16. november 2015 – Ifølge en erklæring fra Det Hvide Hus, udstedt efter Barack Obamas møde med den russiske præsident Putin på sidelinjen af G20-mødet i Antalya, Tyrkiet, hilste den amerikanske præsident »al indsats fra alle lande i at konfrontere Islamisk Stat« velkommen og bemærkede især betydningen af Ruslands militære indsats i Syrien mod ISIS.

Det er noget af et skift i forhold til hans bemærkninger til ABC News i et interview umiddelbart før angrebene i Paris (bliver udsendt den 20. november), og hvor han sagde, at Rusland intervenerede i Syrien, ikke for at gå efter ISIS, men for at »støtte Assad«. Det er i dette interview, at Obama ligeledes udtalte, at ISIS var blevet »holdt tilbage« som resultat af amerikansk politik, for hvilken han blev grillet af flere reportere under sin pressekonference her til morgen i Antalya, Tyrkiet.

En amerikansk efterretningskilde rapporterer, at Obama imidlertid har fattet det budskab, at, hvis ISIS ikke bliver besejret, eller hvis ISIS skulle lancere et voldsomt angreb mod USA i samme skala som 11. september – en ISIS-video, der blev udgivet i dag, truer med et angreb på Washington, D.C. og andre amerikanske byer – så er hans »arv« færdig. Obama-Putin-mødet i Antalya bekræftede således det, der blev besluttet under sidste lørdags møde i Wien mht., at det amerikansk-russiske samarbejde skrider frem, hvilket også giver udenrigsminister John Kerry større spillerum til at samarbejde med sin russiske modpart, udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov, om udarbejdelsen af samarbejdsdetaljerne.

Den nye holdning, som regeringen er blevet skubbet ud i, kom til udtryk på CBS-TV den 15. nov. hos den nylige CIA-vicedirektør Michael Morell: »Jeg mener, at mht. spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt præsident må gå, eller om han er en del af løsningen her, så må vi se på det igen; han er tydeligvis en del af problemet. Men han kunne også være en del af løsningen.« Han foreslog, at en aftale, hvor Assad forbliver ved magten i endnu et år og bekæmper ISIS med den syriske hær og med støtte fra den amerikanskledede koalition og Rusland, »muligvis ville give de bedste resultater«.

Alligevel, som det blev udstillet i morgenens pressekonference, klyngede en meget defensiv Obama sig til det argument, at hans politik i Mellemøsten og anti-terror-strategi har været et strålende eksempel på amerikansk »lederskab« og atter hævdede, at den syriske præsident Bashar al-Assad »er førsteårsagen til denne krise«. De tilstedeværende reporterer have meget lidt tålmod med hans monotone og overlange forklaringer af USA’s »successer«. Tre af dem satte spørgsmålstegn ved resultaterne af den amerikanskledede koalitions bombekampagne, der nu havde stået på i et år, og spurgte, om ikke Obama havde undervurderet ISIS’ evner og påpegede hans beskrivelse af ISIS som et »B-skolesportshold«. Med henvisning til blodbadet i Paris og i betragtning af kendsgerningen om ISIS’ ekspansion i Syrien og Irak, udfordrede en reporter: »Hvordan kan det ikke være en undervurdering af deres evner? Hvordan er dette ’holdt tilbage’, rent ud sagt? … Hvorfor kan vi ikke få ram på disse sjovere?«

15. november 2015 – Med den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, der spiller en ledende rolle i at bringe Rusland og USA sammen ved drøftelserne om Syrien og G20, og på trods af chokket ang. terrormassakren i Paris, måtte pensionerede, tyske general Harald Kujat, under en ZDF TV-specialudsendelse om angrebene sent lørdag, meget eftertrykkeligt holde fast ved at fokusere diskussionen på årsagerne og de mulige løsninger på ISIS-terroren, i særdeleshed om det nødvendige i, at Frankrig og Vesten samarbejder militært og politisk med Rusland og den syriske hær. Først sent i udsendelsens løb bragte spørgsmålet om en NATO-mulighed spørgsmålet om samarbejde med Putin og Syrien frem.

Den tyske justitsminister Heiko Maas, der var gæst i studiet, reagerede på en gavnlig måde på, at general Kujat bragte spørgsmålet om en NATO-mulighed på bane, idet han selv bragte samarbejde med Rusland, og ikke kun en militær løsning, på bane. General Kujat brugte Maas’ bekymringer om NATO og USA til at komme med den afgørende pointe om Putins flanke i Syrien: »Med hensyn til Ruslands intervention, den russiske intervention, den militære intervention, så har det transformeret situationen, militært og politisk. Det faktum, at vi i dag kan tale om, at der forhandles om en politisk løsning, er en konsekvens af den russiske intervention i Syrien, og hvis Frankrig ønsker at engagere sig militært i Syrien, inklusive med landtropper, så må de tale med russerne, hvilket amerikanerne for resten også gør, og som har gjort det lettere at sætte sig sammen ved forhandlingsbordet [i Wien] for at drøfte en politisk løsning.«

General Kujat sagde, på et spørgsmål om, hvad han foreslog: »Det, vi ser nu, er, at Rusland har grebet initiativet og går fremefter militært. Alle stater, der kunne udøve militær indflydelse på situationen, har hidtil afvist at sende landtroper dertil, også Rusland, europæerne under alle omstændigheder, og også USA. Rusland bruger nu Assads hær som landtropper og støtter dem med luftangreb. Og det, vi ser, er fremskridt på den russiske side, selv om dette ikke behandles på en fremtrædende plads i de tyske medier. I Irak ser vi fremskridt deri, at kurderne har styrket deres offensiv. Det har alt sammen naturligvis ført til den kendsgerning, at IS på andre måder [angrebene i Paris, -red.] forsøger at tiltrække sig opmærksomhed. Det har brug for støtte og indstrømning af kæmpere.

