Jason Ross: Diskussionen i aften finder sted to en halv uge efter præsidentvalget i USA den 8. nov. Siden da har vi set en hvirvelvind af spekulationer over udnævnelser til regeringsposter, inkl. nogle udnævnelser til poster i Trump-administrationen. Vi har også set betydningsfulde, internationale nyheder, såsom APEC-topmødet, der fandt sted i sidste weekend; topmødet i Asien-Stillehavsområdets Økonomiske Samarbejde (APEC), der meget betydningsfuldt inkluderede den filippinske præsident Duterte og den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping blandt de mange tilstedeværende ledere. På denne konference understregede Duterte igen, at Filippinerne ikke længere anser sig selv for at være en amerikansk koloni; og landet forfølger en uafhængig politik, rent økonomisk, med Kina, der således er et modtræk til at skabe konflikt i f.eks. det Sydkinesiske Hav. Præsident Xi var på rundrejse i Mellem- og Sydamerika samtidig med, at han rejste til APEC-topmødet. Så ved siden af Peru – som var værtsland for topmødet – besøgte han også Chile og Ecuador, hvor han blandt andet talte om den bi-oceaniske korridor, en plan for en jernbaneforbindelse mellem Sydamerikas to omkringliggende have, Stillehavet og Atlanterhavet, og om at etablere videnskabsbyer. Han blev hyldet af præsident Correa i Ecuador, der betragtede Xi Jinpings besøg som den mest betydningsfulde begivenhed, der nogen sinde havde fundet sted i Ecuadors historie, baseret på det potentiale, som dette tilbød denne nation.

Dette Nye Paradigme, der i øjeblikket ledes politisk og økonomisk af Rusland og Kina, kommer som et resultat af LaRouche-bevægelsens og Lyndon og Helga LaRouches årtier lange organisering; der er således nu et Nyt Paradigme, der fører en stadigt større del af verden i en meget positiv retning. Vores job i øjeblikket er ikke at få de hotteste nyheder om, hvad Trumps udnævnelser bliver, osv. Det er at forme amerikanske politik, som vi med held gjorde det med at gennemtvinge en underkendelse af Obamas veto af Loven om Juridisk Retfærdighed mod Sponsorer af Terrorisme (JASTA). Og som vi nu står klar til at gøre, med at få Kongressen – under denne overgangsperiode, ’lamme and’-perioden – til at gennemføre Glass-Steagall, det nødvendige første skridt for en økonomisk genrejsning. Glass-Steagall er den lov, som Franklin Roosevelt fik vedtaget, og som skabte 60+ år med stabil, kedelig, stabil, produktiv bankvirksomhed i USA; snarere end den form for spillevirksomhed, vi nu ser.

Lad med vise dette kort [Fig. 1] for blot at vise lidt at den succes, som vi har set med det kinesiske program.

Programmet med nationerne i Ét bælte, én vej [OBOR], der inkluderer både – der er to komponenter i Kinas projekt i denne henseende; det Økonomiske Silkevejsbælte, med nationerne vist i blå farve, og det 21. Århundredes Maritime Silkevej i orange farve. Tilsammen refererer Kina til dette på kinesisk som initiativet med »Ét bælte, én vej«; på engelsk ofte blot kaldt initiativet for Bæltet og Vejen. Med hensyn til det potentiale, som dette har, er her blot nogle af tallene: 20.000 km højhastigheds-jernbanelinjer i Kina, alle bygget inden for det seneste årti – mere end i resten af verden tilsammen; et titals billioner af dollars i direkte investering i nationerne i området; en forøgelse af kontrakter om tjenesteydelser på over 33 % i løbet af blot ét år langs Bæltet og Vejen; Kinas Eksport/Importbank har udestående engagementer i flere end 1000 projekter og har for ganske nylig underskrevet aftaler om omkring 500 nye projekter i nationerne langs Bæltet og Vejen. Kina er i færd med at udbygge 150.000 stipendier, som tilbyder uddannelse til 500.000 eksperter til uddannelse i Kina; har etableret 500 Konfucius-institutter i hele verden; har initieret flere end et dusin økonomiske samarbejdszoner; frihandelsaftaler, og er i øjeblikket engageret i flere end 40 energiprojekter – inklusive omkring 20, der lige er blevet etableret i år i Bæltet og Vejens nationer.

Hvordan kan vi så blive en del af dette? I magasinet Chronicles udgave fra 21. nov. er der et forslag fra Edward Lozansky og Jim Jatrus. Lozansky er præsident for det Amerikanske Universitet i Moskva. De skrev en artikel med titlen, »The Big Three: America, Russia, and China Must Join Hands for
Security, Prosperity, and Peace« (De tre store: Amerika, Rusland og Kina må gå sammen om sikkerhed, velstand og fred). To uddrag: De indleder deres artikel, »Med Donald Trumps sejr over Hillary Clinton får vi måske aldrig at vide, hvor tæt Amerika og hele menneskeheden kom på atomkrig«. Med en beskrivelse af verdenssituationen afslutter de med et forslag: »Præsident Donald Trump kan rette tidligere amerikanske præsidenters fejl. Snarere end modstandere kan Rusland og Kina blive Amerikas vigtigste partere, og som er, er vi overbevist om, rede til at respondere positivt. Tiden er inde for Trump og Amerika til at tage initiativet til samarbejde mellem USA, Rusland og Kina hen imod en tryg, fremgangsrig og fredelig fremtid. Et Trump-Putin-Xi ’Store Tre-topmøde’ bør være en prioritet for den nye, amerikanske præsidents første 100 dage.«

Jeg vil nu bede Jeff Steinberg om at fylde verdensbilledet ud og forklare vore seere, hvilke flanker, hvilke håndtag, hvilke vægtstænger vi har for at ændre USA’s politik på dette tidspunkt?

Jeffrey Steinberg (efterretningsredaktør, EIR): Det er indledningsvist meget vigtigt at indse, at vi befinder os i en periode med forandring. Vi ved visse ting om konsekvenserne af det amerikanske præsidentvalg og andre nationale valg den 8. nov. Jeg mener, at Lozansky og Jatrus gjorde en fundamental pointe meget klart: Der forelå en meget alvorlig fare, baseret på Hillary Clintons kampagneretorik, baseret på politikker, der blev stadigt mere aggressivt forfulgt af præsident Barack Obama mod slutningen af hans otte år i embedet; at vi havde kurs mod den værste krise mellem USA og Rusland, som vi nogen sinde har oplevet – måske endda værre end Cubakrisen i 1962. Så Hillary Clintons nederlag er virkelig afslutningen af præsidentskaberne Bush’ og Obamas 16 år lange tyranni. Hvor hurtigt, vi kan vende politikken omkring under det nye Trump-præsidentskab, og i hvilken retning, udnævnelserne til hans administration vil gå, er alt sammen ukendte faktorer; vi har ingen vished om dem.

Det, vi ved, er, at især i kølvandet på APEC-topmødet, der netop er afsluttet i sidste uge i Lima, Peru, og som dernæst efterfulgtes af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings statsbesøg til Peru og dernæst til Chile, og forud for topmødet var han i Ecuador; og vi ved, at der er en enorm mulighed derude for USA, under et Trump-præsidentskab, for netop at gå med i det, der altid har ligget på bordet som en åben invitation til USA; nemlig, at USA kan tilslutte sig projektet om Verdenslandbroen. For, uden et USA er det meget vanskeligt at opfatte dette som en Verdenslandbro, hvilket er det, verden virkelig har brug for lige nu. Der har været meget indledende telefondiskussioner mellem nyvalgte præsident Trump og den russiske præsident Putin; de synes at være blevet enige om at have et personligt topmøde hurtigt efter tiltrædelsen – som finder sted den 20. januar. Det er ligeledes tanken, at præsident Trump, efter tiltrædelsen, også ret hurtigt skal mødes med den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping. Jeg mener, at Lozansky-Jatrus-ideen om et trilateralt møde ville være ekstraordinært værdifuldt. Det er vigtigt at huske på, at, i 1944, var det præsident Franklin Roosevelts kurs i sine handlinger for at etablere De forenede Nationer – hvilket skete i 1945 – at inkludere både Sovjetunionen og Kina i FN’s Sikkerhedsråds fem permanente nationer. Husk på, at Roosevelt forstod, at der var imperiepolitikker, der stadig var kernen i Det britiske Imperium med Churchill, og på lignende måde med Frankrig. Så ideen med at have Rusland – dengang Sovjetunionen – og Kina i dette permanente Sikkerhedsråds kernegruppe, reflekterede den kendsgerning, at Roosevelt dengang så udsigten til denne form for et alliancesystem hen over Eurasien. Jeg mener, at der er en historisk baggrund, for netop denne form for russisk-kinesiske samarbejde, at se hen til her. I de seneste 15 år har det været en hjørnesten i Lyndon LaRouches globale politik med et USA-Rusland-Kina-Indien-samarbejde, især omkring videnskabelige programmer; især udforskning af rummet, som basis for global fred og udvikling. Så disse ideer er fremlagt.

Den 20. november sagde general Michael Flynn, kort tid efter, at han var blevet udnævnt af nyvalgte præsident Trump som national sikkerhedsrådgiver, i et interview med Fareed Zakhari på CNN, at, efter hans mening, var den eneste måde at håndtere problemerne med den jihadistiske terrortrussel i Mellemøsten og Nordafrika på længere sigt at have et globalt samarbejde omkring en Marshallplan – han brugte udtrykkeligt dette udtryk. Han sagde, hvis man ser på, hvad Europa var i stand til at præstere i kølvandet på Anden Verdenskrigs ødelæggelser, og den rolle, som Marshallplanen spillede; det var ikke det hele, men det var et vigtigt element i den økonomiske genrejsning efter krigen. Et perspektiv af denne art er virkelig den vindende strategi for at håndtere befolkningstilvæksten og spredningen af den saudisksponsorerede jihadisme i hele Mellemøsten/Nordafrika-området. Det går også ind i Sydvestasien.

Der findes altså enorme potentialer; de er i vid udstrækning foreløbigt ikke realiseret med hensyn til den forandring, der kommer med den ny administration. Men, som du sagde, Jason [Ross], så er der ingen grund til at vente til januar. Den nyvalgte præsident Trump krævede udtrykkeligt, i en tale i Charlotte, North Carolina, en genindførelse af Glass-Steagall. Det er i begge de to store politiske partiers valgplatform for dette års valg; både Demokraterne og Republikanerne har vedtaget det. Det var en Trump-delegeret til GOP [Grand Old Party – det Republikanske Parti] komiteen for politisk strategi, der introducerede Glass-Steagall. Der er senatorerne Elizabeth Warren, og vigtigere endnu, Bernie Sanders, som siger, at de er villige til at række over midtergangen og arbejde sammen med Donald Trump, hvis samarbejdsspørgsmålene inkluderer og virkelig begynder med Glass-Steagall. Så dette er noget, der ikke behøver at vente til januar og tiltrædelsen og den nye Kongres. Der er fremstillet lovforslag for Glass-Steagall i både Repræsentanternes Hus og Senatet. Et af forslagene i Huset har en ordlyd, der er identisk med Senatsforslaget. Som vi så det med vedtagelsen af underkendelsen af JASTA-vetoet, hvis lederskabet i Kongressen giver grønt lys, kan Glass-Steagall bringes til debat i begge huse og vedtages inden for få timer. Underkendelsen af JASTA-vetoet tog to timer om morgenen i USA’s Senat, og to en halv time eller så om eftermiddagen i Huset. Det opnåede man på en enkelt dag i Kongressen. Så der er ingen som helst grund til, at vi ikke omgående kan gennemføre det – i bogstavelig forstand i næste uge, når Kongressen atter samles efter Thanksgiving-ferien; og den vil sidde i de næste fire uger. Der er intet til hinder for, at vi kan få Glass-Steagall tilbage som landets lov før juleferien, så vi har det på plads til den nye administration; og tiden er rent ud sagt af afgørende betydning. Vi ved ikke, i betragtning af situationen med Deutsche Bank, med Royal Bank of Scotland, med de største, amerikanske for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-banker, der sidder på derivater til $252 billion. Det er 30 % mere end det var på tidspunktet for krakket i 2008. Det sidder på toppen af et meget tvivlsomt kapitalgrundlag på $14 billion; i virkeligheden er det sandsynligvis meget mindre end det, for nogle af de værdipapirer, som bliver talt med som kapitalreserver, er grundlæggende set illikvide og kan ikke – selv i nødstilfælde – gøres likvide.

Så vi kunne altså vågne i morgen, eller mandag morgen, eller midt i næste uge, og finde, at hele det transatlantiske banksystem er nedsmeltet. Så Glass-Steagall er altså et presserende hastespørgsmål; og det forudsætter dernæst de andre hovedelementer i LaRouches Fire Love. Det er et kreditsystem; investering i store infrastrukturprojekter; og en genoplivning af de mest avancerede, videnskabelige programmer, inklusive en storstilet tilbagevenden til rummet og det internationale arbejde for endelig at opnå det fulde gennembrud inden for fusion. Alle disse ting er på bordet, men igen, så er der ingen garantier; intet er blot tilnærmelsesvis sikkert mht., hvad det næste, der vil ske, bliver. Vi kan ånde lidt op, fordi faren for krig med Rusland og Kina er blevet meget reduceret; og der er en masse potentiale. Der er en masse af den form for overgang som fra Jimmy Carter til Ronald Reagan i luften som et potentiale; men intet af det er endnu fuldt ud realiseret. Folk må indse, at dette er et tidspunkt med store muligheder. Det vil blive et krav fra befolkningen under det rette lederskab, der er orienteret mod de rette politikker, der virkelig kan gribe muligheden. Hvis vi venter til januar eller februar næste år, hvem ved så, hvilke slags sabotageoperationer, man vil køre?

Man kan gå ind på Craigs Liste og finde dækgrupper for George Soros, såsom MoveOn.org og blacklivesmatter.org, der tilbyder $1500 om ugen for, at folk render rundt som idioter og protesterer imod resultatet af valget. Der er en hel del usikkerhed med hensyn til, hvad der foregår, samtidig med, at der er store muligheder. Vi må sikre os, at vi tager lederskabet mht. at gribe øjeblikket.

