disse ansvarlighedens bånd, disse dimensioner, forsvundet«.

Det finansielle system er blevet ligesom et videospil. »Man kunne næsten sige, at falskmøntneren i Napoli er en bedre kapitalist, når han reproducerer de nye €20-sedler med en perfekt teknologi i realtid. Virkningen af Napoli-rigdom er ikke meget anderledes en virkningen af rigdom i Frankfurt«, kontinental-Europas finansielle centrum og bankcentrum.

Tremonti kræver, som vi allerede har rapporteret, »en tilbagevenden til principperne i Romtraktaten fra 1957. Dengang blev ordet Union brugt som et perspektiv; det var imidlertid de facto en konføderation, hvor stater delte kul, stål, landbrug og progressivt også markedet … Formlen er stadig rigtig. Vi opdaterer den og vi deler, f.eks., efterretninger imod terrorisme. Resten overlades til folkets suverænitet«.            

2. august 2016 – I et langt interview med CNC-TV sagde den italienske premierminister Matteo Renzi, at hans regering vil modsætte sig en bail-in af hele sin magt. På sit engelske med en stærk accent sagde Renzi, »Italien kæmper totalt for at forhindre bail-in, fordi også en blød bail-in kunne blive en katastrofe for troværdigheden og tilliden.« Renzi sagde også, at den eneste løsning for italienske banker er »vækst«, og at hvordan, man skal opnå vækst, er »min drøm og mit mareridt«.

Tja, nu, hvor Renzi har overtrådt EU-lovene for bail-in, bør han tage det næste skridt og også overtræde EU’s budgetlove med det formål at gennemføre et program for vækst. I en diskussion her til morgen understregede Lyndon LaRouche, at, selv om dette ikke er en national, men en global krise, så må Italien implementere en lov for et statsligt kreditprogram for økonomisk genrejsning, og europæiske nationer bør samarbejde om et nationalt selvforsvar. Dette vil så igen »foranledige, at hele EU/euro-programmet bliver taget op til revision«, sagde LaRouche.

Intet andet vil virke. Tag den »løsning«, som man har vedtaget for Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS), og som ingen har tillid til. I går og i dag blev italienske, såvel som andre europæiske banker, ramt af et lad-os-finde-udgangen-i-en-fart-udsalg. Handlen med Unibank-aktier blev suspenderet begge dage efter at være faldet næsten 10 % mandag og 5 % tirsdag. Den 70 % ’s discountpris for MPS’s misligholdte lån (NPL) er blevet set som en standard for fremtidige handler og tvinger således andre banker med NPL’er til at genkapitalisere.

Financial Times offentliggjorde en grafisk fremstilling over tabet af værdier i fem store, europæiske banker, siden resultaterne af stresstestene blev offentliggjort i fredags: Unicredit -15,9 %; Commerzbank -11,2 %; Deutssche Bank -6,6 %; Credit Suisse -6,1 %: Barclays -5,4 %.

I forbindelse med en politik med nulvækst og nulrente, er der ingen chance for, at nogen bank kan komme sig. Og nu driver ECB også selskabsaktiers finanser til bankerot. Bloomberg har rapporteret, at ECB’s køb af selskabsaktier tvinger afkastet ned, der i sidste uge lå på forbløffende 0,7 %.  

Tallene for Eurozonens BNP for andet kvartal viser en 0,3 % ’s (ikke-)vækst, alt imens et overblik over statslige investeringsrater i forhold til BNP viser en nedgang større end 1 % i perioden 2009 – 2016. Dette betyder et investeringstab på 115 – 120 milliard euro.

2. august, 2016 (Leder) – Sammenbruddet af ikke alene kreditmarkederne, men også af Europas og USA’s økonomier generelt, er nu i fuld gang.

Indførelsen af Glass-Steagall i valgplatformene hos begge USA’s politiske partier diskuteres overalt; men dette er kun et enkelt skridt hen imod et mål, som omgående må nås. Der kan ikke være tale om at vente på en handlingslammet kongres-samling eller den næste Kongres: Dette skal gennemtvinges.

Hvorfor? Fordi Glass-Steagall er en afgørende del af en statslig kreditpolitik til genoplivning af produktion og produktivitet og til at samarbejde med de asiatiske magters globale investeringer i infrastruktur. Uden denne politik er de transatlantiske økonomier gået ind i et uigenkaldeligt kollaps, der er meget værre end blot en »bankpanik«, selv om en bankpanik allerede er i gang.

De beklagelige, falske »stresstests« af de større, europæiske banker har udløst disse bankers generelle styrtdyk på aktiemarkederne, hvor handel i de førende italienske banker tirsdag blev indstillet, efter at de angiveligt netop skulle være blevet reddet! En ekspert-beregning af »den reelle bankstress«, som blev udført som en nødforanstaltning og rapporteret i Financial Times samme dag, fandt, at de store europæiske banker behøver en omgående bankredning på 900 milliarder euro – svarende til en nød-kapitalisering på mere end $1 billion som et »TARP-program« (Troubled Asset Relief Program) – for at overleve.

Tabet af vækst, og det fuldstændige tab af produktivitet i de transatlantiske økonomier, er det, der driver dette kollaps. I USA er væksten i BNP i de seneste 12 måneder 1 %; arbejdskraftens produktivitet er faldet med 1,5 % hidtil i år og er ikke steget i seks år; investering af erhvervskapital er faldet i fem af de seneste seks kvartaler; de reelle ugelønninger er igen ved at falde. Ledere fra Federal Reserve (den amerikanske centralbank, -red.) holder taler – inklusiv præsidenten for New Yorks Fed-afdeling, Dudley, i tirsdags, og formanden for USA’s centralbank Yellen i sidste uge – hvor de begræder tabet af økonomisk produktivitet, som de har været med til at frembringe gennem uophørlig pengetrykning for at redde de bankerotte banker. 

Vækst i mere grundlæggende aspekter, der måler effekten af nye teknologier på arbejdskraftens produktivitet, er komplet forsvundet.

De økonomiske markører i Europa er endnu værre, og offentlige investeringer i hele Europa er i det forgangne år faldet med 115-120 milliarder euro, eller omkring $135 milliarder.

Endnu en TARP på $ 1 billion vil ikke afhjælpe dette kollaps. Italien, der for øjeblikket er epicentret for bankkollapset, skal vedtage en national lov for at give mulighed for statskredit til vækst – et skridt, der for indeværende er forbudt iflg. EU-regler!

En Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling og en begrænsning af indskudsgaranti til kun at gælde for kommercielle banker vil bane vejen for den rette kur. Denne kur består i statslige kreditinstitutioner, der skaber kredit til både ny og mere produktiv infrastruktur og industri, og også til behovet for yderligere kredit fra private udlåns- banker. En håndhævelse af Glass-Steagall vil åbne op for finansminister Alexander Hamiltons succesfulde bank- og kreditpolitik.

En af støtterne for Glass/Steagall-lovforslaget i Senatet mener, at, hvis det kan bringes til diskussion i Senatets sal, og tages ud af hænderne på den komité, der sidder på det, kunne lovgivningen omgående blive vedtaget. Den nationale debat og diskussion, der nu summer om Glass-Steagall i partiernes valgplatforme, må og skal vendes til handling for at gennemtvinge Glass/Steagall-lovgivningen.

De amerikanske og europæiske samfund har siden finanskrakket i 2008 lidt enorme tab, som ofte opregnes som et titals billioner af dollars, men som i virkeligheden kan måles som tabet af en fremtid for de unge generationer. Dette kollaps vil gøre dette tab af fremtid uigenkaldeligt, med mindre det stoppes af regeringshandlinger nu.

Enhver borger kan blive en kreativ kraft i denne indsats.

Foto: Børshandlere i panik midt i krakket i 2008.

Lyndon LaRouche:

»… Det er os, der skal få dette til at ske. Der findes intet andet alternativ. Hvorvidt Kongressen vil handle eller ej er højst usikkert, for der er intet forudsigeligt i dette politiske system. Det, der må ske, er, at der må være en massiv bevægelse, der må have et lederskab, og som må gennemtvinge denne forholdsregel (Glass-Steagall, -red.), og som vil medføre, at visse kendsgerninger kommer for dagens lys – dvs., systemets totale bankerot.«

Glass-Steagall er imidlertid kun det første skridt. Jeg mener, at vi har sagt dette gentagne gange, men det vil blive aftenens store debatemne: Den form for initiativ, som hr. LaRouche har taget mht. Deutsche Bank, med et krav om en tilbagevenden til arven efter Alfred Herrhausen, den sidste, fornuftige bankier i Deutsche Bank, og som blev myrdet i koldt blod den 30. november 1989, netop på det tidspunkt, hvor den fremtidige verdenshistorie stod over for en kæmpe chance.

Uddrag af LaRouchePAC Internationale fredags-webcast, 29. juli 2016:

Virkelighed er, om folk i dag har modet til at indrømme, at LaRouche har ret!

Matthew Ogden: Jeg mener, at vi bestemt kan sige, at vi står ved afslutningen af en gammel æra. Vi har et helt, paradigmatisk system, der er i færd med at kollapse totalt omkring os, og vi kan forhåbentlig sige, at vi står på tærsklen til en ny æra. Vi stirrer direkte ind i ansigtet på det transatlantiske finansielle systems totale opløsning. Dette ses ikke tydeligere end gennem den kendsgerning, at man har disse såkaldte ’stresstests’, som finder sted i dag i alle de større europæiske banker. Resultatet af disse stresstests skal efter planen offentliggøres senere i aften; men, som hr. LaRouche har sagt, »Man behøver ikke at teste disse banker. Man ved, at hele banksystemet er totalt bankerot«.

Især to af disse banker har fået meget udstrakt mediedækning. Den ene er Monte dei Paschi-banken, der er verdens største og ældste, uafbrudt fungerende bank, og den største bank i Italien, og de vil næsten med sikkerhed dumpe til stresstesten, sammen med praktisk talt alle andre banker i Italien, som samlet set rapporteres at sidde på gæld, der ikke betales på, for mellem 210 – 360 milliarder euro, som umuligt kan reddes gennem bailout (statslig redning; ’bankpakke’ med skatteborgermidler, -red.) af Italiens bankerotte økonomi, eller af EU’s ditto, for den sags skyld.

På den anden side har vi Tysklands største bank, Deutsche Bank, der af IMF er blevet beskrevet som den mest risikobelagte, mest sårbare bank i hele systemet. Vi har på det seneste dækket Deutsche Banks bankerot med den forbløffende statistik, at Deutsche Banks nettoprofit nu vitterligt er nede på næsten nul, med et af Deutsche Bank rapporteret 97 % ’s kollaps i nettoprofitten blot det seneste år. Deutsche Banks eksponering til derivater er massiv. Hver eneste større bank i verden er indviklet i Deutsche Bank som en modpart (i derivatkontrakter, -red.). Hvis Deutsche Bank går ned, vil man få en smitteeffekt, der er langt, langt større end i september 2008. Bare fra i onsdags er Deutsche Banks aktier faldet med 8 %. Merrill Lynch har nu nedgraderet banken, og det samme har Frankfurts aktiebørs.

Som det ses, så kan både den ene og den anden af disse banker dumpe til stresstesten. Stresstest eller ej, så kan hele dette system gå op i røg, hvornår, det skal være, og alene dét kan udløse en massiv panik i hele den transatlantiske verden. Det kan ikke understreges tydeligere. Det her er langt, langt værre end den situation, vi befandt os i, i dagene før krakket i 2008.

Det må siges højt og tydeligt, at dette er den drivkraft, der ligger bag truslen om en verdenskrig på dette tidspunkt. Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche gentagne gange har understreget i de seneste uger, så findes der ingen garanteret strategi for at afværge en sådan krig, med undtagelse af at tage roden til denne krigstrussel under behandling, hvilket vil sige en total, systemisk reorganisering af hele det transatlantiske finanssystem. Dette betyder en reorganisering fra øverst til nederst sådan, som Franklin Roosevelt gjorde det i sit embedes allerførste dage, som præsident for USA.

Det afgørende, første skridt i denne totale reorganisering er selvfølgelig en genindførelse af Franklin Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov, i sin helhed, fra 1933, ikke blot i USA, men i hele den transatlantiske verden. Dette er faktisk emnet for det spørgsmål, vi har fået fra institutionelt hold i aften, og som hr. LaRouche kort kommenterede. Spørgsmålet lød:

»Kære hr. LaRouche, kravet om en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall er nu inkluderet i både det Republikanske og Demokratiske partis valgprogram. Hvor sandsynligt er det, efter Deres mening, at Kongressen vil vedtage Glass-Steagall?«

Lyndon LaRouche:

»Ja, vi satser selvfølgelig ikke alt på denne sandsynlighed. Det er os, der skal få dette til at ske. Der findes intet andet alternativ. Hvorvidt Kongressen vil handle eller ej er højst usikkert, for der er intet forudsigeligt i dette politiske system. Det, der må ske, er, at der må være en massiv bevægelse, der må have et lederskab, og som må gennemtvinge denne forholdsregel (Glass-Steagall, -red.), og som vil medføre, at visse kendsgerninger kommer for dagens lys – dvs., systemets totale bankerot.«

Glass-Steagall er imidlertid kun det første skridt. Jeg mener, at vi har sagt dette gentagne gange, men det vil blive aftenens store debatemne: Den form for initiativ, som hr. LaRouche har taget mht. Deutsche Bank, med et krav om en tilbagevenden til arven efter Alfred Herrhausen, den sidste, fornuftige bankier i Deutsche Bank, og som blev myrdet i koldt blod den 30. november 1989, netop på det tidspunkt, hvor den fremtidige verdenshistorie stod over for en kæmpe chance.

Denne form for aktion, som hr. LaRouche har krævet – interventionen i Deutsche Bank – er paradigmatisk for den absolut nødvendige tankegang. Hvad betyder det for os her, i dag? Det er, mener jeg, den form for diskussion, som er blevet genoplivet med ideen om De Fire Love [til USA’s (og verdens!) omgående redning] for en reorganisering af finanssystemet. Dette er ikke blot en samling opskrifter, eller en vasketøjsliste over skridt, der må tages, men, som folk også har erkendt, så udgør De Fire Love sådan, som hr. LaRouche har udtænkt det, en enkelt, sammenhængende principerklæring, der bygger på en enkel, fundamental sandhed om den virkelige videnskab om fysisk økonomi. Denne enkelte, fundamentale forudsætning er den, at mennesket er en art ulig nogen anden. Mennesket er fuldstædigt unikt blandt alle andre levende væsener deri, at udelukkende kun mennesket er i stand til at skabe fuldstændigt nye måder for eksistens, der ikke har nogen forudgående manifestation, ingen afledningseffekt, der stammer fra tidligere erfaringer, men som er en fuldstændig ny, menneskelig adfærdsform. Udelukkende kun mennesket har evnen til viljemæssigt at skabe fremtiden.

Denne, menneskets absolut unikke egenskab, eksemplificeres i en meget destilleret og dybtgående form gennem nogle meget betydningsfulde personligheder, der stadig findes i mands minde hos mange nulevende personer: Albert Einstein er én af dem; og den store, visionære rumforsker, raketingeniøren Krafft Ehricke, er en anden. Jeg tror, dette vil være optakten til, og ligesom skabe en ramme for, aftenens fortsatte diskussion. Men lad mig blot gentage: Jeg tror, vi med sindsro kan sige,

»Dette gamle system er dødt, og det er vores ansvar at bringe menneskeheden over tærsklen til en helt ny æra.«

(Se det engelske udskrift af hele diskussionen her: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=13902)

Virkelighed er, om folk i dag har modet til at indrømme, at LaRouche har ret!

Jeg mener, at vi bestemt kan sige, at vi står ved afslutningen af en gammel æra. Vi har et helt, paradigmatisk system, der er i færd med at kollapse totalt omkring os, og vi kan forhåbentlig sige, at vi står på tærsklen til en ny æra. Vi stirrer direkte ind i ansigtet på det transatlantiske finansielle systems totale opløsning. Dette ses ikke tydeligere end gennem den kendsgerning, at man har disse såkaldte ’stresstests’, som finder sted i dag i alle de større europæiske banker. Resultatet af disse stresstests skal efter planen offentliggøres senere i aften; men, som hr. LaRouche har sagt, »Man behøver ikke at teste disse banker. Man ved, at hele banksystemet er totalt bankerot«.