Foto: Som udtryk for deltagelse i sorgen var Brandenburger Tor i Berlin lørdag og søndag dækket i de franske farver.   

Hvad kan Tyskland gøre? Meget, i modstrid med dem, der hævder, at vi er for små til at gøre noget som helst. For det første må vi starte en debat om, hvad Tysklands virkelige interesser er. Vi bør hæve sanktionerne mod Rusland. Helmut Schmidt havde ret, da han sagde, at krisen i Ukraine var begyndt med Maastrichttraktaten. Vi bør også afslutte enhver mission og alle missioner, som Bundeswehr deltager i til støtte for USA’s/Storbritanniens politik. Vi bør promovere en offentlig debat om alle nationers sikkerhedsinteresser. Vi må have en ny, inkluderende sikkerhedsarkitektur. Den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble bør træde tilbage, fordi hans »sorte nul«-politik giver næring til optrapningen af højrefløjen.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

15. november 2015 – Det er nu et åbent spørgsmål, hvorvidt Frankrig vil anmode om aktiveringen af NATO, under bestemmelserne om kollektivt forsvar i NATO’s artikel 5, i kølvandet på terrorangrebene i Paris den 13. november. Pensionerede admiral James Stavridis, en tidligere NATO-øverstbefalende og et nuværende seniorstabsmedlem af Fletcherskolen for Jura og Diplomati ved Tufts Universitet, skriver i en artikel 14. nov. på avisen Foreign Journals webside, at Frankrig bør anråbe artikel 5, og at NATO nu må gå ind i kampen mod ISIS.

»Paris ville være i sin gode ret til at forvente, at NATO spiller en betydningsfuld rolle i at organisere en afgørende, militær respons på angrebene«, skriver admiral Staviridis. »Det fundamentale formål med NATO’s mission bør være at besejre Islamisk Stat i Syrien og ødelægge den infrastruktur, som de dér har skabt.« Dernæst forklarer Stavridis de skridt, som NATO bør tage, inklusive at gå til FN’s Sikkerhedsråd.

Stavridis går imidlertid et skridt videre og kræver, at man inviterer Rusland til at deltage i denne NATO-mission. »NATO bør lægge vægt på, at det opbygger en »åben koalition«, en koalition, der ikke kun kan omfatte de traditionelle allieredes styrker, men også styrker fra NATO’s traditionelle modstander, Rusland«, skriver Stavridis. »Rusland bør inviteres til at deltage sammen med NATO og andre koalitionsmedlemmer imod Islamisk Stat.«

Foto: Pensionerede admiral James Stavridis, 15. nov. 2015.

USA og Europa har fået et alarmsignal til at vågne op gennem det barbariske terroristangreb i Paris. Mange ledende personer kræver nu, at Obamas vanvittige politik for regimeskift i Syrien – som, ligesom tidligere i Irak og Libyen, er i færd med at udløse kaos i hele verden – omgående må afsluttes, så verden kan gå sammen imod ISIS-svøben.

Lørdag sagde præsident Putin:

»Det er klart, at, for effektivt at bekæmpe dette onde, har vi brug for en reel, fælles indsats fra hele det internationale samfund.«

Tidligere NATO-øverstbefalende admiral James Stavridis sagde til Foreign Policy, at Frankrig kunne forvente, at NATO anråbte artikel 5, der bemyndiger en NATO-respons på angrebet, med det »fundamentale formål« fra NATO-missionens side at »besejre Islamisk Stat i Syrien og ødelægge den infrastruktur, den dér har skabt«. Hvad der er vigtigere, så tilføjede admiralen: »Rusland bør inviteres til at deltage sammen med NATO og andre koalitionsmedlemmer imod Islamisk Stat.«

I Wien lørdag anførte den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry og den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov en bred koalition af nationer med et krav om en våbenhvile i Syrien, med en tidsramme på 18 måneder til almene valg. Præsident Assad er ikke ekskluderet fra denne proces.

Søndag talte præsidenterne Obama og Putin på sidelinjen af G20-topmødet i Tyrkiet, hvor en regeringsperson fra Det Hvide Hus til Reuters sagde, at

»Præsident Obama og præsident Putin enedes om behovet for en syrisk ledet og syrisk ejet politisk overgang, forud for hvilken ville være FN-formidlede forhandlinger mellem den syriske opposition og det syriske regime, så vel som en våbenhvile.«    

Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde søndag fra Tyskland, at amerikanerne må forstå, at »intet vil være det samme i Europa efter dette«. Det overlagte angreb mod hverdagslivet – koncerter, sportsbegivenheder, restauranter – viser, at alle er sårbare, ikke blot i Frankrig, men i hele Europa. Hun rapporterede, at højtplacerede europæiske kilder ved, at amerikanske og britiske efterretningskræfter åbenlyst har støttet terroristerne, både gennem saudierne og direkte, som tidligere chef for den amerikanske Forsvarsintelligenstjeneste (DIA), general Michael Flynn, allerede har afsløret.

Hun påpegede den kendsgerning, at i januar, den dag, da angrebet mod Charlie Hebdo fandt sted i Paris, sagde den tidligere amerikanske senator Bob Graham ved en pressekonference, at, hvis de hemmeligstemplede 28 sider af Kongressens undersøgelsesrapport om angrebet mod USA den 11. september var blevet frigivet, ville angrebet i Paris ikke have fundet sted. Vi må nu, sagde fr. LaRouche, atter fokusere på vores indsats for at få dette ødelæggende bevis frigivet, der viser, at Obama er i en åben alliance med terroristerne med det formål at opnå sin kriminelle politik med regimeskifte.