Ovenstående er første del af det Internationale Webcast; det engelske udskrift af hele webcastet følger her:

MAKE THE MOST OF THE OPENNESS IN POLICY NOW,
TO INSURE A NEW PARADIGM FOR THE UNITED STATES
BEFORE THE INAUGURATION
LaRouche PAC International Webcast, Saturday, November 26, 2016

        JASON ROSS:  Hi there!  Today is November 25, 2016; and
you're joining us for our regular webcast here from
larouchepac.com.  My name is Jason Ross; I'll be the host today.
I'm joined in the studio by Ben Deniston, my colleague here at
LaRouche PAC; and via video by Jeff Steinberg of Executive
Intelligence Review.
        This discussion is taking place 2.5 weeks after the November
8, 2016 Presidential election in the United States.  Since then,
we've seen a whirlwind of speculation about Cabinet appointments,
including some Cabinet appointments for the Trump administration.
We've also seen some significant international news, such as the
APEC summit which occurred last weekend; the Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation summit that included very significantly new
Philippines' President Duterte and Chinese Xi Jinping among the
many leaders who were there.  At this conference, Duterte again
emphasized that the Philippines no longer considers itself to be
a US colony; and is pursuing an independent policy economically
with China, countering the attempts to create conflict, for
example, in the South China Sea.  President Xi Jinping went on a
tour of Latin America while he was at the APEC summit. So in
addition to Peru — which hosted the event — he also visited
Chile and Ecuador; where he spoke, among other things, about the
bioceanic corridor, a plan for a rail link between the Pacific
and Atlantic sides of South America; about setting up science
cities.  He was greeted by President Correa in Ecuador, who
considered Xi Jinping's trip the most significant event to occur
in Ecuador's history; based on the potential that it offered that
nation.
        So, this New Paradigm, being led politically and
economically at present by Russia and by China, comes as a result
of decades of organizing by the LaRouche Movement, by Lyndon and
Helga LaRouche; such that there is now a New Paradigm taking an
increasingly larger portion of the world in a very positive
direction.  Our job at present isn't to get the hottest news on
what Trump's appointments will be, etc.  It is to shape US
policy; as we successfully did in forcing an override against
Obama's veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.
And as we stand poised to do now with getting the Congress —
during this lame duck session — to implement Glass-Steagall, the
necessary first step for an economic recovery.  Glass-Steagall is
the law that Franklin Roosevelt had put in place that created 60+
years of stable, boring, stable productive banking in the United
States; rather than the kind of gambling that we see now.
        Let me pull up this chart [Fig. 1] just to show a bit of
this success that we've seen along the Chinese economic program.
Along the One Belt, One Road nations which includes both the —
there's two components to China's project on this; the Silk Road
economic belt, which you see the nations in blue, and the 21st
Century Maritime Silk Road in orange.  Together, China refers to
this in Chinese as the "One Belt, One Road" initiative; in
English, often just the Belt and Road initiative.  As far as the
potential that this holds, these are just some of the figures:
20,000 km of high-speed rail in China, all built within the last
decade — more than the rest of the world combined; tens of
billions of dollars of direct investment into nations of the
region; an increase in services contracts of over 33% in just one
year along the One Belt, One Road; the Export/Import Bank of
China has outstanding involvement in over 1000 projects, and just
recently has signed up about 500 new projects along the Belt and
Road nations.  China is extending 150,000 scholarships offering
training for 500,000 for professionals for training in China; has
set up 500 Confucius institutes around the world, has initiated
over a dozen economic cooperation zones; free trade agreements,
and is engaged currently in over 40 energy projects — including
about 20 that were just set up this year among One Belt, One Road
nations.
        So, how can we become a part of this?  Well, a proposal was
made in the November 21st issue of {Chronicles} magazine by
Edward Lozansky and Jim Jatrus.  Losansky is the President of the
American University in Moscow.  They wrote an article called,
"The Big Three: America, Russia, and China Must Join Hands for
Security, Prosperity, and Peace".  Two excerpts.  They open their
article, "With the defeat of Hillary Clinton by Donald Trump, we
may never know how close America and all mankind came to nuclear
war."  In describing the world situation, they end with a
proposal: "President Donald Trump can correct the mistakes of
past U.S. presidents. Rather than adversaries Russia and China
can become Americaâs essential partners and are, we are
convinced, ready to respond positively. Itâs time for Trump and
America to take the initiative for U.S-Russia-China cooperation
towards a secure, prosperous, and peaceful future.  A
Trump-Putin-Xi 'Big Three Summit' should be a priority for the
new U.S. Presidentâs first 100 days."
        So, I'd like to ask Jeff Steinberg to fill out the world
picture, and detail for our viewers what are the flanks, what are
the handles, the levers that we have for shifting US policy at
this time?

JEFFREY STEINBERG:  Thanks, Jason.  For starters, it's very
important to realize that we're in a period of significant flux.
There are certain things that we know about the consequences of
the US Presidential elections and other Federal elections on
November 8th.  And I think Lozansky and Jatrus made one very
fundamental point quite clearly:  That there was a very grave
danger based on the campaign rhetoric of Hillary Clinton, based
on the policies that were pursued even ever more aggressively
towards the end of his eight years in office by President Barack
Obama; that we were headed for the worst crisis between the
United States and Russia that we ever experienced — worse
perhaps even than the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.  So, the
defeat of Hillary Clinton really is the end of the 16-year
tyranny of the Bush and Obama Presidencies.  How rapidly we can
turn the policies around under the new Trump Presidency, where
the Cabinet appointments are going to go, these are all unknowns;
they're not certain to us.
        So, we do know that particularly in the aftermath of the
APEC summit meeting that just concluded last week in Lima, Peru,
which was then followed by state visits by Chinese President Xi
Jinping to Peru and then to Chile afterwards; and prior to the
summit, he was in Ecuador.  We know that there's a tremendous
opportunity out there for the United States, under a Trump
Presidency, to precisely join in what has always been on the
table as an open invitation to the United States; namely, for the
United States to join in the World Land-Bridge project.  Because
without the United States, it's very difficult to conceive of
this as a World Land-Bridge; which is really what the world
requires right now.  There have been very preliminary phone
discussions between President-elect Trump and Russian President
Putin; they seem to have reached an agreement that they will have
a face-to-face summit meeting soon after the inauguration —
which is January 20th.  The idea, similarly, is for President
Trump, once he's inaugurated, to also meet quite soon with
Chinese President Xi Jinping.  I think the Lozansky-Jatrus idea
of a trilateral meeting would be extraordinarily valuable.  I
think it's important to remember that in 1944, the orientation of
President Franklin Roosevelt in the move to establish the United
Nations — which happened in 1945 — was to include both the
Soviet Union and China among the permanent five nations of the UN
Security Council.  Remember, Roosevelt understood that there were
imperial policies that were still at the core of the British
Empire with Churchill, and similarly with France.  So, the idea
of having Russia — the Soviet Union at the time — and China in
this permanent Security Council core grouping, reflected the fact
that Roosevelt at that time saw the prospect of that kind of an
alliance system across Eurasia.  So, I think that's there's an
historical basis to look to here for exactly this kind of
Russia-China cooperation.  For the last 15 years, a cornerstone
of Lyndon LaRouche's of global policy has been a
US-Russia-China-India cooperation, particularly on scientific
programs; especially space exploration, as the basis for global
peace and development.  So, those ideas are out there.
        On November 20th, soon after he was named by President-elect
Trump to be the National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn,
in an interview with Fareed Zakhari on CNN, said that in his
view, the only way to deal with the long-term problem of the
jihadist, terrorist threat in the Middle East and North Africa,
was for there to be a global cooperation on a Marshall Plan — he
used that term explicitly.  He said, if you look at what Europe
was able to accomplish in the aftermath of the devastation of
World War II, and the role that the Marshall Plan played; it was
not the whole thing, but it was an important element of the
postwar recovery.  That kind of perspective is really the winning
strategy for dealing with the population growth and this spread
of Saudi-sponsored jihadism throughout the Middle East-North
Africa region.  It extends into Southeast Asia as well.
        So, there are great potentialities; they are largely as yet
unrealized in terms of the change coming with the new
administration.  But I think, Jason, as you correctly said, there
is no reason to wait for January.  President-elect Trump, in a
major campaign speech in Charlotte, North Carolina, explicitly
called for reinstating Glass-Steagall.  It's in the platforms of
both major political parties from this year's elections; the
Democrats and the Republicans both adopted it.  It was a Trump
delegate to the policy committee of the GOP who introduced the
Glass-Steagall.  You've got Senators Elizabeth Warren, and more
importantly, Senator Bernie Sanders, saying that they're prepared
to reach across the aisle and work with Donald Trump if the
issues for collaboration include and really start with
Glass-Steagall.  So, this is something that does not have to wait
for January and the inauguration and the new Congress.  There are
Glass-Steagall bills in both the House and the Senate.  One of
the House bills has the identical language as the Senate bill.
As we saw with the JASTA veto override vote, if the Congressional
leadership gives the green lights, then Glass-Steagall can be
brought to the floor of both houses and can be debated and voted
within a matter of hours.  The override of JASTA took two hours
in the morning for the US Senate, and two and a half or so hours
in the afternoon for the House.  It was accomplished in one
legislative day.  So, there's no reason whatsoever that we can't
move immediately — literally next week when Congress is back in
session after Thanksgiving; and they're there for three weeks.
There's no reason that we should not have Glass-Steagall back as
the law of the land before the Christmas recess.  So that we hit
the ground running with the new administration; and frankly, time
is of the essence.  We don't know, given the situation with
Deutsche Bank, with Royal Bank of Scotland, the largest US
too-big-to-fail banks are sitting on $252 trillion in
derivatives.  That's 30% more than it was at the time of the 2008
crash.  That's on top of a very questionable capital base of $14
trillion; the reality is that it's probably much less than that,
because some of the assets that are allowed to be counted as the
capital reserves, are basically illiquid and can't be — even on
an emergency basis — made liquid.
        So, we could wake up tomorrow morning, or Monday morning, or
the middle of next week, and find that the entire trans-Atlantic
banking system has blown out.  So, Glass-Steagall is an urgent,
immediate issue; and it then begs the other three key elements of
LaRouche's Four Cardinal Laws.  Which is a credit system;
investment in major infrastructure projects; and a revival of the
most advanced scientific programs, including a major return to
space and the work internationally to finally achieve the full
breakthrough on fusion.  All of these things are on the table,
but again, there are no guarantees, there's nothing that's even
remotely certain about what's going to come next.  We can breathe
a little easier because danger of war with Russia, with China is
greatly reduced; and there's a lot of potentiality.  There's a
lot of the kind of transition from Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan
in the air as a potential; but none of it is fully realized yet.
So, people are going to have to realize this is a moment of great
opportunity.  It's going to be an outpouring of the population
under the right kind of leadership, directed at the right
policies, that can really seize the opportunity.  If we wait
until January of February of next year, who knows what kind of
sabotage operations are going to be run?
        You can go on Craig's List and find George Soros front
groups, like MoveOn.org and blacklivesmatter.org, offering $1500
a week for people to run around like idiots, protesting against
the outcome of the election. There's a great deal of uncertainty,
in terms of what's going on, at the same time that there's great
opportunity. We've got to make sure that we take the lead in
seizing the moment.

ROSS: Great! Thanks! In terms of the long-term outlook of where
we're going to go, what our policy should be, a major aspect of
this goes beyond legislation that affects us only here on Earth.
A major component, in fact the fourth component of the Four Laws
of Mr. LaRouche, the last one being the fusion driver crash
program, is connected with our existence beyond the planet, also
out in space. Ben wrote an article that's going to be in the
upcoming issue of the Hamiltonian about what a U.S. space
policy ought to be, and about the really long-term goals that we
have to have, and why this is important and essential. So, could
you tell us about that, Ben?

        BENJAMIN DENISTON: Gladly! As viewers are aware, this has
been an ongoing subject of discussion. Mr. LaRouche, as Jason is
saying, has put a major, major focus on, as a critical part of
the needed recovery program and the future of mankind. In this
article we tried to elevate people's thinking about space,
especially in the context of so many years and administrations
and decades of just zero-growth policies.
        One thing that's being discussed now, which is interesting
and useful, is how much NASA has been hijacked for this global
warming crap. A lot of NASA's budget has been redirected to
"Earth sciences." Not all Earth sciences are bad. There's a lot
of interesting science to learn about the Earth. But Earth
sciences is often a front to push this fraud of some man-made
global warming crisis. So, there's some discussion about NASA
being redirected away from wasting their time on this phony,
phony, fake crisis, which is not something we need to be
concerned about, and redirecting back to exploration. Surprise,
surprise. The Moon has come back now as a central subject of the
discussion. Anybody who had any sense would realize that once
Obama was out, this crazy asteroid mission [The Asteroid Impact
and Deflection Assessment (AIDA) mission] would likely be tossed
aside. Anybody who is serious would recognize that the Moon is
the next place to get back to.
        As Jeff was referencing, there's a lot of discussion, a lot
of openness. From our work and discussions with Mr. LaRouche, I
think it's critical to really raise the level of discussion to
the right basis. We can have exciting missions, we can have
inspiring missions, but the question to ask is: are we going to
have a program where the investments are going to be the basis
for creating a whole new level of activity, that will allows us
to do orders of magnitude more than we were able to do prior to
that investment? Is this going to create what Mr. LaRouche had
once defined as a "physical-economic platform?" Is this going to
create an entirely new platform of activity, of potential — of
infrastructure, of energy-flux density of technologies — which
comes together to support a qualitatively new level of potential
activity for mankind?
        That is the issue we want to put on the table right now.
This goes directly to the vision of Krafft Ehricke, the early
space pioneer who worked very closely with Lyndon and Helga
LaRouche in the '80s, who was one of the leading space
visionaries, who had outlined in great detail the initial basis
of mankind expanding to really becoming a Solar System species.
I'm going to get back to his work in a minute. Mr. LaRouche's
concept of the "platform" is really critical. He introduced this,
I think it was around the year 2010, 2009, something like that.
He was coming up against a real lack of understanding of the
significance of what "infrastructure" really means, in its true
scientific sense. Unfortunately, this has become somewhat of a
buzzword that a lot of people throw out there. "We need to
rebuild our infrastructure" has become a kind of a hot
campaign-trail word to use to get some support.
        The real understanding of what qualitative revolutions in
infrastructure systems mean for mankind's continual creative
progress is not connected to the way most people use that term.
Mr. LaRouche defined the very profound and critical assessment of
looking at the development of human civilization in these stages
of platforms. He said, go back to thousands of years ago, when
the dominant cultures were trans-oceanic maritime cultures. What
you began to see, with the development of inland waterways,
inland river systems — he had put a big point on what
Charlemagne was doing during his reign in central Europe in
developing these canal systems and river systems — was a
qualitative revolution above what had existed prior, with these
trans-oceanic civilizations: the development of these inland
waterways. That defined a new platform of activity that supported
a qualitative leap in what civilization was able to accomplish.
        The next leap came with the development of rail systems,
railroads, especially trans-continental railroads, typified by
what Lincoln had spearheaded with the trans-continental railroad
across America. With these rail systems, with the new
technologies of steam engines powering these rail systems, the
higher energy-flux density of coal-powered steam engines, this
enabled mankind to begin to develop the interior regions of the
continent, in completely new ways, and defined a totally new
relationship of mankind, of civilization, to the environment
around him. It defined a qualitative increase in mankind's
"potential relative population density," as LaRouche had
developed that metric for understanding the science of economic
growth. It made things that were at one point incredibly
expensive or challenging or risky, become just day-to-day regular
activities.
        I think back to the early phases of these frontier
explorations of the American Continent. You go back to the Lewis
and Clark Expeditions, where to travel from the east coast across
the entire mainland of the continent to the west coast required
someone like the leading skilled frontiersmen, and a very
dangerous, very challenging mission, which was a very brave
undertaking for a handful of people to actually be able to
accomplish that. Some decades later, with the rail system, with
the infrastructure of this railroad platform, any family could do
this. With your young children, you could hop on the rail line
and get across the country. Any entrepreneur could come out and
take advantage of the development of new territories that were
completely inaccessible before. It was a complete transformation
in our most fundamental ability to exist on the planet in these
different territories.
        Now what does this have to do with space? This is how we
should be thinking about space exploration, space
development–things that we view today as incredibly expensive,
difficult, dangerous missions. We should be thinking now what
kind of investments can we make to ensure that those then become
regular, day-to-day even, activities that we can support very
easily. What will it take to create a Solar System
physical-economic platform that will enable mankind to do much
more, much easier, than we can today? That's the metric we want
to set. That's the measuring rod we want to utilize, to determine
what kind of space program, what kind of policy we need today.
        In breaking this down, this might not include everything,
but in some of our work in the Basement with our discussions on
this subject, I think we can really, very usefully look at three
categories of activity — three categories of infrastructure and
technologies — which define the basis, you could say the
pillars, of a Solar System platform, of an ability to
qualitatively expand mankind's ability to access the Solar System
in completely new ways, to make things we currently view as
singular flagship missions, [into] just regular, easy activities
that we can do, orders of magnitude more of than we can now.