Engelsk udskrift:

»Standing at the Threshold of a New Era« 

REALITY IS WHETHER PEOPLE HAVE THE GUTS TODAY TO ADMIT THAT LAROUCHE IS RIGHT!
International LaRouche PAC Webcast July 29, 2016
        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good Evening! It's July 29th, 2016. You're joining us for our weekly webcast here from LaRouchePAC.com on Friday night. I'm joined in the studio today by Megan Beets; and joined via video by two members of our Policy Committee: Kesha Rogers, who's joining us from Houston, Texas; as well as Rachel
Brinkley, who's joining us from Boston, Massachusetts.
        I think we can certainly say that we are standing at the end of an old era. We have an entire paradigmatic system which is completely collapsing around us, and hopefully we can say that we are standing at the threshold of a new era. We're staring in the face of a complete disintegration of the trans-Atlantic financial system. This could not be seen more clearly [than] by the fact that you have these so-called bank “stress tests” that are taking place today in all of the major European banks. The results of these stress tests are due out later this evening; however, as Mr. LaRouche [has] said, "You don't need to test these banks. You know that the entire banking system is completely bankrupt."
        Two of these banks, most notably, have been receiving very wide coverage. One of them is Monte dei Paschi Bank, which is the largest and the oldest continually-functioning bank in the world, the largest bank in Italy, will almost certainly fail their
stress test, along with virtually every other bank in Italy, which [all together] are reported to be holding between EU210-360 billion in non-performing debt, which could not possibly be bailed out by the bankrupt economy of Italy, or the EU for that
matter.
        On the other hand, you have the largest German bank, Deutsche Bank, which has been described by the IMF as the riskiest, most vulnerable bank in the entire system. We've been covering the bankruptcy of Deutsche Bank recently with the
stunning statistics that the net profits of Deutsche Bank are now virtually down to almost zero, with a 97 % collapse in just the last year of net profits being reported by Deutsche Bank. The derivatives exposure by Deutsche Bank is massive. Every single
major bank in the world is tied in to Deutsche Bank as a counterparty. Were Deutsche Bank to go under, you would have a contagion far, far wider than September 2008. Just since Wednesday, Deutsche Bank shares have fallen by 8%. Merrill Lynch has now downgraded it, along with the Frankfurt [Stock] Exchange.

        As can be seen, either one of these banks could fail the stress test. Stress test, or no stress test, this entire system could go up in smoke at any given moment, and that alone could trigger a mass panic across the entire trans-Atlantic. It can't be emphasized more. This is far, far worse than the situation we found ourselves in, on the eve of the Crash of 2008.
        What has to be said is that this is the major driver behind the threat of world war at this time. As Helga LaRouche has emphasized repeatedly in the recent weeks, there is no guaranteed strategy to avoid such a war, other than addressing the root
causes of this threat of world war, which is a complete systemic reorganization of the entire trans-Atlantic financial system. This is a top-down reorganization, in the way that Franklin Roosevelt did it in his first days in office as President of the United States.
        The critical first step to this is, obviously, the restoration of the full Franklin Roosevelt [1933] Glass-Steagall Act, not just in the United States, but throughout the entire trans-Atlantic region. This is actually the subject of the institutional question that we received for this broadcast tonight, which Mr. LaRouche had a short comment on. The question was: "Dear Mr. LaRouche, The call to reinstate Glass-Steagall is now included in the platforms of both the Republican and Democratic parties. In your view, how likely is it that Glass-Steagall will be enacted by Congress?" Mr. LaRouche said, "Obviously, we're not banking on the likelihood. We have to make this happen. There is no other alternative. Whether or not Congress will act, is highly debatable, because there's nothing predictable in this political system. What has to happen is a major movement, which we must lead, to force this measure
through, which will induce certain realities to come to light — that is, the total bankruptcy of the system."
        Glass-Steagall, however, is only the first step. I think this is something which we have repeatedly said, but will be the subject of much of the discussion of our broadcast tonight. The type of initiative that Mr. LaRouche has taken, in the case of
Deutsche Bank, the call for the return to the Alfred Herrhausen legacy, the last sane banker at Deutsche Bank, who was assassinated in cold blood on November 30, 1989, right at the critical moment of opportunity for the future of world history.
        This type of action that Mr. LaRouche has called for – the intervention into Deutsche Bank — is paradigmatic of the type of thinking necessary. How does this apply today? This is the type of discussion which, I think, has become revived, with the concept of the Four Laws, Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws for the reorganization of the financial system. This is not just a series of recipes, or a laundry-list of steps that must be taken, but rather, as people have recognized, the Four Laws, as conceived by
Mr. LaRouche, is a single, coherent statement of principle which is premised on a single, fundamental truth of the real science of physical economics. That single, fundamental premise is that mankind is a species like no other. Mankind is completely unique among all other living things, in that only mankind has the
ability to create entirely new modes of existence that had no antecedent, no derivative effect from past experience, but an entirely new mode of behavior. Only man has the ability to willfully create the future.
        This absolutely unique character of mankind is typified in a very distilled and profound form by some very significant personalities within the living memory of many people who are living today: Albert Einstein, for one; and the great visionary
space scientist, Krafft Ehricke, as another. I think that will carry us into the remainder of our discussion here and sort of set a framework. But I'll just reiterate: I think that with confidence that we can say, "This old system is dead, and our responsibility is to bring mankind onto the threshold of an entirely new era."

KESHA ROGERS: I think that is absolutely the starting point of what is the new paradigm that we must bring into existence at this present moment. The discussions we've had with Mr. LaRouche on the conceptions presented by his "Four Laws to Save the United States", are absolutely pertinent, because these Four Laws represent a move away from monetarism and probabilities of what is acceptable or presentable for the future based on numbers and statistics.
        We're not waiting on the numbers and statistics and on the horoscopes to tell us what that future is going to be. We actually must live in that future and create that future. That has been the unique role of Mr. LaRouche and his uniqueness in
forecasting economics. He's not just talking about something that can be brought into existence based on figures that are already presented to you, but that the numbers have to be thrown out.
We're not waiting on the figures of the IMF or the stress tests or anything like this. The Four Laws represent a new direction for mankind that we now have to act to bring the future into existence. If you're going to do that, that means you have to
live in the future.
        I was thinking and very struck by Mr. LaRouche's works going back to his Presidential campaign in 1988. At that time, it's very pertinent to what is necessary for thinking about the future existence which we have to create, now, once and for all, that during that time, he presented in a TV broadcast called The Woman on Mars a vision for thirty-nine years from then, looking at the future in 2027 AD. [It opens with] the voice of a woman from Mars saying, "I have the announcement for which you have been waiting. As of five minutes ago, our environmental systems were fully stabilized. Man's first permanent colony on Mars is now completely operational." Mr. LaRouche comes on and he says, "Many of you are shocked. Some of you are saying, 'Why is this old geezer taking about a permanent colony on Mars, 39 years from
now, with the major budget problems in Washington today?'|"
        At that point in time, what he was actually presenting, was the greatest economic recovery plan for the nation and the world.
That is what these Four Laws today represent. They're not just Glass-Steagall, or something based on the current trends of monetary policy; they go outside of the current trends of thinking, into a new domain of human existence that has not yet
been created. I think that that is very important, because that's what we've lost sight of. In this day and age, too many people are living their lives based on their current state of existence — what they think is possible. You know, "Am I going to survive,
day to day? Where am I going to get my food from? How am I going to pay my next light bill?" And so forth.

        That is not the new paradigm that you want to live in. You want to actually be thinking about creating that future. This is the unique role that Mr. LaRouche's life and his contributions to true human economy have played, and the very critical role that great visionary scientists such as Krafft Ehricke, have really brought into existence.
        The fact of the matter is that, as you said, Matt, the current era of this British Empire, of this anti-growth system, is coming to an end. This monetary policy is not going to be the determining factor of the future. What is, is going to be the creative mind of man, unlike any other [species] to actually determine and act to bring about that future. Right now, none of the current existing trends, election process, candidates, or monetary policy mean one thing whatsoever in terms of the real
universe that we live in.
        I think that that's what we really have to get across to people; that people don't need to live discouraged about "Oh, what is life going to bring me? Am I going to be dealt a bad hand or a good hand?" Well, you better figure out what that hand is going to be, and determine it for yourself!

        OGDEN: One thing I wanted to just pick up on, what you said, Kesha. The idea of "willful action" is something which is inherent in the concept of the American republic. Citizens are not subjects. Just as we are not subjects of a king or a queen,
which was the consequence of the American Revolution, we're also not subjects of some hidden hand, "invisible hand" of fate or economics or statistics. This has been a problem in our population, where people have given up hope that their actions
can actually have a meaning. So, it's the decision to willfully create a future, and say "Despite the fact that the entire system — politically, socially, economically, financially – is crumbling around you, you have the presence of an entirely
different system which has already come into existence; has already materialized on this planet."  The most populous nations in the world are now leading that New Paradigm.
        We have news that Helga Zepp-LaRouche, president of the international Schiller Institute, has been a featured guest at a very important conference that happened in China just this week. This is the T-20 conference, or so-called "Think 20", which is
happening in the context of the G-20; it's a sort of think tank of private sector representatives from around the world.  And it was co-sponsored by the Chinese Academy for Social Sciences — actually a representative of that think tank spoke at the recent Schiller Institute conference that happened in Berlin; Ren Lin, on the subject of the One Belt, One Road policy.  But Helga LaRouche's presentation was to say that we need to now take the concept of the One Belt, One Road — the New Silk Road idea — and expand this to the entire planet.  This is the foundation for a New Paradigm of thinking, a New Paradigm of international relations, and a new idea of mankind's role in the Universe. It's founded on the win-win concept which is fundamentally different than what has reigned over the last 100 years virtually, as British imperial, winner-take-all kind of thinking.
So, the fact that this now exists as an option for mankind, is not an accident; this is the result of willful action that was taken by Helga LaRouche and Lyndon LaRouche at the time that the Soviet Union collapsed, to put this option on the table.  This is
the direct outgrowth of what was proposed at that time when Alfred Herrhausen was picking up on this idea of the Productive Triangle; using the reindustrialization of Eastern Europe, the former Soviet space, as the driver, as the engine for a revival
of the great economic powerhouse of the German economy and the rest of Western Europe.  This was expanded to the Eurasian Land-Bridge; and now exists in actuality — not just as future potential, but as actuality — in the form of this New Silk Road
idea.
        And the American people could so easily say, "We reject this system which is being forced upon us with both of these failed parties; and we are now going to say, 'We insist that our nation is going to become a member of this New Paradigm of relations among nations.'  And we will build the New Silk Road across the Bering Strait into the United States, and down into the entirety of the Western Hemisphere."

BRINKLEY:  Just to follow up on this discussion, Mr. LaRouche was discussing with us yesterday the question of the development of mankind; as Kesha was really emphasizing.  As we come right to the end of this system, what is missing?  A lot of people will say there's a problem; [but] it's beyond a problem, this is a total systemic breakdown.  So what is missing?  LaRouche really pointed to Einstein in particular and said, "For Einstein, he didn't use numbers to measure the Universe."  He said, "The creative powers of mankind are located in the same kind of thing Einstein used to measure the Universe."  If he didn't use numbers, what did he use?  This is a question where the same question is, where does a new idea come from?  What Einstein generated, no one had thought before him; so where did he come up with the means to make that hypothesis?  Something that, based on all human sense perception in previous human existence, no one had ever perceived anything that would tell them this concept, this new idea that Einstein generated.  Where did he come up with it from?  It's really the idea of getting rid of the standards of
measurement that were used generally by empiricism, by sense perception, by describing the Universe via senses.  Einstein said, I want to get beyond this and see what unifies these things; he used a principle of the Universe itself to measure. In so doing, he created a whole new level of power for mankind.
        So, this came from his mind; there wasn't even the ability to perceive what he hypothesized.  To test it experimentally did not even exist at the time; it's now being proven true 100 years later.  But this shows that the power of a human economy really doesn't come from the external sources people would think about it.  It obviously doesn't come from money; it doesn't come from petroleum; it doesn't come from helium-3; it doesn't come from nuclear fuel.  The power of an economy doesn't come from these objects; it comes from the new discovery generated in a mind to
utilize this new power.  This obviously is what has been attacked.  It was also the idea of Nicholas of Cusa, who generated the Renaissance; that is the quality of thinking we need now.
        Not business as usual, as you see at the Democratic or Republican conventions; we don't need to debate minimum wage or something like that.  We've discussed what the problem is with this discussion of minimum wage.  Even if you pay people more, do they have the ability to purchase the goods they need to survive?
Are the goods even there, available to be purchased?  Healthcare — it's not there; transportation — no, it's completely falling apart.  Our nation is really a disgrace compared to what's happening in Asia right now.  I think China's building over 100
nuclear plants in the next 10 years; while we've just shut down about 4. There's more that could be said, but maybe for now we should just open up the discussion; but I just also want to bring up again a Krafft Ehricke quote.  He also recognized the moment of change that mankind was in, even back in the 1970s, when we began to really adopt this environmentalist empiricism, lack of science, lack of intention towards growth.  He said, "To cease growing means to make the grim past the future's only option."
That's what we're living today; we're living the grim past. What he also said is that no growth goes with tension, it goes with conflict, and it goes with war. I think if people look around at the state of conflict on the planet, it's pervasive; this is a result of this lack of a sense of progress, and lack of a sense of mission.
        So, I'll just leave it at that; we can discuss it more.

        MEGAN BEETS:  Well, just to pick up, Rachel, on what you were just discussing, and also Kesha was pointing to in the fundamental principle underlying Mr. LaRouche's Four Laws; which is the fundamental distinction of the human mind from all other forms of existence.  I think it can be seen in the personality of Einstein, as you were saying Rachel; I think it can also be seen in the insights and the actions of Kepler.  Kepler said, in a very provocative letter to a patron of his, he said, "Not every hunch is wrong.  For man is in the image of the Creator, and it's very possible that in matters which pertain to the organization of the Universe, man thinks like the Creator."  And I think that really does get to what Einstein was able to do, and Kepler
himself did this with that principle as a foundation, generating from his mind a notion unique to his mind, of the principle which was organizing and governing our Solar System.  It was a completely new idea; he had never observed anything that clued
him into this.  This was a completely new notion; he discovered the principle of universal gravitation and completely revolutionized the powers of a kind. Mankind now lived in a new Universe.  That's the basis of economics.
        And I think it does get exactly to what Mr. LaRouche has been saying in the face of the collapse of this financial system. Nothing that would be attempted now to save the system – no bail-out measures, no bail-in measures, none of this will work; you cannot save an inherently valueless system.  You have to reorganize it upon the true principle of the source of value, which is the human mind's ability to discover new principles which create a new species.  And that's why you, Kesha, obviously know this first-hand; that's the importance of the space program. That's the importance of declaring that the space program is the number one commitment of the nation; to actually put this challenge to man's mind to go right up to the new frontier to
discover what we have not yet discovered in the forefront.  That then as the boundary, then reorganizes all the other relationships within your economy.  We saw a hint of that in the 1960s, under the influence of people like Krafft Ehricke with our space program here; although that was shut down.  Now, with the crumbling of this British Empire system, we have the opportunity — but also a very real responsibility with people who are around Mr. LaRouche and get this principle — to insure that this is the
direction humanity goes in now; this is not a foregone conclusion.

        OGDEN:  I liked this quote that was featured in what we have as the lead to the LaRouche PAC website today; a quote from Krafft Ehricke, I believe from a paper he wrote in 1966 – I might be wrong.  He is discussing the thrill of what it felt like to be standing on the threshold of a new era; recognizing when they first launched the successful launch of the most rudimentary, basic rocket, that this new era of rocket science was carrying mankind off of the planet.  Or had the potential to carry mankind off of the planet Earth and to open up an entirely new evolutionary moment, phase for the human species.  He compared it to Columbus discovering the New World; it actually reminded me of that poem "On First Looking into Chapman's Homer" by Keats, where he describes the awe of Cortez standing on the cliffs of Darien and looking at the Pacific.  The first European who had seen the Pacific Ocean from crossing over the territory of North America.  He also used the comparison of the astronomer who is the first to discover a new planet coming across the sky. So that thrill of discovery, not just the personal act of discovery of something new; but the recognition that this is a transformative moment for the human species, and that this is what makes us human.  It's those discontinuous moments from the
previous state to the future state, which have no logical consequence one from the other; but that moment, that transition, is the moment of humanity.  And that's what separates us from the animals.  Krafft Ehricke's description of that was the roar of
those engines, the recognition that mankind was about to become a space-faring creature; and it was the experience of what it means to be human itself.

        ROGERS:  And yes, once again, living in the future; creating the future.  Remember, Krafft Ehricke writing in 1966, looking back from the year 2000; he died in 1984.  This was a vision that was being brought into existence that had not yet happened; but was in the mind of Krafft Ehricke as a living principle, as a living idea.  Now, as you said earlier, Matt, that vision is now being brought into reality by the New Paradigm that's being created by Russia, by China.  It is the United States that now has no excuses not to join aboard and join with that New Paradigm that is already at our fingertips.  It's very fascinating to see.
This is the economic recovery; this is the largest economic recovery program — the space program.  It's much greater than anything that even John F Kennedy thought about; Kennedy wasn't the be all and end all with the Apollo missions, and he wasn't
going to stop there.  He had a greater vision; just as Krafft Ehricke, just as LaRouche, based on a human economy.  And this idea of the imagination and what was created in the mind of Krafft Ehricke with the colonies [on the Moon], the nuclear power
systems, the development of fusion economies and helium-3 systems on Mars and Venus and other places.  This is the basis of a real economy; a human economy from that standpoint.  It's very much what our conception and idea has to be based on. And that's the Four Laws; that's the principle of the Four Laws that we really have to get across to people.
        It's good that Glass-Steagall is being implemented in both parties' platforms; but now what are people willing to do?  Are you still going to accept the policy economically of zero growth? Are you still going to accept the policy of fascism, of war? What does Glass-Steagall mean when you actually are going along with this insane policy; when you're not thinking about your children's and your grandchildren's futures?