Lyndon LaRouches ven, den amerikanske, tidl. senator Mike Gravel, har udstedt et følgebrev til et juridisk dokument, der viser, at hans sejr i Højesteret i 1971 – da retten dømte, at hans offentliggørelse af de hemmeligstemplede Pentagon-papirer i Kongressens arbejdsprocedure, var legal under Forfatningen – også gjaldt for de 28 sider, og at ethvert medlem af Kongressen kunne indlæse dem i Kongressens journal. Lyndon LaRouche har pålagt en fuld mobilisering af sin organisation over de næste par dage for at frigive dette dokument til alle kongresmedlemmer, pressen og alle borgere.

LaRouche understregede, at Obama nu er den mest hadede person i verden, og at der ikke er, og ikke vil være, nogen tillid til USA, så længe han forbliver i præsidentembedet.

Supplerende dokumentation:

Amerikansk admiral: Aktiver NATO imod ISIS og inviter Rusland til at være med

15. november 2015 – Det er nu et åbent spørgsmål, hvorvidt Frankrig vil anmode om aktiveringen af NATO, under bestemmelserne om kollektivt forsvar i NATO’s artikel 5, i kølvandet på terrorangrebene i Paris den 13. november. Pensionerede admiral James Stavridis, en tidligere NATO-øverstbefalende og et nuværende seniorstabsmedlem af Fletcherskolen for Jura og Diplomati ved Tufts Universitet, skriver i en artikel 14. nov. på avisen Foreign Journals webside, at Frankrig bør anråbe artikel 5, og at NATO nu må gå ind i kampen mod ISIS.

»Paris ville være i sin gode ret til at forvente, at NATO spiller en betydningsfuld rolle i at organisere en afgørende, militær respons på angrebene«, skriver admiral Staviridis. »Det fundamentale formål med NATO’s mission bør være at besejre Islamisk Stat i Syrien og ødelægge den infrastruktur, som de dér har skabt.« Dernæst forklarer Stavridis de skridt, som NATO bør tage, inklusive at gå til FN’s Sikkerhedsråd.

Stavridis går imidlertid et skridt videre og kræver, at man inviterer Rusland til at deltage i denne NATO-mission. »NATO bør lægge vægt på, at det opbygger en »åben koalition«, en koalition, der ikke kun kan omfatte de traditionelle allieredes styrker, men også styrker fra NATO’s traditionelle modstander, Rusland«, skriver Stavridis. »Rusland bør inviteres til at deltage sammen med NATO og andre koalitionsmedlemmer imod Islamisk Stat.«

Paris, 14. november 2015 – Rædsel har slået Paris. Massakrer er blevet begået i blinde for at sætte vores land i en tilstand af chok. Med det samme barbari og de samme metoder som i Mellemøsten, Libanon, Irak og Israel, eller i Syrien. Seks samtidige angreb i hjertet af vores hovedstad og ved Stade de France-sportsstadion, med det formål at mangfoldiggøre ofrene, bunkerne af lig i gaderne, restauranter, der er forvandlet til lighuse, udrykningskøretøjer for hylende sirener: en strategi af frygt, omhyggeligt planlagt, for at levere det budskab, at det værste kan ske overalt og for alle mennesker.

Vores reaktion må modsvare udfordringen. Vi må kun frygte selve frygten, for frygten inspirerer til vanvittige reaktioner, der kommer oven i det første vanvid. At beherske den kan ikke lade sig gøre i passivitet eller fornægtelse, men ved at se tingene i øjnene, i sandhedens navn. Kun kampen for sandheden gør det muligt at undfly angstens kvælertag.

Erklæringen af undtagelsestilstand og lukningen af grænserne, som Republikkens præsident har annonceret, så vel som også deployeringen af politi- og militærstyrker, er de umiddelbart nødvendige forholdsregler, for vi er i krig. At forblive forenet og gøre fælles front i de værdiers navn, der er indskrevet i Republikkens Forfatning, er umiddelbart uundværligt.

Man må imidlertid gå til de første årsager, uden hvilket rædslen vil gentage sig og endda optrappes. Hvilket vil sige skabe en verden, i hvilken de nationale og internationale omgivelser ikke længere skaber kriminalitet, som de gør i dag. For man kan ikke undfly det onde ved simpelt hen at undertrykke det, men ved at virkeliggøre vilkår, under hvilke det gode overlader det onde mindre og mindre plads.

Det er NATO’s krige, de økonomiske uretfærdigheder og ødelæggelsen af værdige livsvilkår, der har skabt betingelserne for terrorisme. Det samme gælder for den kyniske og forbryderiske politik med del og hersk i traditionen efter Det britiske Imperium, og imod hvilket intet i realiteten har modsat sig i vores transatlantiske univers.

At sætte en stopper for rædslen indebærer således en absolut politisk kursændring. Med lanceringen af gensidig udvikling, »win-win«, der sikrer, at vores børn og børnebørn lever bedre end vi selv, er denne lancering, der er annonceret af de kinesiske og indiske ledere, den eneste, virkelige kilde til fred. Samtidig med, at vi i Mellemøsten bekæmper alle terroristgrupper, Islamisk Stat såvel som al-Nusra-Front og Erobringshæren.

Denne lørdag, den 14. november, i Wien, bør Frankrig spille en aktiv rolle i forhandlingerne, der tilsigter at lancere en fredsproces i Syrien, idet vi koordinerer vores indsats med det russiske diplomati, og ikke spiller i hænderne på dem, der tager friheden som gidsel.

I Mellemøsten må Islamisk Stat slås i hjertet af sine økonomiske ressourcer, med bombardementer af deres olieledninger og ved at slå de banker, der hvidvasker deres ressourcer, hvilket hidtil ikke er sket.