What we want to look at are these three categories of activity:

(1) Access to space. What's our ability to get from Earth's
surface up into Earth orbit? Initial basic access to space.

(2) Travelling in space. Getting around the Solar System. Getting
from one planetary body to the next.

(3) Developing resources. Developing the capabilities to utilize
the resources available to us throughout the Solar System, not
having to take everything with us everywhere we go, but be able
to develop the wealth that's available out there; to utilize it
on site and transport it around, even bringing stuff back to
Earth that we can't necessarily get from Earth.

        If you look at these three pillars, these three categories
together, and if you make qualitative breakthroughs in each of
these together, this really comes together to define a new
platform of activity, a new standard that will enable the kind of
leap that will transition us from viewing space as a Lewis and
Clark style expedition, to a trans-continental railroad style
relationship to the Solar System.
        I just want to take a couple minutes and go through just
some sense of what areas we can see breakthroughs in each of
these categories. Go to the first slide we have displayed. [Fig.
1] It has been said that getting from Earth's surface to low
Earth orbit, is half-way to anywhere in the Solar System. In a
certain sense that's very true. If you have a sense of the
scales, that might sound very, very strange, because, just in
terms of distance, low Earth orbit [begins] about 160 km, about
100 miles, up above your head. If you want to travel to the Moon,
you're talking about hundreds of thousands of miles. If you want
to travel to another planet, you're talking about millions of
miles.
        It's a little funny to think that the first 100 miles,
compared to hundreds of thousands or millions, is actually half
of the trip. But if you look at the energy requirements and what
it takes to actually start from just being on the Earth's surface
and getting into orbit, that is the case. It is a tremendous
amount of energy requirement to get from Earth's surface up into
Earth orbit.
        The graphic here displays this, in terms of travel from
Earth's surface to different planetary bodies, measured in the
standard terms used for Solar System travel, which is your change
in speed. To get into Earth orbit requires not just going up 100
miles, but actually changing your speed, from your current
velocity sitting here on the Earth, to something that will allow
you to stay in orbit. If you want to change orbits, or travel
around, you can measure that, in terms of changes in velocity.
So that happens to be the metric here; but you can see the lowest
dark blue bar on each of these graphics shows that literally far
more than half of the requirement is just getting from Earth's
surface to Earth orbit.

        ROSS:  So, this is half of the speed that you're getting;
this doesn't mean half of the energy, or half of the fuel, or
anything like that.

        DENISTON:  Yeah.  Once you start to include that, it would
be even more energy requirements; because you've got to lift your
fuel that you're going to use for the different travels into
orbit with you.  It definitely gets a little more detailed if you
want to get into it, but this is literally the change in speed
requirements to get into Earth orbit and then to leave Earth
orbit is very significant.
        So, there's improvements being made in rocket systems to get
up more efficiently, but there are new technologies that are just
sitting there on the horizon; they've been sitting there for
decades, frankly, that would dramatically lower the cost, lower
the requirements, and the point is, dramatically increase the
accessibility of space to mankind.  One technology that has been
discussed for a long time is space planes.  Here in the graphic
you can see a relatively recent article covering studies in China
on interest in China to develop what some people call
single-stage-to-orbit space planes.  So, you can get on a plane
on a runway — it's probably going to be a little bit longer than
your standard runway for airplane travel — and you can ride a
single space plane from the runway all the way up into Earth
orbit.  A lot of this depends upon much more advanced engine
designs that can utilize the oxygen in the atmosphere at higher
speeds and at higher altitudes to continue to provide thrust.
But these things could dramatically lower the cost, the energy
requirements of getting people and payloads up into Earth orbit;
far more than a lot of the discussion about these reusable
rockets and some of the developments going on in improving rocket
systems to get from Earth's surface into Earth orbit.

        ROSS:  This is a technology that was in LaRouche's "Woman on
Mars" video from the 1980s, right?  It talked about beginning
with an airplane, and then turning into a rocket.  The big
benefit being that you can use the oxygen in the atmosphere
instead of carrying it with you, is that right?  Is that what
makes this more effective?

        DENISTON:  Yeah, absolutely.  These rocket systems have to
carry the oxygen as part of the rocket to combust to provide the
thrust.  These are more innovative engine designs —
air-breathing engines that can use the oxygen in the atmosphere.
As you said, this has been researched in the United States with
different scramjet designs.  Yeah, Mr. LaRouche featured some of
this, which he had developed I think in some close discussion
with some Italian colleagues at the time in his collaboration
with the Fusion Energy Foundation; and had made it a major part
of his "Woman on Mars" mission.
        But this is being developed; this is live.  Again, you're
seeing clear interest in China; there's interest in the United
States; there's a company in the United Kingdom that's developing
very interesting engine designs that can utilize these
capabilities.  If you want to take it a step further, another
thing that's been discussed is using vacuum tube maglev
technologies to launch from Earth orbit into space.  This might
be a little more frontier and not quite as around the corner as
these space planes; but this is the kind of stuff that we should
be thinking about.  Again, the point is, completely
revolutionizing mankind's access to low-Earth orbit and then to
the Solar System.  So, this is the first major hurdle.  If you
get some solid infrastructure developments that can enable
mankind to overcome this hurdle more easily, you're creating the
basis for a much broader expansion of mankind's activity.
        The next pillar, the next category is travel in space.  And
again, this is an issue that Mr. LaRouche has been campaigning on
for decades.  Space travel requires nuclear reactions; chemical
fuel just doesn't have the energy density to provide quick and
efficient access to the Solar System.  We can get to the Moon;
that's OK.  It probably would be nice to get there a little bit
quicker, but that's our next door neighbor in terms of the Solar
System.  If you want to get to Mars, you want to get around to
other places in the Solar System, you've got to get to nuclear
reactions.  The heart of this is the fact that the energy
density, the energy per mass of nuclear reactions is, on average,
on the order of a million times greater than the energy per mass
in chemical reactions; even as broad categories, setting aside
the particular fuel you use in either case.
        A million times is just a big number, but for one quick
comparison, you take the fuel used for the Space Shuttle launch
— those two solid rocket boosters on either side, the large tank
in the middle filled with liquid fuel.  You take the weight of
all that fuel together, some of the most advanced chemical
reactions we have for fuel for space launch; how much weight of
nuclear fuel would it take to contain the same amount of energy?
You're talking about 10 pounds!  One suitcase full of nuclear
fuel contains the same amount of energy as all three fuel tanks
of the Space Shuttle.  To be fair, you couldn't necessarily use
that fuel the same way to launch the Space Shuttle; you have to
have systems that can actually combust it and get thrust out of
it.  It's not just the energy content as the only issue, but that
is the defining characteristic that makes nuclear reactions key
to getting around the Solar System; enabling things like
travelling at constant acceleration.  Instead of just initially
firing your thruster and basically floating on an orbit to get to
different planetary bodies — which is what's often proposed for
getting people to Mars; which would take on the order of six,
seven, eight months to do.  If you had nuclear reactions —
especially fusion reactions — you can be accelerating for half
the trip, and decelerating the second half of the trip; you can
cut that time down to weeks or even days.
        We were all excited that New Horizons got to Pluto.
Unfortunately, it didn't have the fuel in it and the engines to
slow down when it got there; which is too bad, because it spent
ten years getting there, and even just passing by in the course
of a couple of weeks, found amazing things.  Imagine if it
actually got to stop and stay?  If you had nuclear reactions,
that the type of stuff you could be doing.  If you had
one-gravity acceleration, so you're constantly accelerating,
providing the thrust that creates the equivalent of one Earth
gravity for the crew on the space ship, it would literally take
16 days to get to Pluto.  Compared to New Horizons taking ten
years to get there; that's when the orbits are closest, but maybe
a few more days in sub-optimal conditions.
        You're talking about a complete revolution in our ability to
efficiently get around the Solar System; travel to different
planetary bodies; visit multiple locations.  If you want to send
people to Mars, this is the way to do it.  If you want to send
people out to other places, this is the way to do it.  Even
robotic missions; you want to get around and do way more
exploration.  There's so much we don't know about all these
planets, about their moons; there's just so much to figure out.
These are the kinds of systems that are going to create vast
improvements in our ability to do it.
        And again, the third category is developing the resources in
space; developing the ability to utilize what's available to us
on the Moon, on Mars, on different asteroids.  This is something
we don't really do at all, yet.  So, you have to bring basically
everything with you through that very costly energy-intensive
first hurdle of getting from Earth's surface up into Earth orbit,
through travelling the vast distances of space.  This is just
this very early pioneer style mode of activity.  Whereas, if
we're going to be serious about this, we need to develop the
capabilities to utilize the resources that are there; and
eventually look to serious industrialization and development of
advanced systems out in space, on-site at different planetary
bodies.  One critical driver to this whole thing that we've put a
major focus on is the development of helium-3 from the Moon.
Helium-3 being an absolutely unique, excellent fusion fuel; which
is basically absent on Earth, but relatively abundant all over
the lunar surface, and could be an excellent fuel for fusion
propulsion in space and also to provide electricity energy back
here on Earth.  There's been years of serious study and designs
and investigations of how to go to the Moon, develop the systems
to process the regala[ph], extract the helium-3; and initiate
real industrial-style processes; developments on the lunar
surface.  That's just one example.  You want to get oxygen,
hydrogen, metals; asteroids are also potentially very useful
places to develop the resources.  So, as a third category, the
general idea of developing advanced capabilities to utilize and
create what we need in different regions of the Solar System.
        If you put this together and look at these things
synergistically as integrated technologies, infrastructure
systems, levels of energy flux density; as a whole they define
for mankind a completely different relationship to the Solar
System.  The question is, are we making investments that are
bringing us to that level?  Can we say that the investments we're
going to make in this next administration are going to be taking
mankind in that direction, to be able to support these
qualitatively higher levels of activity to the point where we can
honestly look back in a couple of generations and see the space
activity going on now as equivalent to Lewis and Clark style
explorations of the West; and have mankind have the capabilities
to regularly visit many planetary bodies and do all we want
around the Solar System?  That's the vision that we need.
        We were talking about this with Mr. LaRouche earlier today,
and he again said, "Your starting point is Krafft Ehricke."  And
Krafft Ehricke's industrialization of the Moon really I think is
the critical driver program that can get a lot of this going.  As
I said, we have helium-3 on the Moon; that puts fusion directly
right there on the table.  You're talking about developing
industrial capabilities and mining capabilities on the Moon.  If
you're serious about doing this, you want to increase our access
to space from the Earth's surface.  So, it is excellent that
we're seeing a lot of discussion about the Moon coming on the
table again; but I think the issue is, are we going to pursue
this Krafft Ehricke vision for a real industrial development?
Although he might have used different terms in discussing it, he
had exactly the same conception that Mr. LaRouche has:  That this
is the basis for mankind's much broader expanse.  Really the
essential nature of the type of qualitative changes that mankind
goes through in his natural growth and development as a very
unique species on this Earth and hopefully tomorrow in the Solar
System.
        As Jason mentioned, some of this is discussed in an article
that's going to be released in the next issue of the
Hamiltonian.  This is an ongoing subject of discussion, but
with the openness now, I really think it's critical we set the
level of discussion on that basis.

        ROSS:  Mmhmm; that's aiming pretty high, that's good.  I
think that's a really apt description that you got about
comparing Lewis and Clark.  It used to be a really difficult
thing to cross the continent; now it isn't.  Or think about the
Silk Road.  The ancient Silk Road.  If you're trying the develop
that region of the planet with camel caravans, and you contrast
that with what China is able to do now with building rail
networks and helping build them and road networks in these
neighboring countries; you totally transform the relationship to
that area.  The old development of human settlements along
coasts, along oceans or along rivers; and then by the chemical
revolution, by the ability to have steam power — also canals
earlier, but still connected to water; but with steam power, it
made it possible to open up the interior of the continents.  And
with the potential for nuclear power, then the Solar System
becomes something that's accessible to us in a meaningful or more
regular way than an exotic, years-long, life-threatening trip.
        The other aspect, which you talked about is, if you look at
what's going on with the New Paradigm in the world; what China's
doing, with the way things are being reshaped politically also
around Russia.  And then you look at the scientific advancements
that are being made, where China's got a very top-line in the
world super-conducting tokamak for fusion research.  The major
breakthroughs in terms of lunar exploration — that's China right
now; China's going to be landing on the far side of the Moon;
China had the first soft landing on the Moon in decades.  This is
really a potential.  With their far side of the Moon landing,
China will be able to take the first photographs of our universe
in the very low radio range; it's never been done before.  We'll
have access to a whole new sense of sight about the universe
around us.
        So, I think it's very exciting.  It's definitely much more
thrilling than most of the discussion that takes place about this
policy or that policy, when you think big like that.

DENISTON:  Mr. LaRouche's platform concept is so key.  People
just don't have the idea of this type of qualitative leaps that
are natural for mankind.  People are so accustomed at this point
to just slow, incremental progress if there's any progress at
all.  It's going to be a fight to get people to think on this
level again.