OGDEN:  One thing that came out of the Schiller Institute Berlin conference that we've been discussing — it was about a month ago if not more now — Helga LaRouche keynoted it, obviously, and said, Look, we're at a time in history where an entirely new principle of action is operating; it's a principle of history which is not understood by most people.  She characterized it as the Erinyes, or the principle of nemesis; where all of the failed axioms that have been enforced over the last decades in a system which is now crumbling in on itself, are taking down the very people who enforced those failed axioms.  This was seen with Tony Blair with the release of the Chilcot Report; the major victory with the release of the 28 pages, which is something which goes back even before 9/11 to Mr. LaRouche's broadcast in 1999 of the "Storm Over Asia" broadcast.  This made very clear that there was a very high-level nefarious apparatus that was being run by the Anglo-Saudi nexus, using these mercenary forces for irregular warfare against countries around the world.
        Now, you see that playing out; and I think it's very significant that there's been a drastic shift in the situation on the ground in Syria.  Aleppo, which was actually the subject of a video presentation which was shown at that Schiller Institute, it's one of the most ancient cities; a UNESCO World Heritage site.  It was the crossroads of the old Silk Road; it's situated right in between the three continents.  Aleppo had obviously been held by these terrorists for years; and the action in just the last days by the Syrian government with the back-up of the Russian air force, stationed at Latakia, to be able to come in and begin liberating that city of Aleppo in the same way that Palmyra was liberated, is a real turning point in the war on the ground against the outgrowth of this very mercenary Army-type of irregular force that Mr. LaRouche was warning about all the way back in 1998-99.
        Again, the role that Vladimir Putin is playing in this regard, is a critical role.  I kind of want to link these two things together a little bit.  Mr. LaRouche's prescription for how Europe could possibly survive this entire blow-out of these
completely over-leveraged banks and the disintegration of the political situation itself with the aftermath of the Brexit, was that there needs to be a close collaboration between Germany and Putin in Russia.  What Putin is doing in Russia is the pathway
forward for Europe.  An entire integration of the Asian Economic Union, the New Silk Road, and what remains of the mittelstand, or the industrial sector of Germany, which is viable.
        As you're looking at this complete meltdown, this complete disintegration which could come within days or hours, of Deutsche Bank — the biggest bank in Germany; Monte dei Paschi, the oldest bank in Italy; action must be taken in the very short term.  Not just from the standpoint of stabilizing a collapsing financial system and transforming it into an entirely new system of economics; but also as a critical war avoidance measure.  If these steps are not taken, and Germany is allowed to disintegrate under the weight of a collapsing Deutsche Bank, for example; there will be no pathway forward for the kind of collaboration between sane factors in Germany for example, and what Putin is doing in Russia.  And the force for stability and peace that Russia has represented will not — the access will not be there. So, I think you have to take all of this strategic picture together, and not separate any element of it; and be able to see it from the top down as Mr. LaRouche sees it, and say "Necessary
actions must be taken to resolve the root crises, the root causes of the crises that we now face."
        I'll stress again, this factor of what has been occurring inside of Syria, as these series of regime-change wars, this is the evidence of the breakdown of a system which is evil; a system which is creating the possibility for failed states across that
region.  This is driving millions of refugees out of their homelands into Europe; it cannot be sustained.  An entirely New Paradigm — it can't be resolved piecemeal, which is the point. You can't just say we're going to address this situation here and
address that situation there; but new axiomatic approaches to the entire concept of the system must be in place, and it must be premised on this central feature of what the Four Laws are a derivative of — which is this unique character of man to willfully create new modes of existence for the human species.
        BRINKLEY:  Any type of practical discussion as opposed to that, just needs to be gotten rid of.  We really do need a quality of courage.  It's obvious out there right now what Obama has been doing in promoting and protecting terrorism.  We now
have the 28 pages out, and the Democrats are still kissing Obama's butt; and the Republicans are going over to Trump.  This is crazy, given the truth which has come out that one of our so-called allies, including the British Empire, attacked our
nation in an act of war; and the President who covered that up is still being allowed to be President.  So, this is the question of practicality; which is another symptom of this higher question involved in the discussion of the creation of new states.  You have to be bold; you have to be able to take bold actions as well.  One thing LaRouche said that was insightful about the practical man, he said, "The practical man created nothing but his own noise and fools who believed in his noise."  I think people can think of a few examples of that today; but definitely Wall Street for one.  Anyone protecting Wall Street and anyone saying you've got to go along to get along with party politics or something like this; that's all dead, that's all obsolete at this moment.
        OGDEN:  Just returning to what Mr. LaRouche said about the actions that must be taken around Glass-Steagall, this is the result; the very fact that this is in both party platforms is the result of the leadership that I think both of you have represented over the course of the last almost decade.  Both you, Rachel, and Kesha have run very prominent campaigns for Federal office; and the fact that Rachel, you took on Barney Frank and really refuted all of his arguments against Glass-Steagall on live television; this is what made this a household word.  And then Kesha, your campaign around NASA in Texas was a transformative campaign; it was national in scope and
international in its effects.  The reason why we have the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee, which both Kesha and Rachel are representatives of, is that you do have the deliberative body existing in this country — represented not exclusively by
members of the Policy Committee — but represented by the type of thinking that this Policy Committee has been able to achieve over the course of the last several years as public figures in your own right.
        People must not despair; the belief in the kind of party politics and go along to get along pragmatism is what demoralizes people in this country.  But every time the kind of leadership which Rachel and Kesha represented in their campaigns is
exhibited, you see the American people wake up, just light up. Because that's reminiscent of the kind of leadership that used to be quintessentially American:  John F Kennedy; Robert Kennedy; what Franklin Roosevelt was able to do to draw people from the depths of not just an economic depression, but a widespread emotional depression that had taken hold of the American people in the aftermath of the '29 stock market crash.  And to pull those people up and to turn that generation into the most productive generation that this country had ever seen, that should be enough to give us confidence that through the bold and assertive implementation of the principles behind these Four Laws, not just the words in the effect, but the principles which these are hinged upon; rooted deep within the American System ideas of Alexander Hamilton.  Through the application of this, we could see — this generation of Americans could actually see themselves as becoming once again the most productive, most optimistic, most creative generation that this country has ever seen; in collaboration with what's coming out of China in that regard and all of the other countries that have been touched by this vision.
        So, it's not abstract that we're discussing the figures of Krafft Ehricke or Albert Einstein; who themselves were critical personalities in the context of what Franklin Roosevelt was accomplishing or what John F Kennedy was accomplishing.  It was
that spark of creative optimism which, coming from a few individual geniuses such as that, actually lit the fires of optimism and creativity throughout the entirety of the American people.  That can be done again.
        ROGERS: Yes, and all these figures who you just named, who at a very young age, dedicated their lives to a mission, just as LaRouche did. And right now, we're recruiting people to our team; we need the young people to actually take responsibility and dedicate their lives to this very mission of acting to shape the future.  Because the reality is, the people who are being strongly affected by this destructive policy under Obama and Bush that we've been seeing for far too long, are particularly the young people.  They have to not accept this; and they have to make the determination that they're going to be a part – as others throughout the nation and the world — of shaping and bringing about the future that they want to see.

OGDEN:  Megan mentioned the person of Johannes Kepler. This was Einstein's inspiration; he wrote this paper on the 400^th anniversary of the death of Johannes Kepler.  It was exactly Kepler's ability that nobody else had seen; or to see the
Universe from an angle which nobody else had even attempted to see it from, was the type of thinking that Albert Einstein practiced as almost a religious devotion.  It's the ability to say, "No; mankind does have the ability not to look up at the world from the standpoint of the animals that crawl on the ground, but to look down at the Universe through the eyes of the Creator." To be seeing the world through the eyes of the Creator means to see the infinite potential; there is no limit in terms of what's possible in terms of growth and potential in a creative Universe. You can guarantee that a Creator of that Universe, who does not live in time but lives outside of and above time – as Einstein himself was enabled to do; sees, that that infinite potential is there.  But it hinges on the willful ability of a species such as man to act to unlock that creative potential; to unlock the future.  So, the vision and the faith that comes with that kind of way of thinking is what carries great geniuses such as Einstein, Kepler, Krafft Ehricke, others to be able to see the world from the standpoint of not the extrapolated future; but a future which nobody else have ever dreamed of existing.
        Kesha, you might want to bring this up. You have mentioned earlier that there was this conference that took place in Germany, celebrating the legacy of Gottfried Leibniz and some of the remarks that were made there.  Maybe that would be important.
        ROGERS:  Unfortunately, I don't have those remarks right in front of me; maybe Megan does.  This was a conference on the 370th birthday anniversary of Leibniz, that was being discussed today from developments that we heard of today.  One of the representatives was a Chinese Leibniz scholar, and he was
actually expressing the idea of Leibniz's conception of happiness.  Megan, do you have that there?  Because I though it really encapsulates what we've been speaking of here.
        BEETS:  So this was a gentleman named Wenchao Li, who is from the University; he's a China-born Leibniz specialist at the University of Hannover. He said, "For our own happiness, or the happiness of others, we can only be happy if others are happy, too. What it is about is human beings; other cultures. It is about the common good of all." That was actually how they opened this conference commemorating Leibniz.  I think it's significant, because often times these conferences can be sort of insular and limited to a certain academic community.  But this clearly reflects the principle of humanity that Leibniz represented; and it's also clearly resonating with the potential of the New Paradigm today.
        ROGERS:  Over 400 scientists from around the world, and this is an expression of what the space program truly exemplifies; it is the expression of happiness, of an end to conflict, an end to wars, and a true expression of what it is to be truly human.
Right now, if we're going to put an end to the hostilities and war drive and so forth, the greatest basis that we have to do that is through cooperation in space exploration.  That is the means of happiness that we can bring about to the existence of all mankind. I thought that that was clearly expressed in that quote and in the theme that was brought up in that conference.
        BEETS: I think this really is the challenge to the American people. Everything we've been discussing is couched in how you opened, Matt, with the financial meltdown. What was brought up about the very real danger of the war being driven by the British Empire as their system comes apart. I think the challenge to the
American people is the issue of courage; of realizing that what we've been discussing here today as the true nature of the human mind. That is reality; the Presidential election is not reality. Voting is not reality; it's whether people have the guts today to
admit LaRouche is right. And to stand and organize with us. And I think the call is put out to everyone to stand and organize with us now; now is the moment to bring this New Paradigm into existence in the United States, which is really the lynchpin in
the entire global picture right now.
        OGDEN: OK. That's a conclusion that we can take as the final word here. I would like to ask everybody to please subscribe to the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel; there are actually two channels. This is the LaRouche PAC Live; there's also a channel [called] LaRouche PAC videos, which has a lot more of the substantial, lengthy presentations that we've put together. So, if you haven't subscribed to either one of those yet, please subscribe to both. This is really central to our ability to build the kind of mass movement of intellectual courage which will continue to place LaRouche PAC in the center of creating the vision for the future of the United States.
        So, I'd like to thank you both, Kesha and Rachel, for joining us via video here today; and thanks to Megan for joining me in the studio. Thank you for tuning in. 

Please stay tuned, and we'll see you next Monday. 

Good night.

27. juli, 2016 (Leder) – De mere betydningsfulde finansielle medier i Europa og USA advarer for tiden om, at det europæiske finansielle system er på randen af en nedsmeltning, hvad enten udløseren, som del af et generelt bankkollaps i Italien, er verdens ældste banks, Monte die Paschis, kollaps, eller det er en nedsmeltning af derivaterne i Deutsche Bank, som af IMF for nylig blev beskrevet som verdens mest »systemisk risikable« finansielle institution. Hele det transatlantiske finansielle system har nået et kritisk punkt, og af denne grund vokser der nu en panikkonsensus frem blandt nogle af nøglespillerne i det britiske spil – Den Europæiske Centralbank, IMF, JP Morgan Chase og Goldman Sachs – der går ud på, at en midlertidig ophævelse af bail-in-loven (ekspropriering af visse typer bankindskud) er af afgørende betydning for at muliggøre en bail-out (statslig bankredning) af de italienske banker, der vurderes at sidde inde med dårlig gæld for mellem 210 og 360 milliarder euro. Deutsche Bank holdt onsdag en spontan pressekonference ved en af sine direktører, for »særdeles kraftigt at afvise« at banken skulle være i færd med at overveje en opdeling mellem sine London-centrerede kasino-operationer (Deutsche Bank har en derivateksponering på $55 billioner (55 tusinde milliarder, -red.), og sine andre enheder, selv efter, at DB havde offentliggjort et fald i profit på 97,5 %, og en 20 procents nedgang i indtjening i forhold til samme kvartal i 2016.

Det episke sammenbrud af det transatlantiske finansielle system, er, netop nu, den væsentligste faktor bag driften hen imod faren for krig – atomkrig – som Obama og NATO har fremprovokeret mod Rusland. Den seneste provokation kommer fra den bulgarske regering, der har beskyldt Rusland for at krænke et opdigtet »NATO-luftrum« under bulgarsk kontrol.

Kendsgerningen, som Lyndon LaRouche udtrykte det under diskussion med kolleger i dag, er ganske enkelt den, at »Deutsche Bank er død. Dette skal siges ligefremt og åbent.« Han tilføjede, at tyskerne burde »bede om Putins råd«.

Mens Wall Street forsat er ekstremt rasende over det faktum, at både det Republikanske og det Demokratiske parti har sat en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall på deres valgprogram for præsidentvalget i 2016, tog LaRouche spørgsmålet et skridt videre. Alt imens Glass-Steagall er fuldstædigt afgørende, så det nødvendigt med yderligere tiltag. Man må påkalde den tidligere formand for Deutsche Bank, Alfred Herrhausens forbillede. Under Herrhausen var Deutsche Bank en industribank, der investerede i realøkonomien. Selv på højdepunktet af den Kolde Krig investerede Deutsche Bank massivt i den sovjetiske økonomi og tilvejebragte lån til olierørledninger, kraftværker, veje og jernbaner. Mordet på Herrhausen den 30. november, 1989, faldt sammen med den iscenesatte fængsling af Lyndon LaRouche, iværksat af de samme kræfter – George H.W. Bush/Margaret Thatcher/ Francois Mitterand – der påtvang Tyskland Maastrichttraktatens spændetrøje og således aflivede Herrhausens planer om at integrere nationerne i den tidligere Warszawapagt i et forenet europæisk-eurasisk, økonomisk rum.
Den tyske økonomi står på randen af kollaps, som der er garanti for, hvis Deutsche Bank går ned. Det må forhindres for enhver pris, men de umiddelbare forholdsregler må omfatte en tilbagevenden til den form for bankvirksomhed, der blev praktiseret af Herrhausen. Hvis Tyskland går ned, er der så godt som garanti for, at vi får en atomar Tredje Verdenskrig, og det må forhindres gennem nødforanstaltninger.

Endnu en manifestering af den dødbringende krise, som menneskeheden i dag står overfor, er den fortsatte spredning af den blinde terrorismes pest, hvad enten der er tale om grusomheder begået af Islamisk Stat og andre jihad-kulter, skabt af anglo-saudierne, eller det drejer sig om den »nye vold«, vi på det seneste har set i Tyskland og Japan, og som involverer unge, der, gennem deres afhængighed af sigt-og-skyd-videospil, hjernevaskes til at begå voldelige handlinger.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, grundlægger af og præsident for Schiller Instituttet, har opfordret til en international, koordineret indsats for at knuse denne terrorsvøbe – i tæt samarbejde med Rusland. Sidste september opfordrede den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin i sin tale til FN’s Sikkerhedsråd til en international indsats, med Anden Verdenskrigs alliance mellem USA og Sovjetunionen som forbillede, for at besejre jihad-terrorismen. Onsdag den 27. juli holdt Putin en tale ved et møde for topplacerede folk inden for russisk sikkerheds- og ordenshåndhævelse, hvor han gentog denne opfordring til en global krig mod terrorisme, der nu udgør en civilisationskrise, som alle nationer må bekæmpe.

Den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin til FN's Generalforsamling i 2015: »Det, vi i realiteten foreslår, er, at man lader sig lede af fælles værdier og fælles interesser i stedet for af ambitioner. Inden for rammerne af international lov må vi forene vore anstrengelser for at overvinde de problemer, der truer os alle, og skabe en virkeligt bred international koalition mod terrorismen … «

Download (PDF, Unknown)

25. juli 2016 (Leder) – Interessante kommentarer på begge sider Atlanten i løbet af weekenden reflekterede den voksende sandsynlighed for en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-princippet i den nærmeste fremtid – og som er af afgørende betydning for de transatlantiske økonomier.