Der må sættes en stopper for medskyldigheden i terrorismen hos Qatar, Saudi-Arabien og Emiraterne, uden at vise dette klientel nogen forekommenhed. Og sluttelig må man samtidig genskabe økonomiske udviklingsbetingelser i alle regionens lande, for at migranterne dér kan genfinde værdige livsbetingelser, hvilket Kina tilbyder os ved at udstrække sit koncept med Den nye Silkevej. I mellemtiden må man, i alle regionens flygtningelejre, og i samarbejde med de internationale, humanitære organisationer, skabe disse værdige vilkår ved at sikre tilstrækkelige fødevarer, lægebehandling, anstændige, midlertidige beboelser og uddannelse til børnene.

Dette koncept er ikke russisk, kinesisk, amerikansk eller fransk, det er det koncept, der retfærdiggør nationalstatens eksistens: at tjene menneskehedens sag. Frankrig bør indtage en prominent plads i dette afgørende engagement, og ikke underkaste sig barbarer i djellaba, kameez eller jakkesæt.  

Jacques Cheminade, leder af Solidarité et Progrès.

Ovenstående leder af Jacques Cheminade er oversat fra fransk. Vore fransktalende læsere kan følge med i situationen i Frankrig på Solidarité & Progrès’ hjemmeside: http://www.solidariteetprogres.org/

Vi mødes naturligvis i aften under meget alvorlige og forfærdelige omstændigheder, mens rapporter løber ind om, at over 100 mennesker er blevet dræbt i noget, der synes at være terrorangreb i hele Paris. Hele den franske nation er nu i undtagelsestilstand. Jeff Steinberg vil kommentere hele denne situation senere i aftenens udsendelse.

Engelsk udskrift.

MATTHEW OGDEN:  Good evening. It’s November 13, 2015. My
name is Matthew Ogden, and you’re watching our weekly Friday
evening webcast here from larouchepac.com. I’m joined in the
studio tonight by Jeffrey Steinberg from {Executive Intelligence
Review.}
Now, obviously, we are meeting here tonight under very
solemn and horrifying conditions, as we are hearing reports that
over 100 people have died in what seem to be terrorist attacks
across Paris. The entire nation of France is currently under a
state of emergency, and obviously details of these attacks are
still coming in, as this is an ongoing situation. I know Jeff
will have something to say later on this subject, later on this
evening, during this broadcast, as pertains to these horrific
events.
But this evening we’re going to be beginning our broadcast
with an on-the-ground video report from New York City, where the
LaRouche Political Action Committee held a rally earlier today in
front of the headquarters of the {New York Times}. I’m sure many
of our viewers have had a chance to see on the front page of the
LaRouche PAC website a press release which was published on this
website yesterday, which is titled, “Why won’t the {New York
Times} publish Obama’s Drone Papers?”, which makes the point
that, despite the fact that the Times played a central role back
in 1971 in publishing the so-called “Pentagon Papers”, which were
revealed by Daniel Ellsberg, and were released to the American
people by the courageous actions which Senator Mike Gravel took
by reading them into the {Congressional Record} — despite the
fact that the Times was instrumental in this action, which was
instrumental in laying the foundation for the downfall of Richard
Nixon, and the ultimate end of the Vietnam War — today the {New
York Times} has made the willful choice {not} to publish any
serious coverage of the so-called “Drone Papers”, which were
likewise leaked by a courageous whistleblower from within the
drone program itself, a so-called second Edward Snowden, and
published by Glenn Greenwald’s internet-based publication, {The
Intercept.}
Despite thoroughly damning new details that have emerged and
are contained within these documents, the Drone Papers, which
pull back the curtain on the murderous and completely out of
control targetted assassination program that’s being run,
top-down by President Barack Obama, in his weekly kill sessions,
without any due oversight, and from behind closed doors, despite
this, the editors of the {New York Times} have publicly stated
that in their opinion, these new revelations do not “warrant
their own story.”
The truth is — and you can be assured that the {New York
Times} editorial staff well knows this — any widespread and
serious coverage of the “Drone Papers” today. by a major national
newspaper of record, such as the New York Times, in the fashion
of the Times’ own coverage of the Pentagon Papers in 1971, would
have an utterly devastating effect on revealing to the American
people the true reality of how this secret drone program is
actually run, and the character of the President who runs it. And
just as the Pentagon Papers did back then, major publication of
the “Drone Papers” today would likewise lay the foundation for
the indictment and political downfall of this President — as his
murderous proclivities are put on full display for the entire
country to see.
The question is: Knowing all of this, as the press release
puts it, “Is the {New York Times} more afraid of Barack Obama
than it was of Richard Nixon? And will that fear of taking on the
true characteristic of what this President stands for, cause the
{New York Times} to fail to address that awful reality at the
very time that Obama is leading the United States into
unprecedented war-provocations against both Russia and China, and
by failing to do so, thus finding themselves  — the {New York
Times} —  complicit in actions which threaten the outbreak of a
Third World War, and endanger the continued existence of all
mankind.
With that said as an opening statement, we bring the
on-the-ground report from New York City, delivered by LaRouche
PAC’s Daniel Burke:
“Hi, I’m Daniel Burke, and this is a LaRouche
Political Action Committee rally that you’re witness to at the
moment, in front of the {New York Times} headquarters on 41st
Street and 8th Avenue. And we stand here today in the midst of
certainly the gravest crisis that our species has ever faced,
which is well expressed in this banner that we have before us
“Obama Leads America to Hell.” But our mission is to unify the
United States, to have the courage to stand up against the
insanity that is dominating  our government today.
“At the moment, we are on the brink of a thermonuclear war,
because of the fact that this man has been tolerated, and his
provocations against Russia, and against China, are unprecedented
in the history of humanity, in terms of the danger that they
pose. But as we’ve laid out in webcasts over the recent weeks,
there is a clear train of abuses; the evidence is before you, and
now it’s a matter of having the courage to stand up against it.
So that’s what we’re doing today, because the fact of the matter
is that the {New York Times} has been covering up for Obama’s
Satanic drone murders. It’s been released through {The
Intercept}, from a new whistleblower, as we’ve documented in our
webcasts so far: that Obama is at the top of a chain that is
mass-murdering civilians. And the {New York Times} buried the
release of these documents at the bottom of a column a couple of
weeks ago, and then they justified this, by claiming that it did
not warrant its own story.
“So, we stand here to specifically indicate the editors, the
writers, who were involved in this cover-up; demand that this be
brought to justice; and in the meanwhile to consider that what we
need today is for one Senator to stand up, and to move against
Obama. This is what happened with Richard Nixon, and it was in
that case that the {New York Times} had the courage in 1971 to
publish the ‘Pentagon Papers’. Why will they remain silent on
these Satanic murders from Barack Obama?”
OGDEN: Now, Mr. LaRouche wanted to feature this video report
from New York City for the reason that he has placed Manhattan at
the center of his strategy to restore the United States to its
original founding principle as embodied in Alexander Hamilton,
the very opposite of everything that Obama has come to represent
today. Further coverage of this rally will be available on the
LaRouche PAC website, including a longer version of this
on-the-ground report, as well as the text of the press release,
which I mentioned at the outset of tonight’s proceedings.
But, when you place Obama’s drone program in the context of
his open and blatant war provocations against both Russia and now
increasingly against China, in the recent days and weeks, which
will lead to a global thermonuclear war if not stopped.  In that
context, I would like to ask Jeff to elaborate a little bit on
what Mr. LaRouche’s assessment was of the importance of using
this campaign, as you just saw, centered in Manhattan around the
revelations that are now contained and released in the “Drone
Papers” in order to drive Obama from office before he has the
chance to lead the world into World War III.