        ROSS:  Yes!  So much of what is considered to be progressive
or useful is only nudging people toward being better savers or
something; compared to the kinds of huge changes that are going
to be needed.  I think that's a very good image that we've given
people.  Let's end it with that.  I think the thing to take from
this also is that we have got a lot that we need to do; a lot of
policies to put into place; and a wide open opportunity to make
it happen right now.  Including, as Jeff was emphasizing,
Glass-Steagall is absolutely doable during this session of
Congress; even before the inauguration of the next President and
the next Congress in January.  This is something we can do right
now, next week, in this period.
        The ability to understand this concept of the platforms, of
the history of economic development of the United States, a real
major aspect of economic science, comes through studying
Alexander Hamilton.  So, if you have not been working through
Alexander Hamilton's reports, I urge you to get in touch with —
if you're near one of our offices, one of our locations, to join
us for these readings.  Get a copy of these reports yourself.
The book, Alexander Hamilton's Vision contains all four of the
reports, along with Mr. LaRouche's Four New Laws to Save the USA
Now.  And you don't have to get into a fistfight at a Walmart
parking lot to pick it up, either.
        Let's end it with that.  Please sign up through our website
if you haven't already, to find out how to get involved with us.
Get our daily email, join us via the action center; let's be in
touch, and let's make this happen right now.  There is nothing to
wait for; the situation is open.  So, thank you for joining us;
thank you to Ben and Jeff.  Thank you for all the work that you
have done and that you will do in the period immediately ahead.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 24. november, 2016 – LaRouches Fire Love udgør én samlet politik, der tilsigter en forøgelse af menneskelig produktivitet.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

21. nov., 2016 – Impetu, »dekanen« for pressen i Pucallpa, hovedstaden i Ucayali-distriktet i det østlige Peru, erkendte, at Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche leverede en vidtrækkende vision for hele menneskehedens fremtid, i sin tale på åbningsdagen, den 17. nov.,[1] for Sammenslutningen af Økonomer i Perus XXIII Kongres, der blev afholdt i denne Amazon-by med 200.000 indbyggere. Impetu gav sin historie på kongressens første dag titlen, »Kongres for økonomer diskuterer fremtidsplan for en Måneøkonomi«.

Zepp-LaRouche, stifter af Schiller Instituttet og formand for det tyske, politiske parti BüSo, og hustru til den amerikanske politiker, Lyndon LaRouche, »fremførte, at, om mindre end ét år, er der skabt en alliance af nationer, der har opbygget en paralleløkonomi i halsbrækende tempo, og som udelukkende er helliget opbygning af realøkonomi, i modsætning til maksimering af spekulative monetære gevinster, og som nu omfatter mere end halvdelen af menneskeheden«, skrev Impetu.

»Dette nye fællesskab af nationer – fortsatte Zepp-LaRouche – repræsenterer et kraftcenter, baseret på økonomisk vækst og, frem for alt, baseret på avanceret teknologi, der hører fremtiden til, som man ser det i det succesfulde, kinesiske program for udforskning af Månen, der fokuserer på tanken om at bringe store mængder helium-3 fra Månen til Jorden til brug i en fremtidig, termonuklear fusionsøkonomi.[2] Hun fremførte, at denne kurs for en fremtidsøkonomi vil øge energigennemstrømningstætheden i en helt anden størrelsesorden, både i produktionsprocessen på Jorden, såvel som også mht. brændstof til rumrejser, og på denne måde introducere en helt ny fase i den menneskelige arts evolution.« 

Det følgende er uddrag af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings hovedtale for Asien-Stillehavsområdets Økonomiske Samarbejde (APEC) ledertopmødet i Lima, Peru, 19. november, 2016. Hele talen kan læses her:
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1019023.shtml

I dag er vi kommet til Lima fra hele verden for at forfølge de samme mål om velstand for det asiatiske Stillehavsområde …

For to måneder siden afholdt vi et succesrigt G20-topmøde i Hangzhou, Kina, hvor jeg selv og andre ledere førte dybtgående diskussioner og nåede frem til en vigtig konsensus omkring betydningsfulde spørgsmål, som verdensøkonomien konfronteres med … Vi aftalte, at, stedt over for risici og udfordringer, må alle parter arbejde sammen i partnerskabets ånd om win-win-resultater, for at styrke koordineringen af makroøkonomisk politik og finde kreative måder til ansporing af vækst …

For at en regional handelsaftale skal vinde bred tilslutning, må den være åben, inkluderende og til alles fordel. Vi må etablere en ramme for regionalt samarbejde, der fremviser jævnbyrdig rådslagning, fælles medvirken og fælles fordele. Et lukket og ekskluderende arrangement er ikke det rette valg.

I denne sammenhæng er opbygningen af et Frihandelsområde for det asiatiske Stillehavsområde (FTAAP), som rammende af erhvervssamfundet anses for at være APEC’s drøm, et strategisk initiativ, der er afgørende for det asiatiske Stillehavsområdes velstand på længere sigt …

På et globalt plan er en ny runde af en revolution inden for videnskab, teknologi og industri og globale værdikæder i færd med at blive formet på ny. Alle disse udviklinger har føjet nye dimensioner til økonomisk globalisering …

For det andet, så bør vi styrke sammenhængskraften for at opnå sammenhængende udvikling. Sammenhængskraft udløser potentiale og understøtter sammenhængende udvikling. Vi må opbygge multidimensionalt netværk for sammenhængskraft, der dækker det asiatiske Stillehavsområde. Efter otte år stiller Latinamerika atter op som vært for APEC-mødet. Vi bør gribe denne anledning til at koordinere programmer, der fremmer sammenhængen mellem Stillehavets to kyster, for at støtte og styrke realøkonomien i hele området …

For tre år siden foreslog jeg initiativet for Bæltet-og-Vejen. Det har til formål at styrke sammenhængskraften for at fremme den frie strøm af produktionsfaktorer og skabe en platform for win-win-samarbejde og fælles fordele for alle. Flere end 100 lande og internationale organisationer har tilsluttet sig eller givet udtryk for støtte til dette initiativ og således skabt en stærk kreds af venner, der er kommet sammen omkring en fælles vision, gensidig tillid og venskab. Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB) er nu i drift. Silkevejsfonden er på plads. Flere store projekter er blevet lanceret og genererer enorme økonomiske og samfundsmæssige fordele … Kina byder alle parter velkommen til at gå med i dette initiativ for at imødegå udfordringer, være fælles om mulighederne og søge fælles udvikling.

For det tredje, så bør vi styrke reform og innovation for at skabe mere intern drivkraft …

Vi bør skifte vækstmodel, resolut tilpasse økonomisk struktur gennem reform og hæve multi-faktor produktivitet. Vi bør fremskynde koordinering af makropolitik, med fast hånd fremme strukturreformer og forøge den positive afsmitning. Vi bør fremskynde indsatsen for at udforske en ny filosofi, model og kurs for udvikling, aktivere social kreativitet og på markedet flytte vore industrier og produkter op ad den globale værdikæde og udvide rummet for udvikling.

For det fjerde bør vi promovere win-win-samarbejde for at smede stærke partnerskaber … vi bør forpligte os til at opbygge et fællesskab for en fælles fremtid[,] … og ethvert forsøg på at underminere eller ekskludere hinanden må afvises …

I de seneste mange år efter udbruddet af den internationale finanskrise har Kina bidraget med næsten 40 % af den globale vækst og har spillet en nøglerolle i at være drivkraft i den globale, økonomiske genrejsning …

Vi vil promovere innovationsdrevet udvikling og erstatte gamle faktorer for drivkraft for vækst med nye. Vi vil fortsætte med at forfølge strategien med innovationsdrevet udvikling og intensivere strukturreformer inden for forskning og udvikling for at udskifte en forældet tankegang og fjerne institutionelle forhindringer, fuldt ud gøre indflydelsen af videnskabens og teknologiens rolle i økonomisk og social udvikling gældende og trække på alle kilder til innovation. Vi vil yderligere skabe en pulje af foretagenders, universiteters og forskningsinstitutters bestræbelser, for at aktivere erhvervsorganisationer, folk, markedet og kapitalen til at gøre innovationsbaseret udvikling til drivkraften. Vi vil stimulere nye teknologier, nye industrier og nye foretagender således, at fremskridt inden for innovation vil blive anvendt i økonomiske operationer og forvandlet til nye kræfter, der driver væksten frem.

Vi vil promovere tovejs-åbenhed af høj standard for at levere win-win-resultater …

Vi vil intensivere vores afgørende kamp mod fattigdom således, at, frem til 2020, alle de 55,75 mio. mennesker i Kinas landdistrikter, som lever under den nuværende fattigdomsgrænse, vil blive løftet ud af fattigdom …

Kina har engageret sig forpligtende til fredelig udvikling og en win-win-strategi med åbenhed. Samtidig med, at Kina stræber efter sin egen udvikling, vil Kina også arbejde for at fremme den fælles udvikling af alle lande i det asiatiske Stillehavsområde og skabe flere muligheder for mennesker i vores region.

Erhvervssamfundet, som den mest dynamiske kraft i den globale økonomi, spiller en afgørende rolle som drivkraft bag reform, udvikling og innovation. Jeg håber, I vil tage lederskab i forfølgelsen af win-win-samarbejde og yde nye bidrag til økonomisk vækst i både det asiatiske Stillehavsområde, og i hele verden.

Foto: Kinas præsident Xi Jinping holder sin hovedtale ved APEC-topmødet i Lima, Peru, 19. nov., 2016.       

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 20. november, 2016 – Idet Lyndon LaRouche gjorde status over de betydningsfulde, strategiske fremskridt, der i den seneste periode er opnået over hele planeten, og over de fremskridt, der fortsat ikke er realiseret, sagde han i dag til sine medarbejdere, at »det, der finder sted nu, er i vid udstrækning fremskridt, men det er ikke endegyldigt … vi gør fremskridt, men denne form for fremskridt lever ikke op til menneskehedens behov … Spørgsmålet er, hvad menneskeheden kan gøre for at ændre universets adfærd som sådan«.

LaRouches dybtgående diskussion er afgørende for at imødegå de udfordringer, som menneskeheden nu konfronteres med.

Ugen sluttede med endnu et ødelæggende nederlag for Obama, denne gang et nederlag for hans frihandelspolitik ved APEC-topmødet i Lima, Peru, i takt med, at det globale tyngdepunkt skifter over til de succesrige initiativer, som Kina og Rusland tager. Dér, hvor vi nu står, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche til medarbejdere, er, at

»Jeg mener, vi nu er vidne til en fortsættelse af det meget høje tempo i den dynamik, der har været den fremherskende i de seneste to en halv måned, eller lidt længere, begyndende med Vladivostok-mødet; integrationen af den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union (EAEU) og Ét bælte, én vej; fortsættelsen heraf ved G20-topmmødet i Hangzhou; og dernæst ved ASEAN-mødet i Laos; efterfulgt af BRIKS-konferencen i Goa, Indien, i oktober måned; og nu, under APEC-mødet i Lima, Peru.

Det, der står helt klart, er, at tyngdepunktet og magtcentret fuldstændigt er skiftet over til denne dynamik, især med integrationen af Kinas og Ruslands politik. Og hvad der hermed følger er en fortsættende eksplosion af infrastruktur og andre udviklingsprojekter, som, hvis man tager dem samlet set, virkelig er en bjergtagende dynamik, der i løbet af de seneste tre år har fundet sted i et stadigt stigende tempo.

Dette er ganske afgjort verdens kraftcenter i øjeblikket, for det står ganske klart, at de transatlantiske etablissementer er fuldstændigt ude af stand til at fatte, at deres model, med globalisering og neoliberal fordeling af rigdom, fra de fattige til de rige, har lidt totalt nederlag. Og de er hverken i stand til at forudsige udviklinger eller håndtere konsekvenserne af sådanne begivenheder som Brexit og valget af Trump.«

Men, den umiddelbart foreliggende udfordring – med at bruge den tidevandsbølge, der nu fejer ind over USA, som det kom til udtryk i præsidentvalget, til endelig at bringe USA med om bord i Verdenslandbroens Nye Paradigme – kræver, at vi erkender og vender vores opmærksomhed mod et langt dybere spørgsmål. I sin diskussion med medarbejdere udtalte LaRouche, i uddrag:

»Jeg ved, at det, vi nu gør, i virkeligheden ikke er så fremragende, selv om det ser strålende ud – For, hvis vi ikke ser disse overliggende overvejelser, som folk forsøger at overse – hvor de siger, ’det når vi til senere, det kommer vi til, lad være med at presse jer selv for meget’ – det er det, der bekymrer mig.

Vi er kommet til noget i denne forandring, der nu finder sted, hvor vi sandsynligvis har fået en misforstået selvtillid. Det betyder ikke, at vi som sådan gør noget, der er dårligt, men det betyder, at vi ikke rigtig har fået fat i, hvad det er for et princip, på hvilket menneskehedens fremtid beror …

Spørgsmålet drejer sig om menneskets iboende natur, som Einstein forstod i visse af sine videnskabelige arbejder. Det gjorde han! Og det er, hvad vi har mistet. Vi gik bort fra denne form for idé og besluttede at satse på en mere økonomisk fremgangsmåde …

Vi har gjort nogle gode ting. Vi har forbedret kvaliteten af menneskeheden generelt, menneskehedens kvaliteter generelt, på basis af visse projekter, visse ting. Men, vi har mistet spørgsmålet om, hvad meningen med menneskets eksistens er. Det vil sige, af hvilken art er selve eksistensen, selve arten af det mulige menneske?

Det, vi gør, er godt, i vid udstrækning; i visse dele af verden og inden for visse af livets aspekter. Men, det er ikke det, menneskeheden rent faktisk har behov for. Mennesket må vide, hvad begrundelsen for mennesker, for menneskelige væsner, er, noget, der aldrig bliver forstået af blot og bart dødelige mennesker, der ser på sig selv i en sådan kategori …

Hvad er betydningen, den iboende betydning, af et menneske? Af ethvert menneskes eksistens? Eller af alle mennesker?

Det, der nu finder sted, er i vid udstrækning fremskridt – men det er ikke endegyldigt …

Det vi har med at gøre, er spørgsmålet: Hvad er skabelsens natur? Spørgsmålet er, hvad er den fundamentale mening med mennesket? Hvad er menneskeslægtens natur, som en universel ting? Universet er organiseret, og man må derfor tænke på et univers, der er iboende organiseret. Ikke praktisk organiseret, men iboende organiseret …

Folk ved ikke, hvad det er, der får universet til at fungere. Hvad er det, der er karakteristisk for menneskeheden, og som gør den overlegen i forhold til alt, hvad vi ved om alle former for dyr …?

Vi gør fremskridt; men denne form for fremskridt er ikke tilstrækkelig til at opfylde det, der kræves af menneskeheden. Der er noget i universet, der kontrollerer og bestemmer universets betydning, som en mission.

Hvad er det, der får universet til at gøre, hvad det gør for menneskehedens funktion som sådan? Spørgsmålet er, hvad menneskeheden kan gøre for at ændre universets adfærd, som sådan?«

Foto: Mennesket og Universet – Universet, og mennesket.      