Den førende finansavis på det europæiske kontinent, Handelsblatt, udgav den 22. juli en artikel skrevet af avisens Washington-korrespondent, og som udtrykte Glass-Steagalls voksende styrke: »Adskil, hvad ikke bør være sammenføjet«, hvilket vil sige, at man skal adskille almindelig, kommerciel bankvirksomhed med indskud og udlån fra spekulation i værdipapirer.

Handelsblatt tog udgangspunkt i de amerikanske politiske partiers valgplatforme, men støttede af egen kraft Glass-Steagall. Korrespondenten Frank Wiebe skrev, at debatten om genindførelsen af Glass-Steagall ikke er ny i USA, men, »siden Trump og Republikanerne tog spørgsmålet op igen, har Wall Street pludselig taget det alvorligt. Hidtil har Wall Street været overbevist om, at det, på trods af den store støtte til konceptet, sluttelig ikke ville være muligt at skaffe et politisk flertal for det. Nu er de ikke længere så sikre.«

Og i USA skrev en Clinton-demokratisk superdelegeret og mangeårig kampagne-toprådgiver, Elaine Kamarck, på sin Brookings Institute-blog, at noget hen efter Glass-Steagall måtte blive vedtaget af den nye Kongres og præsident. Hillary Clinton var modstander af Glass-Steagall, sagde Kamarck,

Men ved at gå med til at placere en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall i Demokraternes valgplatform, signalerede Hillary Clinton, at også hun ville støtte det … Der har hidtil i Kongressen ikke været megen interesse for dette. Men hvis der var noget, som etablissementet hørte højt og tydeligt i primærvalgene i 2016, så var det, at millioner af amerikanere mener, at de er ofre for Wall Street, og at den næste præsident hellere må høre efter.

Tabet af Wall Streets kontrol betyder, at stiftende redaktør af EIR, Lyndon LaRouches syv år lange kampagne, der kræver Glass-Steagall som den dør, der vil åbne for en politik med statskredit til genoplivelse af den økonomiske produktivitet i USA og Europa, har vundet voksende indflydelse.

Handelsblatts støtte har også spredt spørgsmålet til Tyskland og Europa. »Ville der være begrundelse for at genindføre Glass-Steagall?«, spørger Wiebe. Det nuværende system giver en universel bank flere muligheder, men

Hvad der er vigtigere, så ville konceptet med en bankopdeling sandsynligvis gøre det finansielle system mere sikkert. Det afgørende punkt er, at storbankerne er for store, og at en opdeling ville gøre dem mindre igen. Argumentet er gyldigt for Europa, hvor meget store banker befinder sig i relativt små stater, mere, end det gælder for USA. Deutsche Bank-forretningsmodellen, hvor en stor investeringsbank sidder på fundamentet af en ikke særlig stærk traditionel bank, diskuteres om og om igen.

Da Lyndon LaRouche påbegyndte sin kampagne for en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall i 2009, var de eneste amerikanere eller europæere, der kendte til lovens navn, de Wall Street-folk, der var lovens banemænd. LaRouches indsigt i fremtiden var af afgørende betydning for at vælge denne kamp. Han vidste, at de transatlantiske økonomiers eneste fremtid, deres eneste chance for at genoplive statskredit, produktion og produktivitet efter Hamiltons principper, gik via Glass-Steagall, der ville sætte gigantbankerne på Wall Street og i City of London i globaliseringens æra, på deres rette plads.

At afværge endnu et generelt finansielt kollaps og truslen om verdenskrig kræver, at man nu griber denne fremtid.

Foto: USA: Det var den nyvalgte præsident Franklin D. Roosevelt, der til finansoligarkiets (Wall Street og City of London) rædsel fik Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven vedtaget i 1933. På dette foto fra 1935 ses FDR underskrive og dermed sætte i kraft, Loven om Social Sikkerhed (Social Security Act).

Social Security Act var en lovgivning for social velfærd, der skabte det sociale sikkerhedssystem i USA. Selv om programmet er blevet ændret siden loven blev vedtaget, så var lovens oprindelige formål det at sørge for statshjælp til dem, der ikke kunne arbejde.   

25. juli, 2016 (Leder) – London/Wall Street-banksystemet har kurs mod et krak, og den grundlæggende årsag er den fuldstændige stagnation af den økonomiske vækst, men navnlig stagnationen i produktiviteten i de europæiske og amerikanske økonomier.

Den amerikanske finansminister Jack Lew bragte sit embede i miskredit ved det nyligt afsluttede G20-møde i Kina, da han opfordrede de andre lande til at gøre alt, hvad der stod i deres magt, for at øge deres økonomiske vækst, men sagde, at den amerikanske økonomi ikke behøver nye forholdsregler til kreditudstedelse eller investering. Den økonomiske vækst i USA er så lav, at Lew har behov for at bruge europæisk nulvækst til at puste sig selv op. Kina – hvis økonomiske fremgang og kredit har holdt verden oppe i et årti, og hvis økonomiske vækst er fire gange den amerikanske – sagde sandheden ved dette møde: »Situationen i den globale økonomi er dyster«, som Kinas handelsminister sagde.

Kina fortsætter med at skabe store mængder kombineret offentlig og privat kreditudstedelse (estimeret til $240 milliarder alene i juni) til investeringer såvel i Kina, langs med det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte og den Maritime Silkevej, samt i Afrika, Mellemøsten og Sydamerika – såvel som også til sit rumforsknings- og teknologiprogram, det mest dynamiske i verden i dag. Men de finansielle kræfter i London og på Wall Street, der gør verdensøkonomien »dyster«, skramler fortsat henimod et nyt finansielt krak med en økonomi, der ikke har nogen kapitalinvestering, er uden produktivitet og uden profit.

EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche, lagde ikke i fingrene imellem i sin kommentar til Lews forsvar for en død økonomi. »At sætte den form for standard betyder i virkeligheden fallit«, sagde LaRouche.

Den politik må lukkes ned. Produktivitetsraterne for de realøkonomiske aktiviteter skal i vejret igen – ellers vil det hele eksplodere. USA og Europa vil ikke overleve. De kan overleve, hvis man gør, hvad der skal gøres. Og det er at sørge for, at videnskab bliver motoren for økonomiens reelle produktivitet.

Det er ligeledes videnskab, der vil være motor for menneskers og husstandes reelle indkomststigninger.

Studier af USA’s økonomiske historie kalder perioden 1935-1970 for »amerikansk produktivitets guldalder« på grund af den totale produktivitets vedvarende vækstfaktor – en vækst i produktiviteten, der kan tilskrives teknologiske fremskridt snarere end blot anvendelse af flere arbejdstimer og mere kapital. Væksten kulminerede under Franklin Roosevelts New Deal og de store infrastrukturprojekter med benævnelsen »De Fire Hjørner«, der voksede med 3,3 % om året. Det voksede stadig med lige under 3 % om året i 1960’erne under JFK, med det måske vigtigste infrastrukturprojekt af dem alle, nemlig NASA’s Apolloprogram, der bragte mennesket til Månen med et potentiale til at nå endnu længere ud.

IMF, den Europæiske Centralbank og USA’s Nationale Kontor for Økonomisk Forskning taler konstant om den totale produktivitets vækstfaktor og følger den nøje, alt imens de overhovedet ikke er i stand til at frembringe en sådan vækstfaktor. IMF har netop rapporteret, at, i årtierne under Bush og Obama var denne vækstfaktor i USA var 0,5 % om året, og at nu, i 2016, er den omkring nul. I »højproduktive« Tyskland, har den også været på 0,5 % om året.

Kina, som sagde sandheden ved G20 om den globale økonomis »dystre tilstand«, har haft en vækstfaktor i den totale produktivitet på 3,1 % om året siden 2004, ifølge den seneste undersøgelse, der er foretaget ved Harvard. Det er, hvad den Nye Silkevej og det kinesiske måneprogram skaber.

LaRouche har siden 2013 udtrykt dette behov som »de fire love«: Genindfør Glass/Steagall-bankregulering (begge de politiske partier er nu, på papiret, enige med ham). Skab statslige institutioner til udstedelse af ny kredit, der er rettet mod vækst i produktiviteten. Invester i de mest højteknologiske infrastrukturprojekter, med rumforskning i spidsen. Fokusér på at skabe gennembrud i videnskabens fremskudte grænse, som er videnskab og teknologi inden for termonuklear fusion, inklusive fusionskraft og fissions/fusions-fremdrift til rejser i rummet.

»I modsat fald vil det hele eksplodere. USA og Europa vil ikke overleve.«

Kinas forpligtende engagement mht. at forøge hele befolkningens arbejdskrafts produktive evne, som eksemplificeres i bygningen af De Tre Slugters dæmning, som ses afbildet her, har resulteret i en vækstrate fire gange så stor, som den aktuelle vækstrate i USA.

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Video: 2. del:

Lyd:

20. juli 2016 (Leder) – For næsten et år siden foreslog den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin en global koalition til bekæmpelse af Islamisk Stat og andre jihadistiske terrorister, en koalition, der er bygget over modellen for den amerikansk- og sovjetisk-ledede koalition til nedkæmpelse af nazismens og fascismens svøbe under Anden Verdenskrig. Nylige begivenheder gør det klart, at tiden nu er inde til netop en sådan kampalliance – rettet mod Det britiske Imperium.

Frigivelsen, efter 14 års lange kamp, af de 28 sider fra den oprindelige Fælles Kongresundersøgelse af 11. september [2001] har fastslået det saudiske monarkis indiskutable rolle i historiens værste terrorangreb på amerikansk jord, og en omhyggelig gennemgang af Al Yamama-sagen gør det klart, at saudierne i denne grusomhed handlede som agenter for Det britiske Imperium.

Den ligeledes nylige udgivelse af Chilcot-kommissionens rapport har bevist, at den tidligere britiske premierminister Tony Blair var skyldig i samme klasse af krigsforbrydelser, for hvilke topnazister blev retsforfulgt og dømt ved domstolen i Nürnberg.

I kølvandet på rapporten fra Repræsentanternes Hus’ Komite for Finansielle Tjenester, som afslører den britiske regerings og Obamas Hvide Hus’ rolle i mørklægningen af hvidvask af penge, der stammer fra narkotikahandel og anvendes til terror, og som i enorme proportioner er blevet bedrevet af den britiske krones bank, HSBC, blev to topfolk fra HSBC arresteret af FBI i denne uge på anklager om finansielt bedrageri. Dette er kun toppen af isbjerget.

Taget sammen, repræsenterer disse udviklinger det største dødsstød mod Det britiske Imperium i meget lang tid. Det nylige kup i Tyrkiet kan kun forstås ud fra et standpunkt om den britiske krones rolle i sponsorering og beskyttelse af de tjetjenske terrorister, samt stort set alle andre etniske separatistgrupper på Jordens overflade. Tjetjenerne har udgjort rygraden i al-Qaeda og Islamisk Stat og har nydt godt af den britiske krones beskyttelse, lige siden begyndelsen af den første Tjetjenske Krig i midten af 1990’erne. Tjetjenerne stod bag selvmordsterrorangrebet den 28. juni mod Istanbul Lufthavn, der fandt sted kun kort tid efter, at den tyrkiske præsident Erdogan, under enormt internationalt pres og isolering, udstedte en offentlig undskyldning til den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin for den tyrkiske nedskydning af et russisk kampfly i november 2015. Dette er den afgørende kulisse, på baggrund af hvilken man skal foretage en kompetent vurdering af de igangværende begivenheder i Tyrkiet.

Det britiske Imperium er under angreb, det er bankerot, og det er isoleret. Enhver, der seriøst vil standse det omsiggribende mønster med global, blind terrorisme, bør erkende, at denne kun kan bekæmpes ved at gå helt til toppen, og derfra nedefter – og det betyder, at man må bringe Det britiske Imperium til fald.

I USA er Wall Street, som er en gren af det britiske finansimperium, vågnet op til den kendsgerning, at der finder en fuldt optrappet revolte sted imod deres korruption og tyveri. Denne revolte har omgående taget form af, at man, i både det Republikanske og Demokratiske partis valgplatform, har inkluderet en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall, noget, som er kommet totalt bag på Wall Street. Dette har forårsaget en hysterisk reaktion fra finansoligarkiet.

Som Lyndon LaRouche i dag understregede: »Glass-Steagall vil gøre det af med Imperiet. Og USA’s økonomi kan ikke overleve, med mindre man vender tilbage til Glass-Steagall.« 

19. juli 2016 (Leder) – I de seneste to uger har vi – som en uopsættelig aktion, der skal gennemføres nu, i denne økonomiske og kulturelle krise – fremlagt Lyndon og Helga LaRouches forslag til at redde Deutsche Bank fra overhængende bankerot, og til at afværge krig. Fordi Tysklands økonomi er den eneste, der har et produktivt potentiale til at redde vraget af Europa ved at koble sig til Kinas storslåede projekt for den Nye Silkevej til udvikling af Eurasien, Mellemøsten og Afrika.

I modsat fald får vi krig med Kina, eller med Rusland. Obamas Hvide Hus forsøger støt og roligt at fremprovokere krigskonfrontationer med både Rusland og Kina og kræver, at Europa fremmer disse provokationer gennem NATO. Hvis terrorsplinterne fra Obamas krige i Mellemøsten og Libyen er i færd med at bombe Europa ind i en tilstand af chok, så har de hans sympati, så længe, de fortsat går med i militære konfrontationer med Rusland og Kina. Hillary Clinton er lige så fast besluttet på denne krigspolitik.

Der er, især efter Brexit, ingen tvivl om, at Tyskland er Europas fremtid. Men hvis det er Angela Merkels og Wolfgang Schäubles Tyskland, forfalsket med det endnu mere krigeriske Grønne Parti, så får vi verdenskrig.

Derfor foreslog hr. og fr. LaRouche: Det må være Tyskland i Alfred Herrhausens ånd, den myrdede leder af den engang produktive, men nu elendige og kriminelle kæmpe, Deutsche Bank. Mere specifikt den Alfred Herrhausen, der i 1989 var i færd med at lancere en udviklingsbank til at løfte Polen og det sovjetiske Østeuropa økonomisk, mens Sovjetunionen kollapsede – og han blev myrdet.

Herrhausens plan dengang for Deutsche Bank og Tyskland, var et paradigme for, hvad Tyskland atter kan blive, såvel som også for Europas fremtid nu.

Det transatlantiske banksystem og finansielle system er ved at falde fra hinanden. Det er offer for sine egne medlemmer, de City of London-centrerede europæiske storbanker og Wall Street-storbankerne, der har knust de reelle, produktive økonomier under sig i løbet af årtiers globalisering. Det, der udløser det umiddelbart forestående krak, er ikke simplet hen italienske bankers dårlige lån, eller ejendomsfonde i London, der lukker, eller at de store tyske og schweiziske banker er i vanskeligheder, og ikke engang ECB’s og Federal Reserves sindssyge politik; men derimod ødelæggelsen af de underliggende økonomiers produktivitet hen over årtier, mens kasinoet voksede på toppen af dem.

Hvis man skal genkapitalisere de fallerede storbanker i Europa, må de tvinges til at afskrive deres kasinoer som totale tab og genvedtage de produktive formål, som Herrhausens lederskab af Deutsche Bank var indbegrebet af. Så kan man skabe statskreditter på samme måde, som Kina har været alene om at gøre i dette århundrede, til den form for projekter, der genopliver menneskers og økonomiers produktivitet.

I løbet af de to uger, hvor vi har fremlagt dette uopsættelige forslag fra LaRouche, har der været betydningsfulde gennembrud i USA. »Det saudiske kapitel« af 11. september-historien er blevet tvunget offentliggjort.

En genindførelse af Glass-Steagall er inkorporeret i valgplatformene hos både Demokrater og Republikanere.

Men den rette måde at kæmpe for en Glass/Steagall-reorganisering af bankerne på, er ved at bruge den »vægtstang«, som er LaRouches forslag. Så bliver denne kamp en kamp for Europas, og også USA’s, fremtid. 

19. juli 2016 (Leder) – Det europæiske lederskab er i panik over banksystemets hastige kollaps. Italien skyder skylden på Tyskland og Deutsche Bank, Tyskland skyder skylden på Italien, mens Wall Street klager over, at europæerne undergraver det falske »opsving«. Dette er farligt og psykotisk nonsens. Vi er i færd med at opleve sammenbruddet af hele det transatlantiske banksystem og ikke blot dele af det, og der findes ingen anden løsning end omgående at skabe love i Europa og USA, der muliggør en ny finansiel og økonomisk orden efter Hamiltons principper. Derivat-spillegælden på $2 billarder (2000 milliarder, -red.) må afskrives, og det kommercielle banksystem genkapitaliseres, så det kan udføre sit legitime job, som er at kanalisere kredit ind i en genopbygning af verdensøkonomien.