STEINBERG:  I learned earlier today that there is a joke
circulating very widely in Israel, and I’m sure in other places
around the world.  And the joke goes something like this:  What’s
the difference between God and Barack Obama?  The answer?  God
doesn’t think he’s Barack Obama.
What we’re dealing with here is truly a Satanic personality,
and yet, he’s been permitted to carry out atrocity after
atrocity; all on behalf of the British, whose policy, at the
level of the British Empire, at the level of the British
monarchy, has been always one of massive population reduction
through policies of genocide.  I think that’s the way you’ve got
to understand the events that are unfolding right now in Paris.
In a very real sense, the slaughter that’s taken place over the
last few hours — and of course French authorities are not sure
that it’s over; there were seven attacks against seven different
random targetted popular nightspots all around the city of Paris,
highly coordinated.  Kind of what we saw in 2008 in Mumbai, but
on a much more elaborate scale.  And you’ve got to ask yourself,
where does this kind of Satanic behavior come from?  What are the
roots of this Islamic State jihadist apparatus?
Well, remember that the former head of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, General Michael Flynn, warned earlier this
year in a now widely circulated interview with Al-Jazeera
America, that he had gone to President Obama in the summer of
2012 and warned that the policies that the US was pursuing —
particularly the policies of facilitating the running of heavy
weapons from the Libyan port city of Benghazi into various Syrian
rebel groups — was going to result in the creation of a jihadist
caliphate on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, and in that
general Middle Eastern region.  Now, this was two years prior to
the formal surfacing of the Islamic State, which really launched
its operations in Iraq with the dramatic takeover of Mosul; and
that was in June of 2014.  So you’ve got high-level US Defense
Intelligence officials telling the President of the United
States, “Drop your fixation with the overthrow of the Assad
government in Syria.  Halt the flow of weapons that were
unleashed on the world as the result of the overthrow of Qaddafi
and his instant execution back in the fall of 2011; which
unleashed floods of weapons throughout Africa.  And through this
Benghazi operation of British Intelligence and John Brennan as
the Counterintelligence Director of the Obama administration, the
weapons began to flow into Syria; and these weapons went into the
hands of the very jihadist networks that we’ve now seen operating
on the streets of Paris.
So, is there a causal relationship between the British
Satanic policies of mass population reduction, often stated by
Prince Philip — the royal consort who insists that the world’s
population must be reduced by 80%.  The fact that General Flynn
openly said that President Obama did not ignore the warnings, but
pursued a willful policy of continuing with the arming of the
Syrian rebels after he was repeatedly told what the consequences
of that would be.  And now we’ve seen those consequences, with
the establishment of the Islamic State; we’ve seen those events
now spilling over into the streets of Paris.  The situation in
France is still unfolding; there’s no definitive answers in terms
of who particularly carried out these heinous attacks.  But we
know that the circumstances under which those kinds of events
could happen, were the product of a persistent line of policy
that has come out of the Presidency of the United States for at
least the last 15 years; the 8 years of Bush and Cheney, and now
the 7-plus years of Barack Obama. So you’re dealing with somebody
who is by his character, pursuing outright policies that are
evil, that are Satanic, and that at their core are British; that
directly go to the demands of the Prince Philips of the world,
who call for mass population reduction.
Now we know that in two weeks, the COP21 climate change
conference is scheduled to happen in Paris; we may very well find
that there was a relationship between these attacks that we’re
now just seeing unfolding on the streets of Paris right now, and
that upcoming conference.  Earlier this week, Secretary of State
John Kerry bluntly stated what has now become obvious; namely
that that COP21 conference — despite the efforts of the papal
encyclical and John Schellnhüber and other outright proponents of
genocide — that conference is likely to fail.  There’s too much
resistance from developing sector countries that realize that
what they’re looking at is a recipe for genocide.  So, what we
have before us then, are other means by which the world is
careening towards the kind of events that can lead to the mass
population reduction policies that are being demanded principally
out of the British monarchy; and are being carried out
principally through agents of that monarchy such as Barack Obama.
So, what have we seen just in the recent days?  The
administration has continued with the drone kill policy; and as
we saw in the rally out in front of the {New York Times}, it’s
quite clear that the White House has put enormous pressure on the
major US media outlets to suppress the story.  Because if the
story were to get national media attention through the {New York
Times}, through the {Washington Post}, through CNN or one of the
major cable news outlets, there would be a groundswell of demand
for President Obama’s removal from office.  These policies are
policies of outright genocide.  And we’ve been continuing our own
investigation into the drone kill policy of Obama; looking beyond
the “Drone Papers” that were released by {The Intercept} about
three or four weeks ago.  And when you dig deeper into this
policy, what you find is that there have been repeated and
consistent studies carried out by the military, carried out by
major thinktanks whose job it is to do analysis of the actions of
the military.  You have the Stimson Center producing a series of
two reports in 2012 and in 2014; the Naval Post-Graduate School
out in Monterrey, California, produced a major study; the Rand
Corporation produced a major study.  In every instance, they can
to the identical conclusion: the drone policy is a failed policy;
it can never work; it will never work. The idea of targetting