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 17. november, 2016 – I hele nationen, og i hele verden, træder ledende personer nu frem for at fastslå det potentiale, der nu præsenteres for USA og verden, for at gøre en ende på den død og ødelæggelse, der er blevet gennemtvunget under administrationerne Bush og Obama. General Harald Kujat, tidligere stabschef for det tyske Bundeswehr, har påpeget de drastisk forbedrede relationer mellem USA og Rusland, som Trump og Putin har sat i gang som grundlaget – og det eneste grundlag – for at løse de uhyrlige kriser i Ukraine og Syrien. Tidligere amerikanske ambassadør Chas Freeman, der også tidligere har været viceforsvarsminister, sagde i et interview med Ron Paul, at Trump »bør erindre sig, at han grundlæggende set har anført en revolution – han anførte en flok mennesker, som Hillary Clinton kaldte ynkelige, til at komme ud til stemmeurnerne og markere deres afvisning af ’politik som hidtil’ i Washington, og til den rent ud sagt degenererede atmosfære i vores politiske kultur«.  Han roste Trumps stærke insisteren på, at USA må gå sammen med Rusland og fokusere på at knuse ISIS i Syrien snarere end at vælte Assad for regimeskift i Syrien og tilføjede, at det var »rent ud sagt vanvittigt, at USA prætenderer, at vi har absolut fortrinsret i havene ud for Kina på ubestemt tid«

Fremkaldt af valgchokket er en politisk følsomhed ved at overvinde den amerikanske befolknings og de europæiske befolkningers accept af ledere, der sanseløst dræber hundreder af tusinder af mennesker og ødelægger hele nationer samtidig med, at de fordriver millioner fra deres hjem som flygtninge.

Men, hvad er da årsagen til denne tidligere blinde accept af sådan ondskab? Den må fastslås som værende lokaliseret i befolkningernes degenererede intellekt, i ødelæggelsen af de menneskelige, skabende evner hos folk, der i to årtier har været underkastet et kulturelt forfald. Når troen på menneskets videnskabelige evne til at »underlægge sig hele naturen«, både på Jorden og i Universet, fordømmes af ’de grønne’ som en ødelæggelse af Moder Jord, og underholdning reduceres til narkotika, vold og perversioner; når skøn musik erstattes af pulserende støj – da er det muligt at overbevise folkeslagene om at lukke deres øjne for den rædsel, der begås i deres navn.

Nu er disse sind ved at blive vækket, både gennem den økonomiske ødelæggelse af deres liv, og gennem den revolutionerende ændring via valget, der giver et glimt af håb.

Som Lyndon LaRouche har sagt i mere end fyrre år, så er det i et sådant skæbnesvangert øjeblik i historien, at den optimistiske tro på menneskehedens potentiale for fremskridt kan og må genoprettes og sikre en fremtid for alle mænd og kvinder på vores planet, gennem videnskabelige fremskridt, der løfter vort blik mod stjernerne, og gennem skønheden i klassisk kunst og musik, »ved hvilken man kommer til frihed«, som Friedrich Schiller sagde.

Frihed, fra City of Londons og Wall Streets destruktive magt over de vestlige regeringer, er nu inden for rækkevidde i takt med, at parlamentarikere, slagne af forbløffelse, i Europa og USA konfronteres med det eneste alternativ til det bankerotte, vestlige finanssystems ukontrollable kollaps: en Glass/Steagall-reform for at lukke de for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-spillebuler på Wall Street ned, og med en kreditpolitik i Hamiltons tradition, med princippet om national, dvs. statslig, bankpraksis til genrejsning af økonomien, rumprogrammet, videnskabelig forskning og internationalt samarbejde omkring nationsopbygning i hele verden, hvor den Nye Silkevej bringes til hele menneskeheden. (LaRouches Fire Økonomiske Love til USA’s – og verdens – omgående redning.) 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYvdB5j1Flk

Helga Zepp-LaRouche diskuterer strategi med aktivister fra LaRouchePAC, der er på vej til Washington, D.C., hvor hun understreger, at Trumps sejr og Clintons nederlag må ses som en del af et internationalt kursskifte. Det er nu op til os at sætte dagsordenen, begyndende med LaRouches Fire Love i traditionen efter Hamilton.

»Først og fremmest vil jeg gerne sige hej til jer. Dette er selvfølgelig en meget vigtig intervention, for valgresultatet i USA, som mange mennesker ikke så komme, er i realiteten en del af en global udvikling. Alle forklaringerne, som de amerikanske medier kommer med, er for det meste røgslør, eller en eller anden forloren forklaring, som f.eks., at det var FBI, der kostede Hillary valget, osv., osv.

Det, der i virkeligheden finder sted rent strategisk, er, at befolkningsmasserne i den transatlantiske sektor – i Europa, og i USA i særdeleshed – nu virkelig har fået nok af et Establishment, der vedvarende har handlet imod deres interesser. Det, de kalder »overløberstaterne« – menneskene i disse stater er ikke repræsenteret af det transatlantiske etablissement. Dette ved de, fordi, for dem, er livs- og arbejdsvilkårene i løbet af det seneste årti, kan man sige, men i realiteten i løbet af de seneste 50 år, kun blevet værre og værre. Folk er nødt til at have flere jobs samtidig for at få økonomien til at hænge sammen. Der har været mange tilfælde, hvor deres sønner, og undertiden endda deres døtre, er blevet udsendt til Irak fem gange i træk og er kommet hjem, totalt nedbrudte. Så folk har oplevet, at livet bare bliver værre for dem, og at de med Washington/New York-etablissementet intet håb har.

Man så det samme fænomen med Brexit-folkeafstemningen i Storbritannien i juni måned; som også her ikke bare handlede om flygtningene, og ikke bare handlede om de mere åbenlyse spørgsmål, selv om disse spiller en vis katalyserende rolle; men, det var den samme, fundamentale følelse af uretfærdighed, og at der simpelt hen ikke længere findes en regering, der tager sig af det almene vel. Og uanset, hvilke forklaringer, de hoster op med, så vil dette ikke forsvinde, før situationen er forbedret, og god regering er genetableret i USA og Europa, og i andre dele af verden.

Det umiddelbart næste punkt, hvor den samme vrede med al sandsynlighed vil vise sig, er ved den forestående folkeafstemning i Italien – hvor man den 4. december vil have en folkeafstemning om en forfatningsændring og, som stemningen i øjeblikket er, som også vil blive en afstemning imod Renzi-regeringen. Renzi lovede først at træde tilbage; nu siger han, at han ikke vil træde tilbage: Under alle omstændigheder, så vil denne udvikling fortsætte, indtil man indsætter en forbedring.

Trumps valgsejr er selvsagt et åbent spørgsmål, for det står endnu ikke klart, hvad hans præsidentskab vil blive for ét; men, som Lyndon LaRouche har understreget næsten hver dag siden valget, så er dette ikke et lokalt, amerikansk anliggende. Dette er et globalt anliggende; det er et internationalt spørgsmål.

En af de væsentligste grunde til, at Trump vandt valget, er, at han, især i den seneste fase, havde understreget, at Hillary Clinton ville betyde Tredje Verdenskrig pga. hendes politik for Syrien, fordi hun … foreslog en frontal konfrontation med Rusland. Det var præcist at ramme hovedet på sømmet, for vi befinder os på en meget, meget farlig kurs for konfrontation med Rusland og Kina.

Under valgkampagnen har Trump gentagne gange sagt, at han ville have en anden holdning over for Rusland. Og siden han blev valgt, har han talt i telefon med både Putin og Xi Jinping og i begge tilfælde sagt, at han vil arbejde for at forbedre relationerne mellem USA og så Rusland og Kina, hhv. Dette er selvsagt ekstremt vigtigt; og det andet, ekstremt vigtige spørgsmål er: Vil han følge op på sit løfte om Glass-Steagall, hvor han især i byen Charlotte atter sagde, at han ville gennemføre Glass-Steagall?

Dette er virkelig hovedspørgsmålet. For kun, hvis man gør en ende på kasinoøkonomien, som er den virkelige årsag til krig, kan situationen i realiteten bringes tilbage på ret køl. Alle de progressive – Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren og selv [Nancy] Pelosi – har allerede sagt, at de vil samarbejde med Trump, hvis han vil satse på dette økonomiske program med infrastruktur/jobskabelse/Glass-Steagall.

Vi bør lade tvivlen komme ham til gode; men, vi bør også være klar over, at hele Wall Street-slænget og de neokonservative i det Republikanske Parti vil gøre alt for ikke at få dette. Derfor må vi have denne intervention for virkelig at opdrage Kongressen og Senatet mht. det, der virkelig står på spil. Hele verden holder nu øje med – holder så at sige vejret – spørgsmålet, om der kommer en ændring til det bedre i amerikansk politik?

Det gør der forhåbentligt. Men det vil kræve alle forholdsreglerne. Glass-Steagall som den absolutte forudsætning, uden hvilken intet andet vil fungere; men det er ikke nok. For, vi taler ikke bare om en bankreform. Vi taler om et totalt nyt paradigme i det økonomiske system. Og dette nye paradigme må defineres af LaRouches Fire Love, som alle må sikre sig, at de forstår, når de skal udføre denne form for lobbyvirksomhed.

For, Lyndon LaRouche har understreget, at nøglen er at øge arbejdskraftens produktivitet. Som følge af de seneste årtiers neoliberale, eller monetaristiske, politik, er denne produktivitet i den transatlantiske sektor faldet under punktet for break-even, hvor det går lige op. Dette er grunden til, at vi må have en nationalbank i traditionen efter Alexander Hamilton; vi må have en politik for statskredit; vi må have et internationalt kreditsystem, et nyt Bretton Woods-system; og vi må selvsagt have et ’win-win’-samarbejde mellem alle nationer omkring opbygningen af den Nye Silkevej – også internt i USA – så den bliver til en verdenslandbro.

Af ekstraordinær betydning er den fjerde af de Fire Love, der siger, at man ikke kan få en forøgelse af økonomiens produktivitet, med mindre man satser på et forceret program for at opnå fusionskraft; samt et internationalt program for udforskning af rummet. For kun, hvis man foretager denne form for avantgarde-spring i produktiviteten – fusionsteknologi vil bringe os en helt anden, økonomisk platform. Med fusionsfaklen vil vi blive i stand til at få sikkerhed i energiforsyningen til hele planeten; man vil få nye råmaterialer, fordi man vil blive i stand til at bruge ethvert affaldsprodukt, hvor man udskiller diverse isotoper og genskaber nye råmaterialer ved at sammensplejse isotoperne, som det skal gøres.

Så det repræsenterer et gigantisk, teknologisk spring. Det samme gælder for rumfartsteknologi, for det vil få samme virkning som under Apolloprogrammet, hvor hver investering i rumteknologi, i raketter, i andre nye materialer, gav 14 cents tilbage for hver cent, der blev investeret. Og alt fra computerchips til Teflon-køkkengrej, og alle mulige gavnlige resultater, opstod som biprodukter af rumforskning.

Og for at få verdensøkonomien ud af den nuværende tilstand, især i den transatlantiske sektor, må man have denne form for kursomlægning i retning af videnskabeligt og teknologisk fremskridt og en forøgelse af energigennemstrømningstætheden. Og hele denne Grønne ideologi – som i virkeligheden er en ikke-udviklingsideologi – må erstattes; og verden må komme tilbage til den kurs, hvor det fysiske univers’ virkelige, fysiske love er kriteriet for sandheden, og ikke en eller anden ideologi.«

Foto: Besætningen fra ekspedition 49, Shane Kimbrough, NASA-astronaut, sammen med Roscosmos-kosmonauterne Sergej Ryzhikov og Andrej Borisenko, og som alle i øjeblikket befinder sig om bord på den Internationale Rumstation, hvor de har arbejdet sammen i over fire måneder i kredsløb. [foto: NASA]

Gottfried Leibniz’ død markerer den største, enkeltstående begivenhed i konsolideringen af ’venetiansk’ imperiemagt i Storbritannien, en begivenhed, der nødvendiggjorde den Amerikanske Revolution. Fire år tidligere, i 1712, havde Leibniz en position som hovedrådgiver til Ruslands Peter den Store; som nyudnævnt Særlig Rådgiver til Kejser Karl VI; som mangeårig strateg og lærer for tronfølger i førsteposition til Storbritannien, Sophie af Hannover; hovedfilosof og diplomat for hertug Anton Ulrich, i sine bestræbelser for at afslutte den sekteriske strid i det kristne Europa og forene kirkerne; og den anerkendte leder af videnskabens fremmeste grænser – og især en leder med et epistemologisk talent for, hvordan man skal avancere disse grænser yderligere. Han havde etableret et nationalt videnskabsakademi i Berlin, initieret et andet i Wien og var i færd med at lægge fundamentet for endnu et i Skt. Petersborg. Han havde betydelige videnskabelige, diplomatiske og epistemologiske indfaldsveje ind i det franske hof og ind i Kina.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Se video: 

Leibniz’ Loving Wisdom, not Russell’s Evil Logic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boJg8yASSfI

Se også: En introduktion til Gottfried Leibniz (dansk):

del I  http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=12423 og

del II http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=14177

14. nov., 2016 – Den tyrkiske premierminister Binaldi Yilderim har erklæret, at miljøkampen er en forhindring for udviklingslande. »Spørgsmålet om miljøet er en fælde. Hvis man begynder at udvikle sig og har en fordel over for andre lande, når man foretager strategiske investeringer, eller trænger ind på deres territorium, aktiverer de omgående miljøforkæmpere«, sagde Yilderim ved et arrangement for »Byens arkitektmøde« i Istanbul.

Yilderim fortsatte med at sige, at ødelæggelsen af historie, kultur og natur ikke bør tolereres. »For at opretholde forsyningsniveauet har vi brug for et udvalg af energi. Vi bør bygge tre [kernekraftværker], ikke bare et eller to«, understregede han.

Den tyrkiske præsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan kom med en lignende udtalelse i sidste uge, og den 7. nov. meddelte minister for energi og naturlige resurser, Berat Albayrak, at den private sektor havde investeret $5 mia. i 2016 til byggeri af i alt 158 elektricitetsværker i Tyrkiet.

Foto: Fra en anti-kernekraftdemonstration i Tyrkiet.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 12. november, 2016: Lyndon LaRouche udtalte følgende under diskussioner med sine medarbejdere den 10. november:

»Hele det økonomiske system er ikke klar til at fungere. Vi må få dette system til at fungere, ikke blot et par ting her og der. Vi må skabe en særlig form for organisation, der fremmer evnen til at få flere dele af verden i hænderne på den anden del af verden. Ellers vil det ikke fungere. Man må samle tingene. Hvis man ikke har en forbindelse, har man ikke en kontrakt … Det, vi vil få at se mht. dette spørgsmål, er en mere kompliceret ting. Det, vi vil få at se, er en forståelse af en ny opfattelse af, hvad internationale relationer er. Det er, hvad der vil ske, og det er sådan, det vil fungere. I modsat fald vil det ikke fungere af indlysende grunde, for dem, der kender detaljerne mht. de tyske osv. økonomier.

Et af problemerne er, at det på nuværende tidspunkt ikke er noget kvalificeret indhold mht. at udvikle relationerne mellem disse nationer. Vi må have et faktisk indhold, der må være funktionelt. Det er en af de ting, vi må arbejde på, men det er ikke på plads i øjeblikket.