Den kendsgerning, at både det Republikanske og det Demokratiske parti har lagt en vedtagelse af Glass-Steagall ind i deres valgplatform, har sendt Wall Street ud i hysteriske raserianfald, skrækslagne, som Barrons rapporterer, over, »at der er en ikke-vedkendt risiko for, at Glass-Stegall kunne blive genindført i 2017 eller 2018, uanset, hvem der vinder«.  Kendsgerningen er, at et momentum for Glass-Steagall ikke kommer fra de allerede fallerede kandidater eller de svigtende partier, som de repræsenterer, men fra et skifte i befolkningens tankegang, et skifte, der går i retning af LaRouche-bevægelsens årtier lange kamp for Glass-Steagall.

Det samme gælder frigivelsen af de 28 sider om den saudiske rolle i international terrorisme, en kamp, som LaRouche-bevægelsen har anført. Befolkningen er blevet lullet i søvn om faren ved Bush’ og Obamas åbenlyse støtte til terrorister for at opnå deres mål om »regimeskifte«, og ligeledes om virkeligheden omkring den økonomiske disintegration af hele det vestlige finansielle system under en kasino-bankpraksis. Nu, hvor ingen af delene kan mørklægges, er sandheden endelig synlig for offentligheden.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouches kriseerklæring fastlægger om Deutsche Banks overhængende kollaps, så må der ske en »omgående genorientering af banken, tilbage til den tradition, der under Alfred Herrhausens lederskab var fremherskende indtil 1989«.  Fr. LaRouche understregede i mandags, at Herrhausen blev myrdet i 1989, fordi han responderede til det dengang igangværende kollaps af Sovjetunionen med en ny politik, baseret på et højere koncept om mennesket og menneskehedens fælles mål. Han fremsatte forslag til en prompte mobilisering af de vestlige økonomier for at lancere en infrastruktur- og industrigenopbygning af Polen, og med tiden af hele Eurasien – præcis, som Lyndon LaRouche havde identificeret det i sin berømte pressekonference, holdt på Kempinski Hotel i Berlin, oktober 1988.

Det Britiske Imperium og dets vasaller kunne ikke tolerere dette nye paradigme, og, med Herrhausens fjernelse, lancerede de transformationen af Europa til et centraliseret diktatur under Maastrichttraktaten fra 1992, under et banksystem, der satte profitmaksimering gennem spekulation over menneskelig udvikling, samtidig med, at man fremprovokerede evindelige krige. Denne proces har nu lagt hele systemet i ruiner.

Lyndon LaRouche gentog i dag, at Tyskland, USA og alle andre vestlige nationer omgående må skabe ny lovgivning for at ændre systemet – hele systemet – tilbage til en bankpraksis efter Hamiltons principper, sådan, som Herrhausen praktiserede det, og de må øjeblikkeligt begynde at skabe kredit op til det transatlantiske områdes nationale økonomiers fulde bæreevne.

Mens farerne stadig mangfoldigføres – for terrorisme, krig og finansielt kollaps – så mangfoldiggøres gennembruddene ligeledes, som med Glass-Steagall og de 28 sider. Med Kina og Rusland, der fører verden imod et nyt paradigme baseret på global udvikling og samarbejde imod terrorisme, er tiden nu inde til at få USA til at vende tilbage til sine rødder i Hamiltons principper, og til at slutte sig til vore naturlige allierede, Rusland og Kina, som vi gjorde, da vi besejrede fascismen i Anden Verdenskrig, og som vi også må gøre for at besejre den nye fascisme, der i dag kommer fra City of London og Wall Street.

16. juli 2016 – Citigroups cheføkonom Willem Buiter sagde på fuldstændig sindssyg vis til Bloomberg den 15. juli, at en »win-win«-politik for Europas centralbanker ville være udstedelsen af helikopterpenge. Buiter gjorde det klart, at han mener den fulde Weimarregerings udstedelse af »evighedsobligationer« til den Europæiske Centralbank, obligationer, der ikke alene ikke har renter, men heller ingen tilbagebetaling af hovedstolen, nogensinde; ECB trykker tilsvarende kontanter og anbringer dem i statslige konti. Dette er potentielt set ubegrænset – som Zimbabwe også opdagede for nylig – især, eftersom Buiter siger, at, mens ECB gør dette, bør de europæiske regeringer afskrive noget af deres gæld.

»Der er indlysende win-win-situationer, som vi kan få«, citeres Buiter. »En gældsomlægning hvis muligt … og så en budgetstimulus med et veldefineret mål, der sluttelig skal finansieres gennem ECB, folkets helikopterpenge. I et land som Tyskland, hvor der er behov for investering i infrastruktur, annoncerer og gennemfører regeringen et storstilet investeringsprogram« og udsteder evigheds-obligationer »til centralbanken, der skaber det om til penge«, sagde Buiter.

Præsident for den amerikanske centralbank, Federal Reserve, i delstaten Cleveland, Loretta Mester, befandt sig i et interview den 12. juli under den samme vrangforestilling: »Vi vurderer hele tiden værktøjer, som vi kan anvende«, sagde Mester til Australiens ABC. »I USA har vi brugt kvantitativ lempelse (pengetrykning), og jeg mener, at det har bevist sit værd. Så det er min anskuelse, at helikopterpenge bliver en slags næste skridt, hvis vi nogen sinde skulle finde os selv i en situation, hvor vi ønskede at være mere imødekommende.«

Og den tidligere vicedirektør i Federal Reserves bestyrelse Joseph Gagnon citeres for den mest fatale udtalelse: »Centralbanker og regeringer er faktisk én og samme ting.«

EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche satte dette på sin rette plads. »Disse vild-øjede planer«, sagde LaRouche, »er svindelnumre i en grad, hvor de udelukkende kan forfølges gennem at føre krig. Der er simpelt hen ingen profit i banksystemet nu, og ingen produktivitet. Det kommer der heller ikke, før vi udrenser dem og starter på en frisk. Luk disse svindelforetagender ned – fjern dem. Erklær dem bankerot. Så kan man komme ind med kredit til et nyt system, der bygger på vækst.«

Det er den skarpe vending i politikken, som LaRouche har foreslået omkring tilfældet med Deutsche Banks krav om bailout – genkapitaliser i stedet banken på basis af en tilbagevenden til bankens tidligere formand Alfred Herrhausens politik for udvikling.

Opkomsten af nazismen på baggrund af Tysklands periode med hyperinflation/kollaps illustrerer LaRouches pointe med, at sådanne »vild-øjede planer« som helikopterpenge, blandt stormagter forfølges »udelukkende gennem at føre krig«.

Foto: ’Go Fly a Kite’ – gå ud og sæt en drage op. Som børnene under Tysklands hyperinflation i 1920-erne selv har lavet af værdiløse pengesedler … Helikopterpenge er ingen ny opfindelse. Det er konsekvenserne heller ikke.

16. juli 2016 – »Deutsche Bank må reddes, for verdensfredens skyld«, Helga Zepp-LaRouches chokerende advarsel om det kaos, der lurer bag Deutsche Banks krav om en ny, europæisk TARP-bailout, er i raketfart blevet cirkuleret til højtplacerede bankierer, økonomer og medier i hele Tyskland, Østrig og Italien. En af disse bankierer bekræftede over for Zepp-LaRouche i en diskussion over telefon den 15. juli, at hendes fremsatte krav, der placerer de London-centrerede europæiske banker »i allersidste øjeblik« før et kollaps, er korrekt, og mange bankierer ved det. I interviews til medierne »kaster de sand i offentlighedens øjne«, sagde han, med de ved, hvad der snart vil udløses over dem.

En anden kilde sagde til EIR’s europæiske kontor i Wiesbaden, Tyskland, at behovet for at vende tilbage til Deutsche Banks myrdede, tidligere formand Alfred Herrhausens »traditionelle dyder« inden for bankpraksis, gentagent blev bragt på bane under bankens nylige generalforsamling for aktionærerne i takt med, at bankens marked og øvrige kapitalisering styrtdykkede.  Zepp-LaRouches appel, der bygger på hendes mand, Lyndons LaRouches forslag, kræver, at Deutsche Bank skal genkapitaliseres med statslige midler, men at den skal udrenses ved at afskrive dens enorme mængde af giftige værdipapirer og ved at vende tilbage til Herrhausens politik for bankpraksis til industriudvikling og produktivitet.

Endnu en højtplaceret finansperson udtalte sig offentligt om den ekstreme fare for en europæisk nedsmeltning. Philipp Hildebrand, næstformand for Black Rock (der ejer 5 % af Deutsche Banks kollapsede aktier), sagde til Tageszeitung den 13. juli, at den nuværende krise i de europæiske banker er ekstremt farlig og »kunne føre til det værste«. Hildebrand søgte at lokalisere udløseren for nedsmeltningen væk fra Deutsche Bank og Tyskland, i Italien.

Men Deutsche Bank har et presserende behov for genkapitalisering. Samtidig med, at bankens cheføkonom David Folkerts-Landau kom med sine forslag til euro-bailout, og Angela Merkel og hendes finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble benægtede, at det skulle være nødvendigt at gøre noget, fik Deutsche Bank omkring 1 milliard euro i ny kapital fra Qatars kongefamilie, hvilket gør dem til den største aktieindehaver (10 %), foran Black Rock.

Ydermere har Deutsche Banks supervisionsbestyrelse skaffet sig af med Georg Thoma – der havde presset på for at få forebyggende undersøgelser og udrensninger af bankens illegale/umoralske aktiviteter – og har netop erstattet ham med Qatars fremstillede kandidat, Frankfurt-advokaten Stefan Simon.

Kilder i den amerikanske bankverden siger, at Deutsche Bank har behov for, ikke 1 milliard euro i ny kapital, men 7 – 10 milliard euro. Handelsblatt rapporterede den 15. juli, at Tysklands andenstørste bank, Commerzbank, også er i vanskeligheder. Den har måttet rapportere indtægter, der styrtdykkede hen over det seneste år med enorme marginer, 10 – 15 %, afhængig af bankafdeling. Den europæiske Centralbanks nulrentepolitik har bragt denne forhenværende kraftstation for lån til industrien ud på afgrundens rand.

EIR kæmper for de handlinger, som LaRouche foreslår, i både Tyskland og Italien, som er krisens centrale fokusområder. EIR’s og LaRouche-bevægelsens kamp for at genindføre Glass/Steagall-bankopdelingsloven i USA er ligeledes af afgørende betydning.

Og i Danmark er det naturligvis Schiller Instituttet, er fører an i denne kamp for en bankopdeling, også i Danmark.  

Den største fare, lige bortset fra en direkte Tredje Verdenskrig, ville være, at den transatlantiske sektor styrtede ud i kaos. Derfor fremkom min mand – der har en unik rekord for at have ret, mht. økonomisk forecasting, og mht. at komme med forslag til, hvordan en situation kan løses – med denne meget overraskende kommentar: at Deutsche Bank, frem for alle banker, skulle udvælges og reddes, denne ene, sidste gang, men ikke uden betingelser: De må omgående sættes under en form for konkursbehandling. En ledelseskomité bør have ansvaret. Og dernæst må banken have en ny forretningsplan, der må gå tilbage til den filosofi, som blev praktiseret af Alfred Herrhausen, der var den sidste, moralske bankier i hele Europa, og som havde en helt anden filosofi.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Jeg tror, det er almindelig kendt blandt absolut alle i det internationale finansielle samfund, og i alle regeringer og blandt alle relevante personer i politiske stillinger i den transatlantiske sektor, at det, jeg nu siger her, er absolut sandt. Med andre ord: bankiererne og de ansvarlige personer i det internationale finansielle system alle er klar over, at dette system er absolut bankerot; håbløst bankerot. Det står umiddelbart foran en nedsmeltning, i langt større skala end den, der fandt sted i 2008, af den meget simple grund, at alle de indikatorer, der var til stede, før Lehman Brothers og AIG gik ned, er til stede nu, men i langt større skala.

[Vi arbejder på en dansk oversættelse af hele webcastet. Bliv på kanalen!]  

Engelsk udskrift:

SAVE DEUTSCHE BANK TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WILL SAVE MANKIND!

LaRouche PAC International Webcast Friday, July 15, 2016

        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening! It's July 15th, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly webcast on
larouchepac.com. I'm joined in the studio tonight by Benjamin
Deniston; and we're joined by a very special guest, via video,
Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche. Helga Zepp-LaRouche is the founder of
the Schiller Institute, and also Chairwoman of the German BüSo
(Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidaritä¤t, Civil Rights Movement
Solidarity) political party.
        Helga LaRouche is joining us tonight to discuss the
initiative that she and Mr. Lyndon LaRouche have taken this week
to act in a very decisive manner to avert World War III and a
global economic blow-out. This concerns the situation that
Deutsche Bank now finds itself in.
        I would like to begin by reading a Statement that Mrs.
LaRouche issued a few days ago, on July 12th of this week. We
will then follow that Statement by a discussion with Mrs.
LaRouche herself. In the Statement that Mrs. LaRouche issued,
titled "Deutsche Bank Must be Rescued, for the Sake of World
Peace," Helga wrote the following:
        "The imminent threat of the bankruptcy of Deutsche Bank is
certainly not the only potential trigger for a new systemic
crisis of the trans-Atlantic banking system, which would be
orders of magnitude more deadly than the 2008 crisis, but it does
offer a unique lever to prevent a collapse into chaos.
        "Behind the SOS launched by the chief economist of Deutsche
Bank, David Folkerts-Landau, for an EU program of EU¬150 billion
to recapitalize the banks, lurks the danger openly discussed in
international financial media, that the entire European banking
system is {de facto} insolvent, and is sitting on a mountain of
at least EU¬2 trillion of non-performing loans. Deutsche Bank is
the international bank, with a total of EU¬55 trillions of
outstanding derivative contracts and a leverage factor of 40:1,
even outdoes Lehman Brothers at the time of its collapse, and
therefore represents the most dangerous Achilles heel of the
system. Half of Deutsche Bank's balance sheet, which has
plummeted 48% in the past 12 months and is down to only 8% of its
peak value, is made up of Level-3 derivatives, i.e., derivatives
amounting to circa EU¬800 billion without a market valuation.
        "It probably came as a surprise to many that Lyndon LaRouche
called today for Deutsche Bank to be saved through a one-time
increase in its capital base, because of the systemic
implications of its threatened bankruptcy. Neither the German
government with its GDP of EU¬4 trillion, nor the EU with a GDP
of EU¬18 trillion, would be able to control the domino effect of
a disorderly bankruptcy.
        "The one-time capital injection, LaRouche explained, is only
an emergency measure which needs to be followed by an immediate
reorientation of the bank, back to its tradition which prevailed
until 1989 under the leadership of Alfred Herrhausen. To actually
oversee such an operation, a management committee must be set up
to verify the legitimacy and the implications of the obligations,
and finalize its work within a given timeframe. That committee
should also draw up a new business plan, based on Herrhausen's
banking philosophy and exclusively oriented to the interests of
the real economy of Germany.
        "Alfred Herrhausen was the last actually creative, moral
industrial banker of Germany. He defended, among other things,
the cancellation of the unpayable debt of developing countries,
as well as the long-term credit financing of well-defined
development projects. In December 1989, he planned to present in
New York a plan for the industrialization of Poland, which was
consistent with the criteria used by the Kreditanstalt für
Wiederaufbau (KfW) for the post-1945 reconstruction of Germany,
and would have offered a completely different perspective than
the so-called 'reform policy,' or 'shock therapy', of Jeffrey
Sachs…."
        Helga completes this Statement by saying:
        "Herrhausen's assassination has gone unpunished. However,
there exists 'the dreaded might, that judges what is hid from
sight,' which is the subject of Friedrich Schiller's poem {Die
Kraniche des Ibykus}. The Erinyes have begun their dreadful
dance.
        It is now incumbent upon all those who, in addition to the
family, have suffered from the assassination of Herrhausen, upon
the representatives of the Mittelstand, of the German economy and
the institutional representatives of the German population, to
honor his legacy and to seize the tremendous opportunity which is
now offered to save Germany."
        With that said, Helga, would you like to follow up at all
with any opening statements?

        HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think that it is absolutely
known to everybody in the international financial community and
to all governments and all relevant people in political positions
in the trans-Atlantic sector, that what I'm saying there is
absolutely true. In other words: the bankers and [those]
responsible for the international financial system all know that
this system is absolutely bankrupt, hopelessly bankrupt. It's
about to blow up in a much, much bigger way than 2008, for the
very simple reason that all indicators which were there before
Lehman Brothers and AIG went under, are there, but much more.
        The famous instrument box which they were using, or
pretending to use, in 2008, has been used up: quantitative
easing, zero interest rate, negative interest rate, helicopter
money. Right now you have the situation — and we have this from
extremely reliable contacts in the banking community who agree
with us — where all the central banks are printing money, paper
money, like crazy, because they know perfectly well that
helicopter money is not just electronic, but if you would have a
banking run right now, the whole thing would evaporate within a
very short period of time, in hours.
        This is a situation where if you have an uncontrolled,
chaotic collapse, which is right now eminently possible, because
you have several [inaud 0:07.39]. Not only Deutsche Bank.
You have the Italian Banking sector about to blow. You have the
British situation after the Brexit. The entire European banking
system is absolutely bankrupt. If you had an uncontrolled
collapse, well, as one banker told us, after he read this
statement of mine, he said, "If this is not remedied in the short
term, we are looking towards a Europe of chaos, disorder, and
revolution."
        The biggest danger, apart from World War III directly, would
be a plunge of the trans-Atlantic sector into chaos. Therefore,
my husband — who has a unique record of being right, in terms of
forecasting, and being unique, in terms of coming up for
proposals how to remedy the situation — made this very
surprising comment: that Deutsche Bank, of all banks, should be
singled out, they should be saved, one last time, but not without
conditions: They must immediately be put in a sort of
receivership. A management commission should be in charge. And
then they need a new business plan, which must go back to the
philosophy of Alfred Herrhausen, who was the last moral banker in
all of Europe, and who had a completely different philosophy.
        We had all kinds of reactions about that. It turned out the
banks are much more hated than meets the public eye. People said,
"Let these banks go bankrupt! Why don't you just close them down?
Nationalize them! Bankrupt them!" You had an outpouring of anger
coming from people you would not expect it — conservative
industrialists, politicians who normally are not speaking in
radical tones at all — but what came out was an explosion of
anger.
        It is very easy to be angry about the situation. If this
thing collapses in an uncontrolled fashion, all the life-savings
of people will be ruined. The majority of the people will have to
pay, and this will be associated with poverty. Millions of people
dying. This is not a joke.
        It's not enough to be "against" something; even if banks
have behaved completely criminal and immoral. Deutsche Bank is
spending right now such enormous amounts of money on legal fines
for illegal activity from LIBOR swindles, all kinds of shady
operations, so that they had to write down their profit warnings.
It's not the question of "doing a favor" to Deutsche Bank. Not at
all! The question is: you must find leverage; how to bring this
thing in order, before the whole thing ends up in a collapse,
causing an absolute uncontrollable situation.
        That is why the reference to Alfred Herrhausen is really
extremely important, because he was the head of Deutsche Bank. He
was a banker. Deutsche Bank had a different policy, and
therefore, when you say, "We have to back to the philosophy of
Alfred Herrhausen," at least the older generation knows exactly
what that means. Therefore, I think we should really spread this
and force people to put pressure on the situation, that this is
being done. You have to "unwind" the outstanding derivatives. You
have to deal with the situation that Deutsche Bank has EU¬55
trillion in outstanding derivatives. Half of their balance sheet
is without market valuation, which means that it's practically
worth nothing, because you can't really sell it.
        If you have an uncontrolled collapse, then that could be
really what brings down the whole thing in a chaotic way. If you
go the way Mr. LaRouche has proposed, then you can have an
orderly resolution of this bankrupt system, and replace it with
one which is in the interest of the people. So, it's not just a
technical proposal. Several people, in response to my statement,
said, "This is probably the very last chance we have to prevent a
catastrophe."

        OGDEN: I would like to get a little bit more into the
significance of the role played by Alfred Herrhausen in a moment;
but before we get to that, Helga, maybe you also say a little bit
more about what the strategic context of this intervention is,
especially from the standpoint of the role that [inaud 13:06]
play, not only as the only viable economy in Europe right now,
but also the emphasis that Mr. LaRouche has placed on the
relationship between Germany and Russia, being the only means by
which we can prevent the outbreak of a thermonuclear conflict.

        ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, people have now all kinds of proposals,
like "Tobin Tax," "tax the speculators" — all these proposals
are floating around. What they don't consider, is that when we're
taking about banking, we're not talking about money or financial
questions; we're taking about the physical pre-condition for a
society to exist. Fortunately, the German economy, despite all of
these paradigm shifts which have occurred in the last 25 years to
the worse, the German economy is still an economic powerhouse.
You still have a very large concentration of very productive
middle-level industry. Middle-level industry is normally where
all the patterns are made, the technological innovation occurs.
That is really the backbone of the productive economy.
        The question is: this German economy, without which all of
Europe would not function, absolutely must be protected, and not
only be protected, because right now, it is already many, many
small firms which are in danger. There are other factors, like
the crazy [nuclear] energy exit of Mrs. Merkel, which has
increased the price of energy tremendously, but the German
economy is sort of weakened; but it is still the absolute crucial
factor because in Germany you have a lot of the industrial
potential which is needed not only for all of Europe, but in
order to get the whole question of Eurasian cooperation on a
sound ground, you need the German economy. The whole question of
the German-Russian cooperation, German-Chinese cooperation in the
development of the Eurasian Silk Road, is absolutely crucial.
        So, the question is the productivity. And what has happened
with the paradigm shift of all the successors of Herrhausen — I
don't want to name all of them — but all of them went into this
high-risk maximization of profit no matter what. Ackermann wanted
25% profit, preferably every month; and they went into these
completely crazy derivative operations, so that Deutsche Bank is
today {the} leading bank in terms of derivative exposure. With
$55 trillion in outstanding derivatives, that's with a GDP of the
German economy of $4 trillion a year; it's more than 10 times
more, even 12 times more the GDP of the German economy. So
Deutsche Bank long has stopped to be Deutsche Bank; it's now
operating from London, from New York. It has become one of the
most aggressive investment banks in the world. But if it goes
bankrupt, which it could at any moment; and that's why the chief
economist Mr. Folkerts-Landau put out every day since Sunday, he
put out an urgent call saying this recapitalization of the
European banks must occur, or else calamity will happen. If
Deutsche Bank would go under, the German economy — and with it,
all European economies — would collapse; and therefore, it's not
a question of choice. Obviously, to just put out more bail-out
packages per se, as the ECB [European Central Bank] and the EU
Commission have done in the past, is completely useless because
it makes the problem worse. Right now, it has reached the limit;
because after helicopter money, what else do you want to do?
        It is not a choice; it is a life and death question, not
only for Germany, but really for the entire trans-Atlantic
sector.

        OGDEN: Now, you have emphasized that the circumstances
around the assassination of Alfred Herrhausen continue to be a
crime that the truth has not yet been told fully about. It's
something that in the United States, we can relate to the
assassination of John F. Kennedy, in terms of the magnitude of
what this meant for the turning point in the policy of Germany at
that time. Obviously, it was in the context of the collapse of
the Berlin Wall in the beginning of November 1989, and just less
than one month later, at the very end of November, November 30th,
Herrhausen was assassinated in a very sophisticated attack on his
convoy as he was travelling from his home to the Deutsche Bank
headquarters. You said, Helga, in an article that you wrote in
1992 titled, "New Evidence Emerges in the Herrhausen
Assassination Case," you said, "The key to the motive behind
Herrhausen's assassination lies in 11 pages of a speech he was to
deliver in the United States only four days after he was
ambushed. The speech contained Herrhausen's vision of a new kind
of relationship between eastern and western Europe, which would
have fundamentally altered the world's future course." And then
you have a quotation from the speech, which I think is shocking
when we go back and read that today, in consideration of what Mr.
LaRouche and you were also both advocating for at that time. What
he said, or what he was to say, in that speech that was never
delivered, was the following:
        "There should be assurances that the new credit will flow
into specific, promising projects. It is therefore advisable that
the export guarantees which the German Federal government wants
to expand, be tied primarily to specific projects. In this
connection, at this year's annual meeting of the IMF and World
Bank in Washington, I proposed setting up a development bank on
the spot; i.e., in Warsaw. Its task would be to bundle the aid
and to channel it according to strict efficiency criteria. My
vision is that such an institution could function somewhat like
the Deutsche Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, which traces its
origins back to the Marshall Plan."
        So, when you compare that speech that Herrhausen was about
to give four days after he was assassinated, to what Lyn said in
his speech in West Germany at the Kempinski Hotel in 1988, when
he forecast the reunification of Germany and the collapse of the
Berlin Wall, he said:
        "Let us say that the United States and western Europe will
cooperate to accomplish the successful rebuilding of the economy
of Poland. There will be interference in the political system of
government, but only a kind of Marshall Plan aid to rebuild
Poland's industry and agriculture. If Germany agrees to this, let
a process aimed at the reunification of the economies of Germany
begin; and let this be the {puntum saliens} for western
cooperation in assisting in the rebuilding of the economy of
Poland."
        So, I think in the context of this speech that Herrhausen
was about to deliver in New York, his cooperation with Helmut
Kohl in terms of the reunification of Germany; and also the fact
that he was on record calling for the debt relief — at least a
partial debt relief, if not a full debt forgiveness of the Third
World countries. He had met with the President of Mexico in 1987;
he had surprised the world by delivering a speech at the World
Bank in 1987 calling for the forgiveness of the debt of the Third
World. All of these are right in parallel with what you and Lyn
were advocating for, going all the way back to 1975, back to the
Operation Juarez and also with this Marshall Plan Productive
Triangle proposal at the fall of the Berlin Wall. So, I think
that certainly puts his assassination in the correct context to
understand {qui bono}. Who benefitted from the fact that he was
killed?

        ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think I would to take it a little bit
back, because this is not just a question of a murder which
occurred 27 years ago. I want to recall what the period was,
because most people have forgotten that Germany was not always
unified; that the Berlin Wall came down. But this was one of the
most traumatic developments in the post-war period. You remember
that you had the peaceful demonstrations in the G.D.R. [East
Germany], the Monday demonstrations; the Warsaw Pact still
existed, and it was not clear what would happen. Would this lead
to another 1956 like in Hungary, or a new Prague Spring, where
Russian or Soviet tanks come? Then the wall came down, and Mr.
LaRouche had this idea about the German unification which you
referenced, which he presented in the Kempinski Hotel in 1988; so
we had a plan. We put out immediately this proposal for the
German unification, to have a mission; to have the Productive
Triangle to take the region from Paris, Berlin, Vienna — the
economic powerhouse of the world at that time — and develop
corridors into eastern Europe to transform Europe. We were the
only ones who had any idea, because we were the only ones who
even had an inkling that the Soviet Union would collapse; which
Mr. LaRouche had already pronosed in 1984. He said, if the Soviet
Union sticks to their military policy of the Ogarkov plan, which
was basically the idea to gain world dominance; then they will
collapse in five years. And I can assure you, not even the German
government had any idea that unification would be real; even if
that was the primary political goal of the entire post-war
period. Then the Wall came down; and in the official documents
which the German government published ten years later, they
admitted they had no contingency plan for the case of German
unification. Can you imagine that? That was the policy goal
number one to have German unification; and they had no plan. But
we did have a plan.
        So, then developments became extremely traumatic. On the
28th of November, Helmut Kohl did probably the most important
step in his entire political career by putting forward the
10-point program. This was not yet a program for German
unification, but it was a medium-term plan for the moving closer
together of the two German states; the West German and East
German states in a federation. But he did that without consulting
the Allies, and he did it without even consulting the liberal
coalition partner, Mr. Genscher; but it was a first baby step in
the direction of two German sovereignties. We know now that
Francois Mitterand put an ultimatum to Kohl and said, either you
give up the German D-mark and its being replaced by a European
common currency — what became the euro — or we will not agree
to German unification.
        Two days after Kohl had put out this 10-point program,
Herrhausen was assassinated. Everybody in the German elite at
that point — and we talked to many people at that time — said
this is not just an assassination, but since Herrhausen was the
closest advisor to Kohl, this was a message to Kohl. Don't stick
your head out; do not dare to pursue and assert sovereignty.
Because Germany in the entire post-war period was an occupied
country; and at that time the saying went, "The best-kept public
secret of NATO is that Germany is an occupied country and will
remain an occupied country." So by Kohl making this tiny baby
step in the direction of sovereignty with the 10-point program,
that obviously was the contributing factor why this assassination
occurred. As you said, if Herrhausen would have made this speech
in New York in the following week, you would have had a proposal
coming from the leading banker which was practically in principle
identical to what Mr. LaRouche and I proposed at the time;
namely, that the unified Germany should take Poland as an example
for the economic transformation of all the other countries of the
Comecon.
        Then naturally, everything went haywire. The following EU
summit in the beginning of December in Strasburg, everybody
started to attack Kohl; and in an interview later, he said these
were the darkest hours of his life. The circumstances were such
that despite the fact that Kohl knew that the euro would not
function, he said this is against German interests; and he knew
absolutely that you cannot have a European common currency
without political union. So, he knew it wouldn't function; he
knew it was against German interests. But he was forced by the
circumstances to accept it, because you had Bush, Sr. who had the
policy of containment of Germany in the EU. It is well
established that originally Bush was against the German
unification; and only because such more experienced political
advisors like Brent Scowcroft told him if you are now against
German unification, then the United States will lose all
influence in Europe, so we have to basically agree to it. But
let's make sure Germany gets contained. And that is what led to
the infamous EU Maastricht agreement, which was the beginning of
turning the EU into an imperial adjunct of the Anglo-American
system. Helmut Schmidt, the late German Chancellor, in an equally
surprising interview recently before he died, said the whole
Ukraine crisis, which is right now what could be the trigger
point for a war with Russia; really started at the Maastricht
agreement, because this is when the EU decided to do exactly what
NATO has been doing ever since. Namely, to go for an eastward
expansion and move the EU and NATO just up to the borders of
Russia.
        So, the decision which was made in these really traumatic
weeks and month, set the course; and if Herrhausen had been alive
and advised Kohl, these conceptions could have been implemented
and history would not be at the point where we are now. So, the
Herrhausen assassination not only meant the lost chance of 1989;
everybody agreed at that time this was an historic chance that
happens at best once a century. I called the star hour of
Germany, because if you had the unified Germany developing a
peace plan for the 21st Century together with Russia, the whole
world would look completely different. But as I said, all the
successes of Herrhausen went in the direction of high-risk
speculation, globalization, money for money's sake, the rich
become richer, the poor become poorer, and all the problems we
have today. All the problems we have today are not just caused by
this one assassination, but the assassination is symptomatic for
the paradigm shift to the worse.
        It's a murder which is unpunished; the so-called murderers,
the third generation of the Red Army Faction probably never
existed. There was even in the first German TV channel a
documentary which said there has never been any evidence that any
of the persons who supposedly were the murderers, ever really
existed. So, the {qui bono} — well, it's the financial oligarchy
which profited; and it really has the smell of something quite
different — of an intelligence operation — as many of the
leading figures who did not fit the Yalta norm were assassinated.
But with the Herrhausen case, as you said, for Germany this is as
important in terms of paradigm shift as the assassination was of
John F. Kennedy.
        And right now, when the entire banking system is absolutely
at the verge of collapse, it is the last moment to do justice and
really go back to the policies of Herrhausen. Even so, almost
nobody knows anymore what real industrial banking is, because
they are so money-greedy and absolutely suckers for the latest
profit, that it would be a real uphill battle. But that battle
must be fought if Europe and Germany and the rest of the
trans-Atlantic sector are to survive; and probably beyond that,
much of the world.

        BEN DENISTON: Well, I think just looking at this transition
period, I know that you and Mr. LaRouche had both made a warning
that I think is very appropriate just to state in this context.
That around the fall of the Wall, this lost chance of '89, you
had explicitly said to the world, if we attempt this bankrupt,
collapsing Soviet system with an equally bankrupt trans-Atlantic
system, you're going to head to a collapse that's worse than
what's happening now. I'm paraphrasing you; you might know more
exactly how you stated it. But it seems like that really bridges
this whole process from '89 to what we're seeing today as the
culmination, the expression of what you warned of at that time. I
think a challenge we have is to get across the importance of
acting now on the level needed to make this shift we're talking
about. What Lyn has laid out with this reform program for
Deutsche Bank is the beginning out of this new paradigm. I think
it's important to see it as an intervention in this whole
collapse process you both had warned about and forecast this
would be the consequence of failing to act then. That should give
us greater impetus to know how important it is to act now while
we still have the chance.

        ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I remember that at that time, you had the
problem of the Bush administration, Margaret Thatcher, Francois
Mitterand, who absolutely really ganged up to prevent Germany
from assuming any such role of having an independent policy;
especially in respect to Russia. They were always saying, "Oh,
the West has won over communism." The only other person outside
of us who totally contradicted them was John Paul II, the Pope of
the time; who said, the people who now are triumphant and say the
market economy is winning over communism, are absolutely wrong.
If you don't believe it, look at the condition of the Third
World, to see that the West has not won; because the moral
condition of the developing countries speaks to the contrary.
        Naturally, that is all the more true today; because if you
look at the inhuman treatment of the refugee crisis, for example.
They are still coming by the hundreds, every week by the
thousands, over the Mediterranean; drowning. Even more are
starving and dying of thirst and lack of water trying to cross
the Sahara. That is also the condition of this system. The system
is what causes all of this; and therefore, it is absolutely high
time that we come to the question of how can we — as a human
civilization — give us an economy and a financial system which
is adequate to human beings? And I think it's very important that
we go back to the question of what is actually the creation of
wealth? Is it what Margaret Thatcher said, is it the ability to
buy cheap and sell expensive? The famous speaking of Margaret
Thatcher being the daughter of a grocery trader, or is it the
possession of raw materials? Or is it the control of the
financial system? No; it's not. The only source of wealth is the
creative power of the human being; and when that creative power
is applied, then you have scientific and technological progress.
That is then leading to an increase of productivity in the
economy.
        That has been the battle between the American Revolution and
the British Empire; between the free-traders and people like
Alexander Hamilton who insisted that it is the creative power of
labor which causes the well-being and the living standard and the
longevity of the people. That was the philosophy of Friedrich
List, the great German economist, who is now the most famous
economist in China, by the way. That was the policy of Friedrich
List and Henry C. Carey, the advisor of Lincoln; who both advised
and through such people as Wilhelm von Kardoff, who was the
head of the German industrial association in the time of
Bismarck. Who changed the mind of Bismarck from being a
free-trader into being an absolute believer in a protectionist
system and the idea that you have to further the productivity and
creativity of your own population as the only source of wealth.
        So, there is a lot of history involved; and what we are
really talking about is taking Germany back to the ideas of
Bismarck, of Friedrich List, of Henry C. Carey, of Dr. William
Lautenbach, who in 1932 presented a plan to the Friedrich List
Organization in Germany which was identical with what Roosevelt
had proposed with the New Deal and the Reconstruction Finance
Corporation, Glass-Steagall, Bretton Woods. That was all in these
proposals by Dr. William Lautenbach, who as history knows,
unfortunately were not taken up; but instead you had Hjalmar
Schacht, you had Hitler, you had before Mussolini, Franco,
Petain, and you are in bed with fascists.
        The question today is, can we, in time, go back to those
conceptions which have proven to be productive and valuable for
the economy; or are we plunging into a catastrophe of new fascism
and new wars? So, on this question of Deutsche Bank, most people
are so in the day-to-day making money, profits, and balance
sheets, and having dollar notes coming out of their eyes, that
they have forgotten that there is something much more important
about human life. And that is the happiness of people; the common
good of people.
        The reason why in this call to honor the memory of
Herrhausen, using this crisis of Deutsche Bank now as a real
paradigm shift to go back to these policies; why I mentioned the
great poem by Friedrich Schiller "The Cranes of Ibykus." And by
the way, I would really urge our audience right now, who probably
are not familiar with that poem, we have at translation which we
can put on the website so it's easily accessible. But this poem
is so powerful; it's written by Friedrich Schiller. It discusses
not only the murder of the beloved poet Ibykus, but more
importantly even, it discusses the power of nemesis; the power of
natural law, which is a power which works in reality. It's not
that God punishes every little thief who steals something
immediately by chopping off his hand; but it is a power which
revenges great injustice. And this poem discusses this in a very
beautiful way by resorting to the Greek nemesis, this idea which
was used in great Greek dramas to demonstrate this principle of
the Erinyes. That there is this power that revenges this murder
and other injustices; that there is a higher power than the
arbitrariness of people's will. The poem is very, very powerful.
As a matter of fact, I would even urge you to learn German, just
to read and understand that poem; because it teaches something
about history. I think right now the Erinyes, those goddesses of
revenge which Friedrich Schiller has in this poem marching in the
amphitheater — in circles — they are bringing forward this
higher power by the prism of the poem. It's a very, very powerful
way of reminding people that there is a higher power than what
people think when they read the daily newspaper. So, please make
the effort. Read it; in English if you have to, but read it in
German because there is another dimension to history than what
people think. And only if you bring this forward this inner
strength, this inner power which people have almost lost in the
trans-Atlantic sector because people small. They feel impotent,
they feel helpless. But what we have to unleash is exactly this
inner strength so that people really become truly human again,
and take the history and the destiny in their own hands. And
that's exactly what the message is of Friedrich Schiller; who
always thought that man is greater than his destiny by resorting
to these kinds of inner powers and higher authorities than the
laws of money.

        OGDEN: Well, you cited the Ibykus principle in your keynote
speech to the conference that you hosted three weeks ago in
Berlin; this extraordinary conference. But I thought in that
context also, you made it very clear that history is working
according to a higher law. That conference came just days after
the Brexit vote which shocked everybody and threw all of Europe
in disarray. But you said, this is the Erinyes principle in
action. Tony Blair lied to get us into the Iraq War. The Iraq War
set off a series of regime-change operations in the Middle East
that have completely destabilized this region. That has, in turn,
created this refugee crisis; and now you have the Brexit and the
disintegration of Europe as the Erinyes beginning their dreadful
dance, as you said in this statement once again.
        I think that's also highly relevant in the context of the
anticipated news today, where people have read in the press that
the 28 pages, which we have fought for years to force the release
of these 28 pages; the reports are in the press that these very
well could be released today. In what form, we don't know; how
heavily redacted, we don't know. But again, this is the Erinyes
acting, and it's our responsibility to understand this as a
principle of history; and to continue to understand that the
moral arc of the Universe may be long, but it does bend toward
justice. I think Martin Luther King also understood what
Friedrich Schiller was getting at in this poem, as you said.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, I think that having said that, I want to
come back to the absolute need to find a handle; because right
now the problem is, nobody has a handle on how to intervene with
this financial crisis. And if the proposal of Mr. LaRouche is
taken seriously, you have a way of dealing with the consequences
of avoiding the dangers of an uncontrollable collapse. You have
to untangle this; you have to shut down this derivative system;
you have to shut down the bubble. You have to do it in an orderly
manner, because there's no point to just say let's just close it
down or tax it or whatever. You have to find a skilled level of
how you take management of a bank — in this case, the Deutsche
Bank; you have to put in a supervisory management commission
which has to evaluate the validity and integrity of the
outstanding obligations. Many of the derivatives have much more
than two parties; they have two, three, four, and more parties.
You have to untangle that. You probably have to write down the
nominal value of these outstanding obligations. That way, you can
put a new basis, a new business plan for the bank which is in
cohesion with the idea of credit policy in general. But you have
to start to do that somewhere. The Herrhausen history and
tradition is exactly what makes it very practical. We are not
proposing something completely outlandish, utopian; this was the
policy of Deutsche Bank at one point.
        So therefore, I want to bring it back to this point; and I
would really urge all the people who are watching to make sure
this proposal is being distributed to all institutions which have
anything to do with the economy, with industry, with people in
political positions who should take care of the common good. And
make sure that we get a serious debate. I know that in both
election platforms of the Democratic Party and the Republican
Party, you have the Glass-Steagall law in the platform. Now that
is very good; we will have the conventions in the next weeks.
This is not necessarily the stated position of the candidates;
but it is in the platform. So there is hope that if we mobilize
in the right way, this change can occur before it's too late. But
it's really one second, or maybe a nanosecond before midnight; so
it's not a time for complacency. It's a time for action.
Therefore, I would really urge you to join us; because we have a
beautiful future ahead of us if we do the right thing. If we miss
this moment, it can be the end of civilization; because the war
danger is very real, not only in respect to NATO against Russia,
but also the escalation around the South China Sea. We are not in
a political void, but we are in one of these moments in history
where a lot depends on the individual courage and the individual
action. Therefore, I really ask you to join us to bring history
in a better direction.

        DENISTON: Absolutely.

        OGDEN: Thank you very much for joining us today, Helga. This
was a special broadcast, and I think a very important and timely
one for the American audience. We're going to make the statement
that you wrote on this subject — which I read from in the
beginning of the broadcast — available in the video description
to this video and also on the website. This is absolutely one of
the key pieces of material that people can use to, as you said,
to do outreach to all the key layers in the United States and
elsewhere to put this proposal very seriously on the table. We
will also make the English translation of "The Cranes of Ibykus"
available to our audience as well.
        Would you like to make any final remarks before we close, or
is that a good place to conclude our broadcast?

        ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I just would like to really express my hope
that enough people recognize that we have now a point where
history will be either totally a catastrophe — and most people
are already thinking that; the people who are not completely dead
because of drugs or other problems, they know that we are in a
really unprecedented civilizational crisis. Even worse than any
of the prewar situations of the 20th Century. Just yesterday, one
of the key advisors of the Kremlin said, all the signs are of a
prewar period; and that's true. We are in a prewar period; and
unless we remove the real reason for the dynamic for war, which
is the danger of a collapse of the trans-Atlantic financial
system. Unless we remedy that, I'm almost certain that war will
happen; and if that war would happen, it's the logic of war that
in that case all weapons available will be used. In the case of
thermonuclear weapons, that would be it; there probably would not
anybody to even record what happened, because it would be the
elimination of civilization. And therefore, the remedy of the
financial crisis is not just a banking technical affair; it
really is the question of putting society back on a course where
we all can survive as a human civilization. In a certain sense,
it's what {The Federalist Papers} discussed. Can we give
ourselves a political order which is suitable for man to organize
his own affairs and govern according to the common good? So, it's
a much larger issue; and I'm very optimistic that it can be done.
But it requires an extraordinary effort, and it requires all of
you.

        OGDEN: OK, thank you very much for joining us today, Helga.
Hopefully, we can do this at some point again in the future.
Thank you all for tuning in. Please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com; and take this discussion and take what Mrs.
LaRouche just had to say very much to heart. So, thank you very
much and good night.

15. juli 2016 – Her til morgen gentog Deutsche Banks cheføkonom David Folkerts-Landau i et interview på CNBC-TV sit krav om en bailout/genkapitalisering for de europæiske banker og sagde, at centralbankens politik er en fiasko og ødelægger kanalen for kredit til SME-sektoren (Små og Mellemstore Entrepriser). Efter en briefing om dette bemærkede LaRouche, at spørgsmålet er meget fornuftigt, men, af de involverede elementer er nogle kendte, mens andre repræsenterer tvivlsspørgsmål. Han pointerede betydningen af Alfred Herrhausen, formand for Deutsche Bank fra 1971 og frem til november 1989, hvor han blev myrdet.

LaRouche sagde, at kapitalisering som sådan ikke er et effektivt instrument for situationen. De tvivlsomme værdier bør annulleres. Det er den eneste måde at komme ud af dette rod på. Det er ligesom at få en syg person til at blive endnu mere syg, og så kalde ham én, der ’med succes er blevet mere syg!’

Det er selve fremgangsmåden, der er problemet. Deduktiv tænkning er altid problemet. Vi står med et svindelnummer, et system, der er et falsum. Så vi må tilbage til ’Gå’ og starte om igen. Man kan ikke forsøge at ’fikse det’. Det er ikke et ’fiks det’-problem.

Overvej det følgende: Hvad er det økonomiske system? Man må følge det, Herrhausen var i færd med at etablere. Han blev myrdet for at annullere denne indsats, der skabte den ødelæggelse, der fulgte. Det var formålet med mordet. Enhver idé om at »forhandle« et skifte vil være et falsum.

Der må komme en annullering af såkaldt rigdom, der ikke er berettiget til at bære dette navn. Se så på, hvad der er tilbage. Find ud af, hvad der skal gøres. Der må være et selvudviklende program for produktivitet. IKKE en proces, hvor man tinger! Man skal ind på en anden kurs. Kursen kan ikke være forhandling. Man må udvirke produktive evner, og udvirke øget produktivitet på permanent basis.

Graden af produktivitet er den primære skabelse. Man kan ikke »tilføje« noget ved at tilføje det. Man skal bygge noget nyt, til en start. Annuller alle former for forhandling. Man skal acceptere Herrhausens program. Accepter hans program, ikke noget i den retning. Motivet for at myrde ham, øjensynligt af de franske og britiske netværk – var at standse dette system. Vores fremgangsmåde må være den, ikke at tale om »forhandlinger gennem tilpasninger«. Vi må eliminere det nuværende koncept om et finanssystem, ikke »udbedre« finanssystemet. Vi ønsker ikke et »blødere system«. Glem alt om penge, og tænk i stedet på økonomi, hvad det gør for økonomi.

Det, som det britiske/franske system gjorde ved at myrde Herrhausen, var for at forhindre en flugt fra svindelen. Man kan ikke »fikse op« noget, der var et falsum fra begyndelsen. I dag må vi komme op med et godt instrument. Afslutte det, der var forkert dengang, og nu.

Det er simpelt: 1) Herrhausen blev myrdet; og 2) briterne og andre systemer var involveret. De gjorde det for at nedlægge alt, der var forbundet med ham. Gerningsmændene havde til hensigt at forhindre Herrhausen, eller noget som ham, i nogensinde at tage styringen. Se lige på, hvem der stadig er der – George Soros, et førende problem, og britisk.  

Foto: Alfred Herrhausen (1930 – 1989), tysk bankier og formand for Deutsche Bank. Var fra 1971 og frem til sin død medlem af bankens bestyrelse. Rådgiver til kansler Helmut Kohl. Ingen er nogen sinde blevet straffet for hans mord.

14. juli, 2016 (Leder) – For 48 timer siden ændrede vi alting i hele vores fremgangsmåde på globalt plan – men mange af jer gik glip af det. Tænk! Mind jer selv om, at det ikke nytter at klage over den overhængende fare for et panik-kollaps af verdens økonomiske system ud i et dødbringende kaos. Og at advarsler mod en termonuklear tilintetgørelseskrig i sig selv ikke vil forhindre det i at ske alligevel – lige så lidt, som de blotte advarsler nogen sinde har forhindret krig i fortiden!

Det, Lyndon LaRouche netop har gjort, er at pege på det afgørende, unikke led i kæden, der, hvis I griber fat i DET, og trækker i DET, lige akkurat vil være i stand til at trække Europa væk fra klippekanten – og som, i absolut sidste øjeblik, kan afbøje denne historiske, tankeløse, automat-lignende march ud over afgrunden.

Skub dette til side for hellere at overveje det i morgen, og I er færdige! Der vil ikke være noget i morgen – hverken for jer, eller for nogen andre.

Alle disse overvejelser er forklaret i Helga Zepp-LaRouches udtalelse d. 12. juli, »Deutsche Bank må reddes, for verdensfredens skyld!« 

Men der er mange mennesker, der ikke taget denne udtalelse til hjerte og indledt den omgående kovending, der er påkrævet.

Zepp-LaRouches udtalelse må studeres og genlæses i detaljer. Men for at rekapitulere nogle punkter for vores formål her: Frankrig, Italien og andre europæiske stater er totalt bankerot; Europa har inden for få dage kurs mod en nedsmeltning, som, under de nuværende omstændigheder, vil føre til krig. Tysklands derivat-tyngede Deutsche Bank kan meget vel blive udløseren af en sådan nedsmeltning, der omfatter hele Europa. Men det er paradoksalt nok Tyskland, der stadig har den potentielle økonomiske produktivitet, der kunne føre Europa tilbage mod sikkerhed. Og, hvis Deutsche Bank blev reddet fra kollaps, og man omgående vendte om og slog ind på den politik, som Alfred Herrhausens kurs stod for, ville DB blive hovedkraften i organiseringen af et sådant tysk opsving.  

Lyndon LaRouche har krævet, at regeringen skal forøge Deutsche Banks kapitalgrundlag, der skal ledsages af en omgående ændring af bankens politik tilbage til den politik i Hamiltons tradition, som Alfred Herrhausen førte. Samtidigt må der udpeges en ledelseskomité, der kan finkæmme og reorganisere bankens aktiver.

I løbet af de seneste to dage er mange af vore venner eksploderet i raseri over dette livreddende forslag fra Lyndon og Helga LaRouche og har spruttet, at de store banker er vore fjender, og at vi er modstandere af bailouts. Men, som Diane Sare fra LaRouche PAC Komité for Politisk Strategi påpegede i går, så er det letkøbt blot at aflire en liste af korrekte »holdninger«. Men hvad får man ud af det, andet end et pas til et Trotskistisk Paradis? Langt sværere [er det] at forstå og gribe den ene, sidste chance, som historien tilbyder, og som vi nu må gøre.

De, der myrdede Herrhausen, skabte en fortsat grusomhed, der ikke er sluttet den dag i dag; de, der gjorde det, må fjernes, ellers er der ingen løsning. Før eller siden vil noget, man har undladt at gøre, komme tilbage og ramme én.

Foto: USA's første finansminister Alexander Hamilton foran USA's Finansministerium i Washington, D.C.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche vil være hovedgæst

ved LaRouchePAC Internationale Fredags-webcast.

Vi udlægger video samt et engelsk udskrift lørdag morgen.

Bliv på kanalen!

14. juli 2016 (Leder) – Selv, mens tåber som Angela Merkel og Wolfgang Schäuble holder fast ved, at både de italienske banker og Tysklands største bank, Deutsche Bank, ikke er i alvorlige vanskeligheder, udvider cheføkonom for Deutsche Bank, David Folkerts-Landau, sin tidligere advarsel om, at hele EU-banksystemet er på randen af kollaps. Han lagde i vid udstrækning skylden for dette på den Europæiske Centralbanks præsident Mario Draghis Quantitative Easing, QE (kvantitative lempelser; ’pengetrykning’) – med ubegrænset opkøb af skrantende obligationer – og med nedsættelsen af rentesatserne til negative værdier. »Europa er alvorligt syg«, sagde han i et interview med Die Welt og tilføjede, at en hurtig kur krævedes og i særdeleshed forholdsregler, der atter giver gnisten til økonomisk vækst, for uden vækst kan bankkrisen ikke overvindes.