priority terrorist agents for elimination, does nothing to reduce
the spread of these kinds of jihadists. If anything, it becomes a
major means of further recruitment, of expansion of operations.
These are not things that are unknown at the levels of the
National Security Council, the Obama White House, and similar
locations. It is {willfully known} that these polices do not curb
terrorism, do not defeat insurgent movements. They feed them,
they fuel them, they expand them.
And so, you really do have a principle here, in which the
objective is not to defeat terrorism, but the objective is to
spread the kind of murderous chaos that weve seen engulf Syria
for the last four and a half years; that weve seen in Iraq and
Afghanistan, going back to the beginning of the Bush/Cheney
administration in 2001, with the aftermath of the 9/11 events
that have been systematically covered up, first by President
Bush, now by President Obama.
The real issue, here, is not exposing the role of the Saudis
in this kind of sponsorship of terrorism, including the 9/11
attacks. The real issue here, is that there is a {conscious
policy} of creating conditions of global instability and chaos,
that ensure that the targetted population- reduction goals are
being met, and war is still one of the major means for that to be
carried out. So, we have a period that weve been living through,
that constitutes more than a Thirty Years War, a period of
perpetual war, and these last two Presidencies have been major
instrumentalities to make sure that that policy happens.
Now, in the past days, in addition to the continuing
cover-up of the Obama drone kill programs which go directly and
personally to Obamas desk in the Oval Office, every single one of
these kill orders has Barack Obamas personal signature on it.
Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, when he was asked to
comment about the drone program, simply said, Its the only game
in town. So, this has been the {signature policy} — an
indiscriminate mass murder policy, of this President and of this
administration. The idea of toleration for that, for one moment
more, is something that now clearly threatens us all. If these
kinds of actions can happen in the streets of Paris, France, then
they can happen anywhere, including here in the United States.
Now, not only is Obama continuing to pursue and defend this
policy of drone kill, but, in the past week, weve seen an
escalation on the strategic scale, as well. Defense Secretary Ash
Carter spent last week in Asia, attending the ASEAN Defense
Ministers Meeting. He tried to turn that event, unsuccessfully,
fortunately, into a gang-up against China. The host government,
Malaysia, refused to include a reference to the South China Sea
situation in the draft communiqué for that conference. Carter
showed up — and by the way, the United States is not a member of
ASEAN. Carter was there as an invited guest of the ASEAN
countries, the ten nations of Southeast Asia. But, he basically
intervened to try to hijack the entire direction of that
conference. Fortunately, many of those countries of the region
simply refused to do it. As the result, the conference ended in a
shambles; there was no final communiqué.
From Kuala Lumpur, Carter returned to the United States via
Simi Valley, California, where he gave a major speech at the
Reagan Library, and assailed both Russia and China, and accused
them of sabre-rattling around the threat of nuclear war. What he
was referring to, in the specific case of Russia, is that Russia,
in response to the United States deployment of ABM systems right
along the southern borders of Russia, the expansion of NATO
throughout eastern Europe, in violation of the agreements that
were reached at the time of German reunification. In response to
all of those provocations, the Russians have moved to establish
new levels of defense against what President Putin this week
described as a clear attempt by the U.S. and its allies, to break
up the strategic balance that had existed throughout the period
of the Cold War and the post-Cold War period, up until this time,
and that the United States, by refusing to collaborate with
Russia on some kind of global missile defense program, as
President Reagan had proposed back in 1983, when he was in close
collaboration with Lyndon LaRouche on that project. The United
States policy, is to create a thermonuclear war-winning option.
That poses not just an existential threat to Russia, but a grave
threat to all of mankind.
Now, middle of this past week, President Putin convened the
annual meeting with top Russian defense officials and leaders of
the defense-industrial sector of Russia, at Sochi, on the Black
Sea. In opening remarks to that event, which were widely
televised throughout Russia, Putin made very clear: the United
States has been targeting Russia with the ABM deployment. The
fact is clearly demonstrated, because even after the P5+1 deal
was reached with Iran, the United States announced it was
continuing to move full steam ahead with the ABM deployment, not
in partnership with Russia, but unilaterally, with U.S. allies.
Since the original argument had been made that this ABM system
was strictly directed against Iran, now that Iran has come into
compliance with the nuclear deal, with the P5+1, it just shows
the lie to everything that Obama has been saying on this. Putin
made very clear, that Russia is moving forward to develop new
weapon systems that can defeat any kind of ABM program that the
U.S. puts in place, which {will} be directed against Russia.
At the same time, as reported this week in the {Guardian} —
weve mentioned it here on these Friday night webcasts for some
time — the United States is going ahead with the deployment of
what is, in effect, a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons
that will be forward-based in central and eastern and western
Europe, which will be a new generation. Theyre called the B61-12,
with highly accurate tail-guidance systems, that will penetrate
deeper into Russian territory, with much more precision accuracy,
and therefore these nuclear weapons will have greatly-reduced
thermonuclear payloads, which means that the gap between
strategic nuclear war and tactical-theater conventional nuclear
war, is greatly reduced. In other words, were moving towards a
policy of having a deployable force of thermonuclear weapons,