Problemet er, at vi ikke har et defineret, internationalt system, der kan sikre fred. Det findes ikke endnu, og vi må skabe det … Det vil kræve en masse arbejde af folk, for at skabe det, for det er ikke kun af navn, at det skal gøres; problemet er at forstå, hvordan det kan fungere. Dette kan gøres. Det kan gøres med samarbejde mellem nogle dele af verden som helhed. Det generelle billede bliver ikke let, men der er nogle forbindelser, der kan skabes til en begyndelse. Men der skal gøres meget for at det skal lykkes.

Jeg ville ikke sætte min lid til Trump. Han vil gøre, hvad han vil gøre, men sæt ikke jeres lid til ham. Man må sætte sin lid til skabelsen af et nyt system, ikke Trumps system, men et nyt system, et globalt system, der lever op til kravene til udviklingen af et ægte, internationalt system. Og man må mobilisere folk på denne basis. Man kan ikke bare sige, ’Vi vil forsøge at få dette til at fungere.’ Det vil ikke fungere. Det vil ikke fungere. Men vi kan gå i gang. Jeg ville sige Tyskland – Tyskland har et potentiale; hvis det ønsker det, kunne det sandsynligvis yde et godt bidrag … Det, Putin gør, er fremragende, og det er vel integreret; Kina er ved at blive meget velintegreret på mange områder. Der er udvikling i dele af Asien. Alle disse ting er på plads, men vi må have mekanismen, der får det hele til at komme sammen på en synkretisk måde.

Rumforskning er den måde, folk må operere på, fordi rumforskning inkorporerer de afgørende elementer, der mangler i andre kilder.

Man må nå ind i den nuværende befolknings tanker, internationalt og nationalt; man må nå ind til tankerne hos den person, der slet ikke har nogen opfattelse af, hvad disse tanker kræver. Man kan gøre ting, der fremmer udvikling, men det er hovedsageligt lokal og regional udvikling. Vi må have mekanismer for international handel, og aftaler om dette, og dette er presserende, lige nu!

Stumper og stykker vil ikke gøre det. Forsøg ikke med stumper og stykker. Man må faktisk komme ind under huden på tankerne hos folk i de forskellige nationer. Jeg har stor erfaring med dette. Det kommer ikke frem pga. mennesker, der ikke rigtig forstår, hvad det her handler om, men når man ser på historiens forløb, ville man sige, at jeg har en meget skarp indsigt i menneskeheden. Men ikke alle mennesker i denne menneskehed deltager i det. Det er problemet.«

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 10. november, 2016 – Donald Trumps valgsejr, og både Hillary Clintons og Baracks Obamas valgnederlag, betyder en kortvarig udsættelse af fremstødet for Tredje Verdenskrig imod Rusland, under forudsætning af, at Obama forhindres i at foretage en eller anden vanvittig handling i sine tilbageværende ’lame duck’-uger – overgangsperioden – i embedet. Det faktum, at en umiddelbar fare for atomkrig midlertidigt er taget af bordet, er vigtigt, men det løser ikke den anden, alvorlige krise, som verden konfronteres med.

Det transatlantiske finanssystem er stadig på randen af total disintegration, og med mindre man omgående håndterer dette problem, vil betingelserne for global krig snart vise sig igen. For at løse denne umiddelbare krise, må den amerikanske Kongres omgående vedtage de love, der er fremstillet i begge Huse, for en genindførelse af den oprindelige Glass/Steagall-lov fra 1933, og som bryder for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-bankerne op, i totalt adskilte kommercielle banker og investeringsbanker. Dette må være det første punkt på Kongressens dagsorden, når den vender tilbage til Washington i begyndelsen af næste uge.

Når denne presserende handling er vel overstået, må der træffes yderligere forholdsregler til en ny form for relationer mellem de ledende nationer på planeten. Der er udsigt til en snarlig genoprettelse af de amerikansk-russiske relationer, en mulighed, der blev hilst velkommen af den førende, russiske økonom og rådgiver til Putin, Sergej Glazjev, i et interview torsdag med Itar-Tass. Han advarede ligeledes om, at Obama-administrationens politikker har ødelagt relationen mellem USA og Kina, og at en afspænding mellem Washington og Moskva kan spille en vigtig rolle i at udbedre de skadede amerikansk-kinesiske bånd. Det, der behøves, er en række positivt bekræftende handlinger, der vil være med til at sikre et globalt system for fred og stabilitet. Kinas præsident Xi Jinping tilbød gentagne gange præsident Obama at samarbejde omkring netop disse mål, men Obama afviste alle disse tilbud. Som både ambassadør Chas Freeman (USA’s ambassadør til Saudi-Arabien, 1989-1992) og tidligere CIA-direktør (og Donald Trumps nationale sikkerhedsrådgiver) James Woolsey understregede i udtalelser i denne uge, så må USA rette den tragiske bommert, hvor de har afvist tilbuddet om at deltage i Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB) og det overordnede initiativ for Bæltet-og-Vejen (OBOR). Verden må tage en række skridt hen imod et nyt, globalt samarbejdssystem. Lyndon LaRouche understregede torsdag, under drøftelser med medarbejdere, at dette kan gøres, især, hvis nøglenationer kan udvikle samarbejde. Et sådant globalt hovedeftersyn er ikke let, men, med de korrekte rettesnore for at gå fremefter, kan det gøres. Både Lyndon og Helga LaRouche understregede behovet for at skabe et Nyt Bretton Woods-system, der trækker på succeserne fra den oprindelige aftale fra 1944, som Franklin Roosevelt stod for.

Resultaterne af de amerikanske valg har dæmmet op for den umiddelbare fare for atomkrig, men det ville være en alvorlig fejl at sætte sin lid til, at den nu valgte præsident Donald Trump tager de nødvendige skridt. Der er nøglespillere, der kan bidrage til dette nye, presserende nødvendige arrangement, når man kaster et blik rundt på planeten. Tyskland kan spille en sund rolle. Rusland, under præsident Vladimir Putin, spiller allerede en fremragende rolle, og Kina, under præsident Xi Jinping, udgør en betydelig, positiv kraft.

Et område, der er af vital betydning for ethvert fremvoksende, nyt samarbejdsarrangement, er samarbejde om udforskning af rummet, der inkorporerer alle de afgørende elementer, der mangler i andre bestræbelser, der i øvrigt måtte være betydningsfulde.

Mange af de fremskridt, der er så presserende, vil finde sted på lokalt og regionalt niveau; men alle disse indsatser må være i overensstemmelse med en større, global vision. Hvis det mislykkes at gennemføre disse udfordrende, men afgørende handlinger, vil det føre til en endnu større katastrofe, inklusive, at en fare for atomkrig atter vil vise sig. Dette kræver seriøs tænkning fra et bredt udvalg af ledere fra hele verden.

Foto: Den russiske præsident Putin udtrykker Ruslands hensigt om at genoprette relationer i fuldt omfang med USA, under bemærkninger i sin tale i Kremls Store Palads den 9. november, 2016, efter Trumps valgsejr (Foto: kremlin.ru)         

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 9. november, 2016 – Donald Trumps slående valgsejr tirsdag kan kun korrekt forstås i sammenhæng med globale udviklinger, der alle reflekterer en stærk, folkelig afvisning af systemet med krig og åger, der har domineret det transatlantiske område i de seneste seksten år med Bush’ og Obamas præsidentskaber. Denne revolte har en international karakter og reflekteredes i juni måned i år, da britiske vælgere afviste den Europæiske Union i Brexit-afstemningen. Vi ser refleksioner af denne revolte i Tyskland, hvor Merkel-regeringens anti-russiske politikker møder en mur af modstand, inklusive fra ledende tyske industrikredse, der ser handel og samarbejde med Rusland som et eksistentielt krav.

Dette mønster går længere end til betydningen af begivenhederne i USA alene, hvilket på ingen måde skal forsmå betydningen af de amerikanske vælgeres revolte imod Wall Street/Washington-etablissementet. Et betydeligt antal amerikanske vælgere så Hillary Clinton som en fortsættelse af de seneste 16 års gamle, dårlige politikker, og de så hende desuden som en person, der ville få os ind i en krig med Rusland, som kunne betyde afslutningen af liv, som vi kender det, på denne planet.

Valget af Trump var et valg imod faren for krig, der i stigende grad kom til at være associeret med Hillary Clintons anti-Putin tirader under hele kampagnen. Det var et valg for en overhaling af USA’s økonomiske politik, der begynder med genindførelsen af en Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling, som Trump åbent tilsluttede sig under en vigtig kampagnetale i Charlotte, North Carolina, hvor han også advarede om, at Hillary Clinton ville starte Tredje Verdenskrig, hvis hun blev valgt.

Mandatet fra 8. november er givet til en fornyelse af traditionelle, amerikanske politikker og værdier, der begynder med en genoplivning af realøkonomien gennem anlægsinvesteringer i infrastruktur og genopbygning af industrien.

Lyndon og Helga LaRouche leverede et stærkt budskab i en dialog med medarbejdere den 9. nov., der i uddrag blev udsendt på LPAC-TV som et specielt webcast efter valget. 

Hr. LaRouche krævede en »New Deal for Universet«, der omfatter en genoplivelse af USA’s rumprogram, i partnerskab med nationer som Kina, der har fortsat menneskehedens udenjordiske forpligtelse, mens USA, under præsident Barack Obama, rent faktisk har lukket det engang storslåede amerikanske rumprogram ned. Både Lyndon og Helga LaRouche understregede, at tiden er inde til, at menneskeheden må se længere end til kun nationale interesser, og til menneskehedens interesser som helhed.

»Vi må række ud og se menneskeheden i et større lys ved at udvide menneskehedens magt ud i universet«,

erklærede hr. LaRouche.

Der er en global bevægelse, der går i retning af sådanne dybtgående ideer og udfordringer. Denne bevægelse reflekteres i Kinas lederskab inden for udforskning af rummet og i det voksende kinesisk-russisk-indiske samarbejde omkring udviklingen af det eurasiske område, gennem storslåede infrastrukturprojekter. Det er kun i sammenhæng med disse globale, dybtgående forandringer, at den fulde betydning af tirsdagens valg kan blive korrekt forstået. Afvisningen af det gamle, døende system, der er vældet ud af de amerikanske vælgere, er et begyndelsespunkt, men ingen garanti. Det vil kræve arbejde, men vejen er afstukket.

Foto: Den valgte præsident Donald Trump under sin første optræden til et offentligt borgermøde, 19. august, 2015, i Pinkerton Academy i Derry, NH. (Photo: Michael Vadon CC-SA).                 

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 3. november, 2016 – En revolution finder sted i verden i dag. Den startede i Asien, hvor den allerede er langt fremme, med Kina, Rusland, Indien og i stigende grad også Japan, der samarbejder for at skabe en udviklingsproces for verden som helhed, baseret på videnskab, innovative teknologier, udstrakte, regionale infrastrukturprojekter, store spring fremad i udforskning af rummet og reel udvikling af de forarmede nationer i Afrika, Latinamerika og Asien. Som man vil se af nedenstående rapport, så har denne dag, ligesom stort set hver eneste dag af dette nye paradigme, set et utroligt niveau af nye samarbejdsprojekter, lanceret af disse eurasiske nationer, mellem hinanden indbyrdes, og som rækker ud til udviklingssektoren gennem fælles udviklingsprojekter.

Virkningen af denne revolution er nu endelig i færd med at nå ind i USA, efter betydningsfulde gennembrud i Europa gennem de Nye Silkevejsprojekter, der kommer fra Kina og når ind i både Øst- og Vesteuropa. Dette skifte, der nu finder sted i USA, kan spores direkte tilbage til Lyndon LaRouches arbejde.

I takt med, at præsidentvalgkampagnen udviklede sig i løbet af det forgangne år, begyndte alt, Obama rørte ved, at smuldre. Obamacare afsløredes som den katastrofe, LaRouche havde forudsagt, den ville være. Modtageren af Nobels Fredspris er blevet afsløret som en massedræber, der har allieret sig med terroriststyrker i hele Sydvestasien for at vælte suveræne regeringer. Det er nu blevet afsløret, at præsidenten, der skulle rydde op i det Wall Street-rod, som George Bush efterlod, har nægtet at sagsøge så meget som én eneste bankier, selv med det faktum, at de forbrydelser, som er begået af Wells Fargo, med HSBC’s narkopengehvidvask og med en tilbagevenden af en spekulativ derivatboble i JP Morgan Chase og alle de andre, for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned-banker, står klart og tydeligt i offentlighedens lys. Den præsident, der aflagde løfte om at bringe Håb og Forandring, har skabt den største epidemi af opiater og narkotika i nationens historie, i en ungdomsgeneration, der har mistet ethvert håb om en fremtid og vælger narkotika eller selvmord, eller begge dele.

Og Hillary Clinton valgte en kampagne på dette fundament og tilføjede den kendsgerning, at hun er ivrig efter at starte en militær konfrontation med Rusland, som, åbenlyst for alle undtagen de blinde, vil være det samme som at haste hen imod global, atomar udslettelse.

Men, tingene har ændret sig i løbet af de seneste uger. Mange mennesker har stillet spørgsmålstegn ved LaRouches afvisning af at vælge side i dette valg, men i stedet har insisteret på, at hans tilhængere arbejder på at introducere en seriøs politik i en kampagne, der næsten udelukkende har været et afskyeligt, pornografisk slagsmål om at forsøge at rive tøjet af hinanden! Denne seriøse politik måtte begynde med Glass-Steagall, insisterede han, for at lukke Wall Streets kasinoøkonomi ned og genindføre en kreditpolitik i nationen, efter Hamiltons principper. Dette betyder at kanalisere statslig kredit gennem en genindført Nationalbank for USA, der skal erstatte det bankerotte Federal Reserve-system (centralbanksystem), med det formål at finansiere en transformation af nationen med videnskab som drivkraft, og som er centreret omkring en genoplivning af NASA’s rumprogram, udvikling af fusionskraft og et vidtstrakt program for hård og blød infrastruktur – det, LaRouche kalder sine Fire Love.

Donald Trump har krævet en vedtagelse af det 21. århundredes Glass/Steagall-lov og fordømt Hillarys (og Obamas) sleskhed over for Wall Street. Han er gået længere end til at foreslå samarbejde med Rusland for at knuse ISIS, hvilket er bemærkelsesværdigt, men utilstrækkeligt, og til at advare om, at, et valg af Hillary vil betyde en atomkrig.

Begge disse spørgsmål identificeres internationalt med Lyndon LaRouche. Hans indsats for at introducere virkelighed i kampagnen har haft en virkning, der kan og må forhindre krig og påbegynde reformen af de kollapsende, transatlantiske økonomier.

I dag talte LaRouche om dette nye potentiale, men advarede om, at tiden ikke er til at »lade vore stemmer trækkes nedad« og falde for at følge en kandidat, men til at optrappe kampen for et revolutionært, politisk skifte i USA, og til at være klar til at handle den 9. november, uanset hvem, der vinder valget, for at gennemføre Glass-Steagall og de Fire Love.