Folkerts-Landau sagde, at levestandarden i hele Europa er alvorligt truet, og at dette er en væsentlig årsag til den hastige vækst af anti-EU-følelser i hele Europa.

Lyndon LaRouche har direkte interveneret i denne krise og påpeget den faktiske årsag til denne krise, der udspiller sig – nemlig, det politiske mord i 1989 på formand for Deutsche Bank, Alfred Herrhausen, som LaRouche identificerede som den sidste tyske bankier, der forstod bankernes nødvendige rolle i skabelse af kredit til realøkonomien. Siden dette mord er Deutsche Bank, og tysk bankvirksomhed generelt, blevet overtaget af briterne, både rent bogstaveligt i den betydning, at briterne nu ejer Deutsche Bank, og også mht. at skifte over til spekulation snarere end produktiv investering.

Se: Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Deutsche Bank må reddes for verdensfredens skyld!

De fleste transatlantiske nationers økonomier er implicit bankerot, sagde LaRouche i en diskussion onsdag med sin Komite for Politisk Strategi. Men den tyske økonomi har i sig midlerne til at redde de europæiske økonomier, og videre endnu, pga. den historiske tyske helligelse til investeringer i videnskab og teknologi. Skulle Deutsche Bank gå hen og kollapse, advarede han, ville resultatet blive ikke alene et økonomisk sammenbrud i hele Europa, men også krig – global krig.

Alt imens en genkapitalisering af Deutsche Bank derfor haster, så må det ikke blive et spørgsmål om penge per se, i sig selv, men derimod en reorganisering af bankens enorme eksponering til stort set værdiløse derivater og dårlige lån, samt en tilbagevenden til produktiv investering sådan, som Herrhausen havde tænkt. Den tyske økonomi kunne dernæst levere den nødvendige margin for at bringe den europæiske økonomi tilbage til skabelsen af reel profit.

Krigsfaren kunne ikke være mere åbenlys end den er i dag. En af Putins toprådgivere, Sergei Karaganov, sagde til Der Spiegel i dag, at den udstrakte NATO-deployering af styrker på den russiske grænse, som blev yderligere implementeret ved NATO-topmødet i Warszawa i sidste uge, er en militær provokation, og at, »hvis NATO indleder en overskridelse – imod en atommagt som os selv – vil de blive straffet.«

På samme tid responderede Kinas ambassadør til USA, Cui Tiankai, i tirsdags til de multiple militære trusler mod Kina siden Obamas »omdrejningspunkt Asien« og den amerikanske intervention imod Kinas suverænitet i det Sydkinesiske Hav og sagde: »At sende disse hangarskibe og bombefly er en manifestation af loven, ’magt er ret’. Kina må derfor gøre modstand mod det og afvise det. Dette sker i den sande ånd af international lov. Og hvis det kan ske for os, kan det ske for hvem som helst.«

Der findes ingen delvise forholdsregler, der kan håndtere den eksistentielle økonomiske og strategiske krise, der nu konfronterer menneskeheden. Der må komme en kreativ løsning, baseret på nye principper, og som hviler på den forståelse, at ethvert menneske har et kreativt potentiale til at bidrage til menneskehedens fælles mål. En afslutning af geopolitik, og af den dyriske filosofi, der lyder »alle mod alle«, mellem individer og mellem nationer, haster, er mulig og nødvendig.  

Foto: Den Europæiske Centrabanks bygning.  

Erklæring fra Helga Zepp-LaRouche, forkvinde for det tyske parti Borgerrettighedsbevægelsen Solidaritet (BüSo), udstedt 12. juli, 2016:

Den overhængende trussel om Deutsche Banks konkurs er bestemt ikke den eneste udløser for en ny systemisk krise i det transatlantiske banksystem, en krise, der ville blive mange gange mere dødbringende end krisen i 2008, men som samtidig tilbyder en enestående mulighed for at forhindre et kollaps ud i kaos.

Bag det SOS-nødsignal, som Deutsche Banks cheføkonom David Folkerts-Landau har udsendt for at få et EU-program på €150 milliarder til at genkapitalisere bankerne, lurer der en fare, der åbent diskuteres i de internationale finansielle medier, for, at hele det europæiske banksystem de facto er insolvent og sidder på et bjerg af dårlige lån til mindst €2 billioner. Deutsche Bank er den internationale bank, der, med udestående derivatkontrakter for i alt €55 billioner og en gearingsfaktor på 40:1, overgår selv Lehman Brothers på tidspunktet for denne banks kollaps og derfor repræsenterer systemets farligste akilleshæl. Halvdelen af DB’s balance på regnskabet, som er styrtdykket 48 % over de seneste 12 måneder og er nede på kun 8 % af sin topværdi, udgøres af niveau 3-derivater, dvs. derivater til et beløb af ca. €800 milliarder uden en egentlig markedsvurdering.

Det kom sikkert som en overraskelse for mange, at Lyndon LaRouche, på grund af de systemiske implikationer af Deutsche Banks truende konkurs, i dag krævede, at banken blev reddet gennem en engangsforøgelse af sit kapitalgrundlag. Hverken den tyske regering med sit BNP på €4 billioner, eller EU, med sit BNP på €18 billioner, ville være i stand til at kontrollere dominoeffekten af en ikke-reglementeret konkurs. 

Denne engangskapitalindsprøjtning, forklarede LaRouche, er alene et nødtiltag, der må følges op af en omgående ny-orientering af banken, tilbage til dens tradition, der var fremherskende indtil 1989 under Alfred Herrhausens lederskab. For virkeligt at overvåge en sådan operation, må en ledelseskomité etableres, der kan verificere forpligtelsernes legitimitet og deres implikationer, og som kan afslutte dette arbejde inden for en given tidsramme. Komitéen bør også udfærdige en ny forretningsplan, baseret på Herrhausens filosofi for bankdrift, og som udelukkende er orienteret mod den tyske realøkonomis interesser.

Alfred Herrhausen var Tysklands sidste, egentlig kreative, moralske industrielle bankmand. Han forsvarede blandt andet eftergivelse af udviklingslandenes ubetalelige gæld, så vel som også langfristet kredit-finansiering af veldefinerede udviklingsprojekter. I december 1989 havde han til hensigt i New York at præsentere en polsk industrialiseringsplan, der var i overensstemmelse med de kriterier, som Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW) fastsatte for genopbygningen af Tyskland efter 1945, og som ville have tilbudt et fuldstændig anderledes perspektiv end Jeffrey Sachs’ såkaldte »reformpolitik« eller chokterapi.

Se LaRouchePAC Feature-videos:

‘The Lost Chance of 1989’ (1989 – Den forspildte chance) og 'The Lost Chance of 1989: The Fall of the Wall' 

Herrhausen blev dræbt d. 30. november 1989 af den »Tredje Generation af Røde Armé Fraktion«, hvis faktiske eksistens den dag i dag stadig ikke er bevist. Det skete kun to dage efter, at kansler Helmut Kohl, der regnede Herrhausen blandt sine nærmeste rådgivere, havde præsenteret sit 10-punktsprogram for gradvist at overvinde Tysklands deling [mellem øst og vest]. Terrorangrebets Cui bono (hvem har gavn af det, -red.) er fortsat et af de mest skæbnesvangre spørgsmål i Tysklands moderne historie, og et spørgsmål, som det er påtrængende at få afklaret.[1]

Kendsgerningen er, at Herrhausens efterfølgere indførte et fundamentalt paradigmeskifte i bankens filosofi, hvilket bragte Deutsche Bank ind i den vilde verden af profitmaksimering for enhver pris, og også ind i utallige ikke-strafbare og strafbare juridiske forviklinger, som de ansvarlige hidtil ikke er stillet til ansvar for, hovedsageligt på grund af præmisserne for de banker, der er ’for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned’.

Transformeringen af Deutsche Bank til en global investeringsbank med den højeste eksponering til derivater, kombineret med den samtidige kredit-flaskehals for små og mellemstore tyske virksomheder, er symptomatisk for den dårskab, der har ført til den nuværende katastrofe.

Vi må nu handle med beslutsomhed, men ikke på den måde, som Folkerts-Landau foreslår, det vil sige, ikke med mere af den samme medicin, der blot ville slå patienten ihjel. Selv om Deutsche Bank i løbet af de senere år hovedsagligt har opereret ud fra London og New York, så er DB for vigtig for den tyske økonomi, og derfor for Tyskland, og ultimativt for hele Europas skæbne. Bankens reorganisering i Alfred Herrhausens ånd er ikke alene nøglen til at overvinde bankkrisen, men også til at afværge den akutte fare for krig.

Mordet på Herrhausen er forblevet ustraffet. Der findes imidlertid »den frygtede magt, der dømmer det, der er skjult for øjet«, hvilket er emnet for Friedrich Schillers digt »Ibykus’ Traner«. Erinyerne er begyndt på deres frygtelige dans.[2]

Det påhviler nu alle, der, udover familien, har lidt under det politiske mord på Herrhausen, repræsentanter for den tyske »Mittelstand«, den tyske økonomi og de institutionelle repræsentanter for den tyske befolkning at ære hans eftermæle og gribe den enorme mulighed, der nu gives, for at redde Tyskland.

12. juli 2016 (Leder) – Europa konfronteres med tre mekanismer, der kunne udløse en nedsmeltning, et sammenbrud, af det transatlantiske finansielle system, og enhver af disse mekanismer kunne detonere, hvad øjeblik, det skal være. Og så er de endda på ingen måde de eneste kilder til det transatlantiske, London/Wall Street-ledede systems kollaps.

For det første er de italienske banker på randen af kollaps. Man har offentligt indrømmet, at de førende italienske banker har for 360 milliarder euro gæld, der er i betalingsstandsning – og uofficielle estimater sætter tallet langt højere. Men, som den italienske premierminister Renzi korrekt har advaret om, så er krisen omkring Deutsche Bank »hundrede gange værre«. DB sidder med aktuelle derivater til $72,8 billioner og har et bjerg af insolvent gæld. I søndags krævede DB’s cheføkonom David Folkerts-Landau en omgående haste-bailout af de europæiske storbanker til 150 milliarder euro – med start i hans egen DB. Iflg. EU-love, der trådte i kraft 1. januar, skal banker først gennemgå en bailin (ekspropriering af visse typer indeståender), før de kan få en bailout (statslig redningspakke), og dette udgør i sig selv en sikker udløser af en systemisk nedsmeltning.

Fra mandag at regne konfronteredes Londons store ejendomsfonde med et stormløb fra investorerne, i kølvandet på Brexit-afstemningen, og udsigten til et umiddelbart forestående sammenbrud af hele den britiske ejendomsboble er meget virkelig. I en klar panik over den accelererende disintegration vred det regerende Konservative Parti armen om på den ene af de to tilbageværende kandidater til partiformandsposten for at trække sig som kandidat, således, at Theresa May kunne blive installeret som premierminister på onsdag – for at have en regering på plads til at håndtere den fremstormende krise.

Dette umiddelbart forestående, systemiske krak kan ikke adskilles fra den voksende fare for atomkrig i kølvandet på NATO-topmødet for statsoverhoveder i Warszawa i sidste uge.

Det er præcist pga. denne kombinerede fare for et kollaps ud i kaos og en potentiel udslettelseskrig, at Lyndon LaRouche har krævet en engangs-bailout af de tyske banker for at standse blødningen længe nok til at lancere et reelt skifte i politikken, baseret på hans egne Fire Love for, hvordan verdensøkonomien skal genoplives gennem kreditter, der er rettet mod at forbedre arbejdskraftens produktive evne, gennem investering i infrastruktur, fremskudt, videnskabelig grænseforskning, der anføres af en massiv udvidelse af rumprogrammet, og lignede tiltag. LaRouche advarede kolleger den 10. juli om, at, hvis Tyskland tager et styrtdyk ud i kaos, er krig umiddelbart overhængende. Tyskland sidder inde med nøglen til en ny europæisk politik over for Rusland, baseret på strategisk og økonomisk samarbejde, og hvis dette forhold spoleres, vil konsekvenserne blive katastrofale.

Tiden er inde til at se den nuværende krises virkelighed i øjnene, krævede LaRouche, og til at handle på basis af denne nødsituation, som krisen kræver det.

Læs: LaRouches Fire Love til at redde USA (og verden …) 

SUPPLERENDE MATERIALE:

Italienske banker og Deutsche Bank fører an i den transatlantiske sektors krak

11. juli 2016 – Pressen i den transatlantiske verden er fuld af dækning af krisen i Deutsche Bank og de italienske banker, som understreger betydningen af Lyndon LaRouches intervention, hvor han kræver en engang-bailout af Tyskland for at forhindre kaos i Europa, men baseret på behovet for gennemgribende ændringer i banksystemet for at forcere kreditter ind i realøkonomien og lukke derivativerne og andre spekulative bobler ned.

Russia Today har David Folkerts-Landaus interview med Welt am Sonntag, hvor cheføkonomen for Deutsche Bank (DB) krævede en haste-bailout til 150 milliarder euro, og det citerer også udtalelser fra Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, formand for Societe Generale, hvor han advarer om, at den italienske bankkrise kan brede sig til hele EU. DB-aktier er faldet 48 % i løbet af de seneste 12 måneder, Societe Generales aktier er faldet 63 %, og Bloombergs Europa-index over 500 banker og finansielle serviceselskaber er faldet med 33 %, det laveste i syv år. En tidslinje i Bloomberg-artiklen har titlen, »Deutsche Banks episke kollaps«, og som gør det ganske klart, at det europæiske banksystem nu står på randen af et umiddelbart krak.

RT har også en nylig, underskrevet kronik af George Soros, hvor han erklærer, at EU’s kollaps er blevet »næsten uundgåeligt« siden Brexit-valget.

»Det katastrofale scenario, som mange har frygtet, har materialiseret sig og gør en disintegration af EU praktisk talt uigenkaldelig«, skrev han for Project Syndicate (som han financierer kraftigt). Han tilføjede, at det finansielle kollaps i UK i kølvandet på Brexit var det værste i tre årtier. »Det europæiske projekts blotte overlevelse er indsatsen i forhandlingerne om, hvordan Brexit kommer til at forløbe.« RT’s dækninger bemærker, at Marine LePen mødtes med den franske præsident Hollande og pressede på for at få en folkeafstemning om en «Frexit«, men blev afvist.

Reuters har også en omfattende dækning af Folkerts-Landau-interviewet. Cityam, en online finans-publikation, bemærkede, at italienske banker sidder med insolvent gæld til 360 milliarder euro, og aktier i samtlige italienske storbanker og andre banker i Middelhavsområdet – Unicredit, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, Banco Popolare og Intesa San Paolo (Portugal) – er faldet med 25 % siden Brexit-valget. Michael Hewson fra CMC Markets UK citeredes for at sige, »hvis Italien går ned, vil det tage resten af Europa med sig«.

The Street havde følgende hovedoverskrift tilbage den 5. juli, »Vil Deutsche Bank initiere den næste finansielle krise? Aktier kunne være på vej til nul«. Artiklen nævnte paralleller til Lehman Brothers og viste, at DB er i en langt værre tilstand end Lehman var mod slutningen. IMF advarede om, at det største overløb fra DB vil ramme Frankrig, UK og USA, der »har den største grad af overløb fra omverden, målt ud fra den gennemsnitlige procent af kapitaltab hos andre banksystemer pga. chokket i banksektoren i oprindelseslandet«. En grafisk fremstilling i Wall Street Journal, der nævnes af The Street, viser bank-til-bank-forbindelserne i Deutsche Bank. DB er belånt med over 40:1, langt værre end Lehmans 31:1 på tidpunktet for dens kollaps; og DB’s aktuelle portefølje af derivater udgør $72,8 billioner, hvilket er 13 % af alle globale, udestående derivater. »Hvis domino-effekten opstår, vil Tyskland, med sit BNP på $4 billioner eller EU med sit BNP på $18 billioner ikke være i en position, hvor de kan få kontrol over det.«

New Europe online har hovedoverskriften, »Hvorfor Deutsche Bank er den farligste bank i verden«, og spørger, hvad prisen ville være for den tyske regerings bailout, versus konsekvenserne af at lade det nedsmelte med systemiske implikationer.

Bloomberg har også advaret om, at Londons ejedomsmarked er ved at krakke, og dette er endnu en konsekvens af Brexit. Standard Life Investments annoncerede, at fra og med i dag, vil de suspendere deres UK Ejendomsfond for at afværge investorer, der kræver deres penge tilbage. Dette udløser allerede smitte, med flere andre store ejendomsinvestorers meddelelse om lignede fastfrysninger af klienternes midler, og med endnu andre, der simpelt hen meddeler, at de trækker sig ud af eksisterende handler om prima ejendomsprojekter i London.

Samlet set er tilstandene i Italien, Deutsche Bank og ejendomsmarkedet i London mere end tilstrækkelige til at eksplodere hele den transatlantiske finansielle sektor. Det er præcis pga. denne allerede igangværende krise, at nødforanstaltninger, nøjagtigt i overensstemmelse med LaRouches krav, omgående må vedtages.     

Med næstformand Michelle Rasmussen