directed at close range, against targets in Russia.
Now, we learned this past week, through excerpts from a
forthcoming authorized biography of George Herbert Walter Bush
[{Destiny and Power}, by Jon Meacham], that at the time of the
1991 Operation Desert Storm, and again during 2003, during the
period of the invasion and overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq,
[Vice President] Dick Cheney was persistently pushing for the use
of nuclear weapons. In the case of the first war in the Gulf,
Cheney was promoting the idea that the U.S. should use 17
tactical nuclear weapons against targets in Iraq. So now we’ve
got a continuation of that policy under President Obama.
So, here we are, more than 25 years after the end of the
Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the
Warsaw Pact — we’re facing the gravest threat of thermonuclear
war not because of any actions on the part of Russia, but because
of the character of the President of the United States, a Satanic
character who has no sense whatsoever of the consequences of
pursuing this kind of policy of genocide.
So, whether it’s preparing the groundwork for thermonuclear
confrontation with Russia, and similarly with China — we’ve had
B-52 bombers, which are bombers that are capable of carrying
thermonuclear warheads, flying over territory that China claims
in the South China Sea, as China’s sovereign territory, as part
of the Spratly Islands. That happened just in the last several
days, and it’s only now been first acknowledged by the Pentagon.
There was an earlier incident involving naval ships, incursions,
into those same waters.
So we’ve got the targetting of Russia, the beginnings of a
similar outright targetting of China. We have the drone policy,
and the cover-up of that policy. So here we are, literally
looking at somebody whose track record, documented proven track
record, is that of mass murder. And yet there is toleration for
his remaining in office.
Now in our discussion this afternoon with Mr. LaRouche, he
very much placed the emphasis on the situation in Manhattan.
You’ve got a unique characteristic of the population of
Manhattan, the population of New York City and the great
metropolitan area — but particularly the population of
Manhattan. They still have a greater sense of reality, at least
large segments of the population do. They have a greater sense of
the morality that goes with recognizing the great danger that
we’re facing in the world today. And so, if you look back
historically, Manhattan was the place where the core concepts
around which our Constitutional republic was organized were
formulated. They were formulated in Manhattan in particular by
our First Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. There is a
Hamiltonian tradition that prevails, and that tradition is the
organizing principle for our nation, for our republic.
So Manhattan holds a special place for the nation as a
whole. Mr. LaRouche pointed out that if you do a survey, region
by region around the United States, you will find that region by
region the economy has been destroyed. The social fabric has been
gutted. We have drug addiction, suicide, all kinds of social
dislocation because region by region, the economies of these
areas of the United States have been gutted, particularly during
the period first of the Bush-Cheney administration, and at a
greater and greater accelerating rate, under President Obama.
Never mind that since 9/11, $44 {billion} in your taxpayers’
money has gone into the establishment of this drone kill program
that is one of the critical factors that keeps expanding the size
and brutality of the terrorist apparatus that we’ve now seen
playing out on the streets of Paris just in the last few hours.
So we’re dealing with an assault against the American people, an
assault that has weakened the social fabrics of many parts of our
country. So again, Manhattan represents a certain kind of glue, a
potential critical point of inspiration for saving this nation,
and this event that you’ve just seen a brief excerpt of in front
of the {New York Times} headquarters today, is indicative of the
kind of thing that we will be doing at an accelerating and
continuing rate of expansion in Manhattan.
And we’ve got a situation in Washington, where there are a
precious handful of elected officials, people in other positions
within the Federal government, within the military, within the
diplomatic corps, within the intelligence services — a handful
of people — who remain truly committed to the survival of this
nation and the planet, and we call on you, the American people,
to put maximum pressure on them to step outside the bounds of
what’s required to “go along to get along” and for a handful of
these people to step forward and speak the absolute truth about
what has gone on in this country, particularly during the seven
years of this Obama presidency.
One or two leading members of the U.S. Senate, in
particular, taking their oath of office seriously, can bring this
President down and start the process of reversal of this
destructive, literally Satanic takedown of the United States and
everything it has historically stood for. We need that step, but
we need the voice of the American people, led by Manhattan, to
make sure that that actually happens, and that it happens in
time.
OGDEN: Thank you, Jeff. Jeff’s comments just now regarding
the events which occurred in Paris this evening prompted me to
recall the remarks that former Senator Bob Graham made at a press
conference on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6 of this year, which was
nearly hours after the Charlie Hebdo attacks, also in Paris. And
in that press conference, former Senator Bob Graham laid the
responsibility right at the doorstep of President Obama, and put
the fault right on Obama’s doorstep, because of his refusal to
end the cover-up of the 28 pages of the 9/11 Joint Inquiry
report. And as Jeff  just said, this indictment of Obama’s fault
on this matter, obviously still applies, and Bob Graham at that
press conference, called for a Lincolnesque standard of full
disclosure of the contents of the 28 pages in that count, but
also this obviously applies to the “Drone Papers”, and all the
other crimes that remain in the shadows.
Bob Graham was referring to Abraham Lincoln’s full
disclosure of the role of the British in supporting the