På et tidspunkt som det nu foreliggende, hvor verden, i den umiddelbart forestående periode, vil ændre sig dramatisk, til det bedre eller til det værre, er der ingen plads til pessimisme eller pragmatisme, og ingen grund til at give frygten lov til at afskrække os. Det nye paradigme breder sig i hele verden. Ved at genindføre vore grundlæggende principper, kan Amerika også gøre en ende på den britiske, »unipolære imperieverden«, hvis mentalitet har grebet vores nation, og gå med i at opbygge en verden af suveræne nationer, der arbejder sammen for menneskehedens fælles mål.

Foto: USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) i det Filippinske Hav, oktober 2016. (Foto: U.S. Pacific Fleet Flickr)

Se også f.eks.:

»Tysklands potentielle rolle i udviklingen af Verdenslandbroen« af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

»Potentialet for Frankrig og hele Europa i opbygningen af Verdenslandbroen«, af Helga Zepp-LaRouche 

 A Renaissance in World Infrastructure: A Presentation to Engineers on the World Land-Bridge, video og engelsk udskrift.​            

Kan menneskeheden, konfronteret med alle de kriser, vi ser for vore øjne, etablere et verdenssystem, i hvilket folkene kan leve sammen i fred? Er menneskeheden i stand til at definere et højere fornuftsniveau, eller er vi tvunget til – ved at holde os til de vante, og veltrampede, stier – at ramle ind i en stenmur og muligvis miste civilisationen for altid?

Jeg er overbevist om, at det er muligt at finde dette højere fornuftsniveau, og at gøre det til virkelighed. Ligesom den gamle Silkevej, under Han-dynastiet for hen ved 2.000 år siden, ikke blot var et middel til vareudveksling, men også til udveksling af teknologi, kultur og filosofi – og således førte til en enorm forbedring af levestandarden i alle de nationer og regioner, der deltog – således er jeg også overbevist om, at det er muligt at sætte en Ny Silkevej, en ny politik for at knytte nationer sammen, på dagsordenen i dag.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

19. okt., 2016 – Under en delegation fra den tyske delstat Saksens igangværende besøg i Rusland blev en aftale om samarbejde i går underskrevet mellem universiteterne Freiberg og Samara, om forskning i metallurgi. Martin Dulig, Saksens økonomiminister, der leder delegationen, sagde, at aftalen var vigtig, fordi det viser, at, alt imens det kan synes ekstremt vanskeligt at samarbejde inden for andre områder, så er det muligt inden for videnskab. 

Med næstformand Michelle Rasmussen

N.B. den 25. oktober: Det blev meddelt i går, at vi ikke kører en kampagne for at få amerikanerne til at skrive LaRouches navn ind, når de vælger præsident, men at vi vil intensivere vores kampagne for at få LaRouches fire økonomiske lov vedtaget.

16. oktober, 2016 – I sit slutkommunike med navnet Goa-erklæringen, erklærede det 8. BRIKS-topmøde i Goa, Indien, at den fem medlemmer store gruppering var »en indflydelsesrig stemme på verdensscenen, der yder direkte fordele til vore folkeslag« gennem bl.a. nye finansinstitutioner såsom den Nye Udviklingsbank (NDB) og Valutareservefonden, (CRA) (Contingent Reserve Arrangement), »der yder et væsentligt bidrag til den globale økonomi og til styrkelsen af den internationale finansarkitektur«.

BRIKS er, understreger Goa-erklæringen, forpligtende engageret til en »omfattende, samlet og beslutsom fremgangsmåde« for at konfrontere de udfordringer, som trusler mod den globale sikkerhed og økonomisk tilbagegang stiller, med henblik på at virkeliggøre »overgangen til en multipolær, international orden«. Sluterklæringen udtrykker BRIKS’ forpligtelse over for »international lov og De forenede Nationers centrale rolle, som den universelle, multilaterale organisation, der er betroet et mandat for bevarelse af international fred og sikkerhed, fremme af global udvikling og promovering og beskyttelse af menneskerettigheder«.

Med hensyn til spørgsmålet om global sikkerhed understreger Goa-erklæringen, at udvikling og sikkerhed er »indbyrdes tæt forbundne, virker gensidigt forstærkende og er af afgørende betydning for at opnå en vedvarende fred«. Erklæringen afviser indgriben i andre landes interne anliggender og påbyder »samarbejde, der udelukker udførelse af ensidige, med magt gennemtvungne forholdsregler, der ikke finder deres grundlag i international lov … vi fordømmer ensidige militære interventioner og økonomiske sanktioner, der krænker international lov … «

I de specifikke tilfælde med Syrien og Nordafrika fastslår erklæringen, at dette er spørgsmål af den dybeste interesse og kræver løsninger »i overensstemmelse med international lov« og i overholdelse af principperne for »uafhængighed, territorial integritet og dette områdes landes suverænitet … Vi opfordrer alle de involverede parter til at arbejde for en omfattende og fredelig løsning på konflikten, der tager det syriske folks legitime forhåbninger i betragtning, gennem en inkluderende dialog og en syrisk ledet, politisk proces.«

BRIKS-nationerne fordømmer international terrorisme »i alle dens former«, og har aftalt at styrke samarbejdet for at bekæmpe den. Den Islamiske Stat, Daesh og dens forgreninger, udgør »en global og hidtil uset trussel mod international fred og sikkerhed … Vi opfordrer alle nationer til at vedtage omfattende fremgangsmåder til bekæmpelse af terrorisme …«

BRIKS-nationerne bemærkede, at den globale, økonomiske genrejsning »går fremad«, men at der stadig er udfordringer. Desuden »har geopolitiske konflikter … yderligere forværret den globale økonomis usikkerhed«. Erklæringen hævder, at, alt imens monetær politik fortsat vil støtte økonomisk aktivitet, »så kan monetær politik alene … ikke føre til ligevægtig og vedvarende vækst«. Innovation er af afgørende betydning: »Vi understreger betydningen af industrialisering og forholdsregler, der fremmer industriel udvikling som den strukturelle transformations bærende søjle.« I denne sammenhæng aftalte BRIKS indbyrdes konsultation og koordination med hensyn til gennemførelsen af G20-dagsordenen, som blev skitseret på G20-topmødet i juni i Hangzhou, Kina, »for at styrke makroøkonomisk samarbejde, … så vel som også robust og bæredygtig handel og investering for at drive global vækst frem … styrke udviklingslandenes rolle, og styrke international finansarkitektur«.

Goa-erklæringen specificerer, at kernekraft vil spille »en signifikant rolle for nogle af BRIKS-landene, mht. at imødekomme deres forpligtelser i forbindelse med Klimaforandringsaftalen i Paris, 2015« og peger på betydningen af »forudsigelighed mht. adgang til teknologi og finansiering til udvidelse af kernekraftkapacitet til civilt brug, der ville bidrage til den bæredygtige udvikling af BRIKS-landene«. (Fremhævelser tilføjet.)     

Jeg mener, at LaRouches understregning af spørgsmålet om Alexander Hamilton og hans arbejde, og LaRouches Fire Love – for forpligtelsen til varefremstilling handler jo ikke om varefremstilling som sådan; det handler om videnskab som drivkraft for fremskridt. Det drejer sig om spørgsmålet, om vi kommer frem til en økonomi, baseret på fusionskraft? Og når vi først har udviklet termonuklear fusion, går vi så videre frem til plasma, til stof/antistof? Og hvilket potentiale åbner det op for?

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Krafft Ehricke var en nær ven til os, og især i de seneste år af hans liv havde jeg mange samtaler med ham, om relationen mellem videnskab og kultur. Han var absolut overbevist om, at Schiller Instituttets bestræbelser var absolut afgørende, for han sagde, at vi må tilføje menneskets æstetiske opdragelse til videnskabeligt fremskridt, eftersom teknologi aldrig er god eller ond. Det er mennesket, der anvender den til et godt eller ondt formål. Det afgørende spørgsmål er derfor, sagde han, at vi forædler menneskeslægten, hvilket netop er spørgsmålet om den æstetiske opdragelse.

Det er grunden til, at vi lægger så megen vægt på skønhed, og at kunst må være skøn, for kun da opfylder det denne forædling af den menneskelige sjæl. Skønhed, siger Schiller, er meget vigtigt, fordi det både er en egenskab af sanserne, fordi sanserne opfatter skønhed, men det findes også inden for fornuftens rige, fordi skønhed ikke er et spørgsmål om oplevelse, men er derimod et spørgsmål om intellektets, om fornuftens, definition.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

Lyndon LaRouche: »Det vigtigste spørgsmål, der konfronterer menneskeheden, er, hvilke er de eksisterende potentialer, på hvilke menneskehedens fremtid er beroende? Hvilke er de videnskabelige opdagelser, der må gøres af den unikt kreative art, som er mennesket, og på hvilke vi kan skabe en sand og vedvarende fremtid for den menneskelige art?«

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 30. sept., 2016 – Under en diskussion i dag med LPAC Politiske Komité, Basement-videnskabsteamet og andre, erklærede Lyndon LaRouche, at, med mindre vi kan udvikle menneskers intellekt på en ny måde, gennem at gøre nye opdagelser af videnskabelige principper, så vil vi ikke overleve. Evnen til at skabe nye former for videnskab er nøglen til menneskeheden, og dette er for lidt kendt, som et resultat af århundreders kulturel degeneration, hvor al fokus, i heldigste fald, lå på gimmicks og færdigheder. Der har været en vedvarende, induceret degeneration af det menneskelige intellekt, til en tilstand, hvor nye ting aldrig overvejes. Vi må genoplive videnskab – og udforskning af rummet er én nøgle. Dette er det umiddelbare, vigtige spørgsmål over alle andre. Menneskeheden er blevet bedøvet af sin kultur, og nu er tiden kommet, hvor vi må komme i gang med ægte videnskab. Uden det klarer vi det ikke.

Vi har evnen til at ændre reglerne for eksistens på planeten, og vi må derfor have en mere intens kampagne. Vi må genoplive Einstein-princippet. Dette er, hvad mennesket har brug for. Gør det umulige! Einsteins mest avancerede arbejde, som kun få forstår, handlede om, hvordan menneskeheden kan udvikle menneskeheden ved at vedtage de rigtige regler. Vi må nu komme ud af det, vi har ligget under for, med det, som fortiden har gjort ved os alle.

Vi må revolutionere ideen om videnskab, for det er, hvad USA og Europa har mistet. Visse dele af verden, som Kina, har været i gang med at undersøge ting af en højere orden. Kina er f.eks. i færd med at udvikle projektet om Månens bagside, og dette er meget vigtigt. Dette aspekt af det kinesiske, videnskabelige arbejde er det bedste til at formidle til folk, ånden af denne presserende nødvendige ændring i metoden til tænkning. Månen har stadig karaktertræk, der stort set er ukendte for os. Kina udforsker disse ukendte faktorer, og denne mentalitet må være fokus for vores indsats for at genoplive ægte videnskab. Vi må bevæge befolkningen ind i nye områder, der giver dem evnen til atter at tænke.

Selvfølgelig må vi tage os af afgørende spørgsmål som faren for en atomkrig, Deutsche Banks kollaps og det umiddelbart forestående kollaps af hele det globale finanssystem, med mindre Glass-Steagall omgående implementeres – men, med mindre, man fæstner opmærksomheden på dette dybereliggende spørgsmål om at ændre menneskehedens formindskede kreativitet og indlede et nyt, videnskabeligt udsyn, så findes der ingen fremtid.

Med korte artikler fra hele verden. I dette nummer, bl.a.:  

– NASA kalder Junos placering i kredsløb omkring Jupiter for en total succes

– Kinas Videnskabsprogram 2030 satser på at gøre Kina verdensførende inden for videnskab

– Kinesisk jernbanegruppe skal bygge Bangladesh’ jernbane og jernbanebro over Padma-floden

Download (PDF, Unknown)

In English, with vice-president Michelle Rasmussen
På engelsk med næstformand Michelle Rasmussen

See slides below.
Se dias herunder.

Videos after the slides:

* The gala concert after the G20 meeting in China, including Beethoven's and Schiller's Ode to Joy

  Galakoncerten efter g20-topmødet i Kina, inkl. Beethovens og Schillers Ode til Glæden

* A 20-minute video introduction to the World Land-Bridge, introduced by the president of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche

  Se også den 20-minutter-lang video om Verdenslandbroen, efter diabillederne.

Dias from the meeting: Click on the slide to make it full-sized. 

Klik på diabilledet for at gøre det større.

Video: 

The gala concert after the G20 meeting in China: The Beethoven/Schiller Ode to Joy section begins at 43:30

The 20-minute video introduction to the World Land-Bridge, introduced by the president of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche:

5. september, 2016 (Leder) – De afgørende uger, som vi nu har for os, stiller dette spørgsmål til alle amerikanere (blandt andre): Hvordan er det muligt, at det kan lykkes for det enkelte individs inderste, private tankers »lille hjul« at dreje det »store hjul« i den historiske proces, der involverer den kurs og skæbne, som nationen, og menneskehedens mere end syv milliarder individer generelt, i fremtiden, i de kommende århundreder, vil få?

Den virkelige historie om det netop afsluttede G20-topmøde i Kina er den, at den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping, sammen med Ruslands Putin og udviklingslandene under anførsel af BRIKS, samt Japan m.fl., fremtvang spørgsmålet om udskiftningen af det nuværende finansielle system. De insisterede på, at Wall Street/London-systemet, baseret på hasardspil, har kurs mod en ny krise, og at det må erstattes af et produktionsorienteret system, funderet i videnskab og store internationale, avantgarde-projekter: det system, der er centreret omkring Kinas Nye Silkevejs-politik, som præsident Xi kalder »Ét Bælte, Én Vej«.

Det finansielle fundament for dette nye, menneskelige system leveres af en række udviklingsbanker, som Kina har været med til at lancere, såsom den Asiatiske Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank (AIIB), og BRIKS’ Nye Udviklingsbank (NDB).

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går bemærkede, vil det, efterhånden, som resultaterne af G20-topmødet og det forudgående Vladivostok-topmøde i løbet af de næste par dage bliver kendt, blive klart, hvem, der forsvarer menneskehedens sag, konfronteret med udsigten til økonomisk udslettelse, og hvem, der forsøger at lægge hindringer i vejen. I løbet af disse dage vil den amerikanske Kongres, den 6. september, træde sammen, og FN’s Generalforsamling træder sammen den 13. september. Samtidigt vil rækken af topmøder på højeste niveau fortsætte i Asien.

Det, som den amerikanske Kongres må gøre, når den atter træder sammen, er at vedtage Glass-Steagall, for hvilken lov der er fremsat tværpolitiske lovforslag i begge Kongressens huse. Kongressen må ligeledes handle på de kendsgerninger, der er blevet afsløret i de »28 sider« af den Fælles Kongresundersøgelsesrapport om 11. september (2001): den må handle med henblik på at fjerne Obama for hans beviste, overlagte mørklægning af saudiernes (og briternes) ansvar for 11. september, og samtidig fremtvinge flere skjulte fakta om den britisk/saudiske sammensværgelse, og om Bush’ og Cheneys – men først og fremmest Obamas – medskyldighed. Det faktum, at vi ikke fjernede Bush og Cheney, gav os Obama, som er endnu værre. Hvis vi nu ikke fjerner Obama, vil vi få noget, der er værre endnu, hvis vi da ellers stadig vil være i live til at opleve det.