Confederacy during the Civil War. And what Senator Graham said at
that time, was that the national security threat lies {not} in
the disclosure of these documents, but in the non-disclosure, as
could be seen then in the case of the attacks on {Charlie Hebdo},
and I believe as can be seen again today in the continuing
attacks in Paris. Also, I would say the 28 pages warrant the
Pentagon Papers treatment by some courageous member of the United
States Senate, or U.S. House.
Now, with that said, we have a question which has come in
from our institutional source, and I’m going to read it. It’s
very brief, and I’m going to ask Jeff to respond: “Mr. LaRouche.
What are your thoughts on the immigration crises in Europe, and
what is our advice to European leaders?”
STEINBERG: Mr. LaRouche’s answer to this question was very
brief and very blunt. He said the first step toward solving this
problem is that Wolfgang Schaüble, the Finance Minister of
Germany, has got to be dumped. Schaüble, in Mr. LaRouche’s words,
belongs to be put in a pig pen, because his ideas and his
opinions stink. He’s terrible, he’s disgusting, and he
personifies those in Europe who are trying to stir up this
refugee crisis into a showdown, a kind of a confrontation that
could ultimately lead to the eruption of an outright civil war in
Europe.  In fact, I greatly feat that in the wake of these Paris
attacks, that you’re going to see an enormous backlash.  German
Chancellor Angela Merkel, who is increasingly becoming a captive
of the revolt by people like Schaüble in her own party, actually
took the surprising, but courageous stance, of saying that these
refugees must be assisted; they must be protected, and they must
be given an opportunity to be integrated into European society.
And so, there’s a deep split over this issue.
The Russians, through President Putin, have intervened
forcefully into the Syria situation to bring the Syria war to an
end.  The Russian military intervention on behalf of the Assad
government, is beginning to show significant success.  Remember,
the Russian involvement only began directly on September 30; so
we’re talking about a period of six weeks.  And in that six week
period, there have been a number of significant setbacks
delivered to the Islamic State and some of the other jihadist
elements of the Syrian rebel opposition.  The area around the
city of Aleppo, which is the industrial capital of Syria, is now
in the process of being retaken by the government forces.  60% to
80% of the population of Syria has now moved, or has already been
located in areas under government protection.  So, the idea that
the Syrian people are fleeing to Europe through Turkey and other
routes to get away from Assad is not the reality of the
situation.  They’re fleeing to get away from the Islamic State,
the Nusra front, and the jihadists who’ve been the instruments
for the war to overthrow the Assad government.
Remember, in August of 2009, President Obama simply
declared, “Assad must go”; and with that declaration, the US
began facilitating the efforts of the Saudis, the Turks and
others to provide weapons to an army of jihadists who have come
in from around the world.  So, defeat the Islamic State; push
back against the tyranny of the Anglo-Saudi apparatus; dump the
likes of Wolfgang Schaüble and others of his ilk, who are trying
to stir up literally a Hitlerian backlash in Europe against these
refugees, who are caught in a trap between the brutality of ISIS
back in the Middle East and Iraq and Syria, and the emergence of
a nativist right wing, literally a Hitlerian backlash inside
western Europe.  If Europe is to survive, if Syria is to be
rebuilt, then you’ve got to take certain decisive actions; and
the United States should be collaborating with Russia in a
coordinated effort to defeat ISIS.  Because every effort that the
US and this so-called coalition of 60 nations has taken against
ISIS has been a completely transparent fraud.
So, who’s responsible for the flood of refugees streaming
into Europe?  Start with President Obama, British Prime Minister
Cameron, former French President Sarkozy, current French
President Hollande.  These are the criminals who, along with the
Saudis, the Turks, the Qataris and the others, have been
providing all of the logistical and other support to the spread
of jihadism.  Because ultimately what they’re out to accomplish
is a population war.  We’ve said this previously.  The British
policy towards the entire Islamic world, is to foment a new
religious Hundred Years War between Sunni and Shi’a on a global
scale; because ultimately their objective is population
reduction.  If they can launch such a Hundred Years War, then how
many of the 1.8 or so billion Muslims on this planet will survive
at the end of the day?  And again, we have a President of the
United States who, by personality and by ownership by the
British, is a fully witting instrument in this process.
So, on the one hand, as Mr. LaRouche said, Schaüble and
people of his ilk have got to be dumped.  They’re the menace;
they’re the danger.  Schaüble wants to go ahead with murderous
austerity against the population of Europe; and has even less
interest in doing anything for these refugees.  And Obama, in his
own right, has carried out the same kinds of policies.  The
destruction of the United States on his watch and on the watch of
the previous President, is a crime beyond imagination.  And so,
it’s time for the American people and even a handful of leading
elected officials in Washington to wake up to exactly where the
clock stands and to act before midnight.

OGDEN:  Well, with that said, I think is the point where we
are going to bring a conclusion to our broadcast tonight.  Again,
I would recommend people go on the website and watch the full
coverage of the rally in front of the {New York Times}
headquarters today in New York City; as well as reading the full
text of the press release that was circulated en masse there
today.  Thank you for joining us, and please stay tuned.  And
please, if you are in the New York City area, participate in the
weekly discussion which Mr. LaRouche holds every Saturday
afternoon with the citizens of Manhattan.  If you’re not, you
have the opportunity to do the same on Thursday nights with the
weekly Fireside Chats.  Thank you very much for joining us
tonight; and please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.