Netop nu, hvor omgående, politisk handling er presserende nødvendig, forbereder ledelsen af Lyndon LaRouches bevægelse, der er lokaliseret på Manhattan, det, som LaRouche har kaldt for et »levende mindesmærke« for ofrene for 11. september – først og fremmest de direkte ofre og deres familier, men også USA og enhver del af verden, som er blevet offer for forbrydelsen og dens mørklægning. Centrum for dette »levende mindesmærke« vil blive opførelser af Mozarts Rekviem, i hvilken en stor skaber fejrer, ikke døden, men det uforgængelige liv og dets mission, konfronteret med døden, igennem alle århundreder i fortid og fremtid.

Med dette »levende mindesmærke«, og ud over dette, arbejder den Manhattan-centrerede LaRouche-bevægelse på at genskabe et funktionsdygtigt præsidentskab for USA, ud fra selvsamme Manhattan-lokalitet og gennem de samme principper, som Alexander Hamilton anvendte til at skabe det oprindelige George Washington-præsidentskab for USA.

For at vende tilbage til vores indledende spørgsmål om »det lille hjul« og »det store hjul«: Politikken med Den Nye Silkevej begyndte som en idé: ideen om den Europæiske Produktive Trekant, som Lyndon LaRouche udviklede i slutningen af 1980'erne, og som han, sammen med sin hustru Helga, videreudviklede til den Eurasiske Landbro, Den Nye Silkevej og Verdenslandbroen. Og det, der udløste det kinesiske rumprogram, som i 2018 for første gang nogensinde vil lande en robot på Månens bagside – var også først en idé. Det var Ronald Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI), der overbeviste det kinesiske lederskab om behovet for et forceret, videnskabeligt udviklingsprogram, inklusive et forceret rumprogram, som vi vil gå i dybden med i det næste nummer af EIR, 9. september. Det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ var en politik, der helt fra bunden af blev opfundet af Lyndon LaRouche, og som overbeviste Reagan.

Og de udviklingsbanker, der i dag bliver lanceret, blev udtænkt af Lyndon LaRouche i 1970'erne, hvor de blev forelagt FN’s Generalforsamling af Guyanas agtværdige udenrigsminister, nu afdøde Fred Wills.

Som den store, russiske videnskabsmand Vladimir Vernadskij viste i første halvdel af det tyvende århundrede, så er den menneskelige noesis, eller kreative tænkning, den mest magtfulde kraft i universet. Der er ingen kraft, der kan måle sig med det menneskelige intellekt med hensyn til kreativ opdagelse.

Foto: Brasiliens præsident Michel Temer, Indiens premierminister Narendra Modi, Kinas præsident Xi Jinping, Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin og Sydafrikas præsident Jacob Zuma ankommer til Kina for at deltage i G20-topmødet, der finder sted 3. – 5. september, 2016 [www.gcis.gov.za/flickr]

Matthew Ogden: Vi havde en diskussion med Lyndon og Helga LaRouche for et par timer siden. Det er helt klart, at vi står ved et punkt, hvor tre, meget afgørende initiativer, som LaRouche-bevægelsen har stået i centrum for i flere år, nu kulminerer. For det første står vi umiddelbart foran G20-topmødet; topmødet i Vladivostok er i gang; og to uger efter disse begivenheder træder FN’s Generalforsamling sammen. Det er helt åbenlyst, at man tager initiativerne til at skabe en ny, finansiel arkitektur for planeten omkring udviklingen af den Nye Silkevej. Jeg vil blot nævnte ganske kort, at, hvis man ikke har set den endnu, så har vi en fremragende, ny, 20 minutter lang video (på larouchepac.com – se den danske hjemmeside, inkl. udskrift: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=14429) »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«. Den går i dybden med meget af indholdet i EIR’s rapport af samme navn. Den må I bestemt se, hvis I ikke allerede har.

Engelsk udskrift.

You Can Change History: Act Now to Force a Vote on Glass-Steagall        

"A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT."

International LaRouche PAC webcast, Saturday, September 3, 2016   

        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening; it's September 2, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you're joining us for our weekly webcast
here on Friday evening with larouchepac.com. I'm joined in the
studio tonight by Jeffrey Steinberg from {Executive Intelligence
Review}, and via video by two members of the LaRouche PAC Policy
Committee. We have Dave Christie joining us from Seattle,
Washington; welcome, Dave. And we have Diane Sare joining us from
the greater New York City area.
        I'll just say to start off, we did have a discussion with
Lyndon and Helga LaRouche just a few hours ago. It's very clear
that we are at the intersection point of the culmination of three
very crucial initiatives that the LaRouche Movement has been
right in the center of leading for several years. Number one,
we're on the eve of the G20 summit; we have the Vladivostok
summit which is occurring; and in two weeks following that, we
have the United Nations General Assembly. It's very apparent that
the initiatives are being taken to create a new financial
architecture for the planet, around the development of the New
Silk Road. I'll just say very quickly here, if you haven't seen
it yet, there's an excellent new 20-minute video feature on the
larouchepac.com website which is about "The New Silk Road Becomes
the World Land-Bridge". It elaborates a lot of the {Executive
Intelligence Review} publication by that same title. I would say
to definitely watch that if you haven't yet.
        On the domestic front, we have a very intense campaign which
is now being escalated to reinstate Glass-Steagall; and
marshalling the forces to force that to a vote before the
Presidential elections take place. Then we have the push to
reopen a full investigation into the attacks on 9/11; with the
declassification of the 28 pages that happened, you have to
further that with the pursuit of the tens of thousands of more
pages which continue to be withheld. On that front, we are one
week away from the 15th anniversary of those horrific attacks on
9/11; and we will be seeing a series of concerts which will take
place in New York City — Diane can tell us a lot more about that
— of Mozart's {Requiem} that will be performed in the cathedral
in Brooklyn, a major church in Manhattan and elsewhere to
commemorate the victims of those attacks and to bring justice.
This is happening in conjunction with a strategic seminar which
is being sponsored in New York City on the same subject. And at
the same time, there's a powerful push to force a vote in the
House of Representatives — hopefully next week, before the
anniversary happens — on the JASTA bill (Justice against State
Sponsors of Terrorism Act). Congress is returning next week.
        As part of that push, former Senator Bob Graham was in
Washington DC the day before yesterday, at a major press
conference which he held at the National Press Club. Both Jeff
and I had the opportunity to attend that conference, and we will
be featuring some excerpts from that press conference as part of
our broadcast tonight.
        But before I get to that, I do want to start with the
discussion that we had with Mr. LaRouche just a few hours ago;
particularly on the necessity of launching an immediate
mobilization around the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. So, in
order to introduce that subject, I'm going to read the
institutional question which we received today, which was
presented to Mr. LaRouche. I'm going to ask Jeff to elaborate a
bit on what Mr. LaRouche's comments were in response to this
question. It reads: "Mr. LaRouche, you have warned that unless
the United States Congress acts — and now in September — to
reinstate Glass-Steagall as the first step in a much larger
overhaul in economic and monetary policy, then the entire
trans-Atlantic system is headed for blow-out. Would you please
elaborate on the importance of the passage of Glass-Steagall in
the next session of Congress immediately after Labor Day?"

        JEFFREY STEINBERG: Mr. LaRouche was very blunt; he said, "If
you don't implement Glass-Steagall as the starting point for such
a total overhaul of the entire US financial and monetary system,"
and extending that obviously into Europe as well; "then an
enormous number of people are going to die. It comes down to
that." The major European banks, which are completely co-mingled
with the big Wall Street banks, are carrying trillions — perhaps
hundreds of trillions — of dollars in derivatives and
non-performing debt of all other kinds as well. They're
hopelessly bankrupt, and unless you implement Glass-Steagall and
separate out and just simply write off all of that derivatives
and other gambling debt, you have no chance whatsoever for any
kind of turnaround in the situation that we have in the US
economy right now; and similarly in Europe. Namely, that there is
a collapse of productivity; don't believe the numbers about job
creation, because the reality is that 93.5 million eligible,
working age Americans have no work. Because they've given up
trying to find a job, or they've never found a job; and therefore
have never been counted in the working force to begin with. On
top of that, a growing percentage of people are finding
themselves relegated to working part-time; sometimes a few hours
a day on several different jobs, because there are no full-time
productive jobs available in the economy. You've got a lot of
parasitic jobs; you've got a lot of other jobs that in a healthy,
growing economy would be necessary and useful. But when you've
got a collapse of production as we have in the United States and
Europe, and you put on top of that a kind of massive banking
crisis — financial bubble bigger than 2008; then you've got a
perfect storm for something that will result in mass deaths.
        Now, Glass-Steagall is the first step; it's by no means the
totality of what must be done. Mr. LaRouche has laid out the four
cardinal laws, four major initiatives that must be taken to
restore productivity; to create genuinely productive jobs. But
the starting point has to be to break up and separate out the
legitimate commercial banking functions from the speculative
activities that have completely looted the depositor base of
commercial banks since the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Both
political parties, in their platforms, have endorsed reinstating
Glass-Steagall; and this was not just simply a perfunctory thing.
There was a fight at the Republican convention among the Platform
Committee people; there was an aggressive push to force
Glass-Steagall's adoption. The same thing happened on the
Democratic side. Hillary Clinton has not publicly called for
reinstating Glass-Steagall. So, you've got both parties poised.
You have bills in both houses of Congress and a vote can and must
be taken; not after the elections, not during the lame duck
session, but during this next 2-3 week period starting Tuesday,
the 6th of September, when Congress returns that evening.
Wednesday will be the first full day that Congress is in session.
This must be one of the very first acts of this Congress during
this interim session; and it's not going to happen unless there
is a full-blown mobilization of the American people. There are
major institutions from the AFL-CIO to various civil rights
groups that are with us on this question of Glass-Steagall. But
what's required, is an absolutely focussed and tough and
laser-like intervention. And I think nothing sums that up more
clearly than what Mr. LaRouche has said repeatedly over the last
few days: Namely, if you don't pass Glass-Steagall; if you don't
intervene to make sure that Congress does it, then you may die as
a result of that.

        OGDEN: Well, I want to use as an example of the kind of
strategic leverage that is going to be required to force through
this passage of Glass-Steagall, I want to use as an example what
the LaRouche Movement was able to do by marshalling forces across
the country to force the declassification of the 28 pages.
Because it's a very similar example of the kind of widespread
upsurge in activism across the country led with this kind of
laser focus, that's going to be required right now in the coming
weeks to force the Glass-Steagall vote. So, on that note, I'd
like to introduce a short 7-minute video clip which is excerpts
from the blockbuster press conference that former Senator Bob
Graham held at the National Press Club this past Wednesday. We
can invite you to watch the full press conference, which is
available on the LaRouche PAC YouTube channel. For right now, I'd
like to introduce that, and then use that to open up a broader
discussion here.

FORMER SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Burr; and thank
you for the opportunity to come back to the National Press Club.
        As has been said, on July 15th, after some 14 years, the
chapter of 28 pages from the final Report of the Congressional
Joint Inquiry into 9/11 was released. This was removing the cork
from the bottle; but there is a significant amount of information
which, like the 28 pages, has been withheld. It was necessary to
get this first block of material to the public in order to build
the support that will be necessary for the balance of the
material to flowâ¦.
        Now that the bottle is open, what is likely to pour forth?
        I think there are three tasks in which the liquid will flow.
One is, the 28 pages were written in the Fall of 2002, but were
not — in a number of instances — completed. We were under a
mandate to submit our final report before the end of that session
of Congress; which meant by the end of December of 2002. There
were some issues that have not been taken fully to ground. As an
example, the role of Prince Bandar, the long Saudi ambassador to
the United States. In the 28 pages, it is disclosed that in the
book of Abu Zabadeh[ph], one of Osama bin Laden's closest
operatives, were the telephone numbers — which were otherwise
unavailable — to Bandar's mansion in Aspen, and to his bodyguard
here in Washington. There was also information about the fact
that both he and his wife had been involved in money transfers
which appeared to go to the mentors and protectors of the three
hijackers in San Diego. Was that where that money flow ended; or
did it end up supporting the hijackers? That's the kind of
questions which were raised in the 28 pages; but I hope that we
will now get information to close those loopsâ¦.

        ??: Senator Graham, thanks and congratulations for what
you're doing in insisting that the facts on 9/11 come out. As you
pointed out, and as the media pointed out, the 28 pages and
credible media reporting that there were meetings, there were
facts here; not just myths and wonderings, but facts. In San
Diego, the meetings by the Saudi Director of Religious Affairs
with at least three of the hijackers; and 15 of the 19 hijackers
were from Saudi Arabia. There was money paid from Prince Bandar's
account. Those are the facts; but it just seems that the American
policy is to hide and to obfuscate. Why? Is it a matter of
Democrats and Republicans alike just want to pander to Saudi
Arabia? What I don't understand is the reason why we don't just
take the facts and move from there; because these are the facts.

        GRAHAM: No, this is not a partisan issue. In fact, in the
House, the effort to pass this JASTA legislation that will modify
the sovereign immunity defense, and prior to that, a resolution
urging the President to release the 28 pages, was led by a
Republican, Walter Jones from North Carolina, and a Democrat,
Stephen Lynch from Massachusetts. This has had strong bipartisan
support. If anything, it's more of an Executive Branch versus the
people of America; it's been the Executive Branch through not
only Justice and State, but Treasury and the intelligence
agencies, that have largely been the barrier to allowing this
information to be known by the American people. And let the
American people then form a judgment. What do they think we ought
to be doing in this relationship with Saudi Arabia?

        STEINBERG: Jeff Steinberg; {Executive Intelligence Review}.
Senator, former Navy Secretary John Lehman, who was a
commissioner on the 9/11 Commission, told "60 Minutes" back in
April that there really never was a complete investigation by the
9/11 Commission; and you've already said that the Joint Inquiry
was limited by time and resources. Now, 15 years later, we have
the 28 pages. As you just indicated, there's lots of facts in
there. There was a 47-page report written at the beginning of the
9/11 Commission by the two people on your staff who were
following up on the Saudi leads. They listed 22 Saudi officials
who had direct contacts with just the San Diego hijackers. What
do you envision as the next step? Can there be a new
investigation without the time restrictions and other problems?
Do you support that? How would you envision moving forward from
here in addition to the lawsuit which we do hope will be
reinstated against the Saudis for discovery?

        GRAHAM: In addition to the request to the National Archives,
who are the custodians of the 9/11 papers, to release those
sections of its report which have been withheld which relate to
following up to the leads which are in the 28 pages. So, we could
ask, in those pages, is there a chapter about Prince Bandar that
pursues the leads that were outlined in the 28 pages? Second,
will have to be more Freedom of Information Act with the FBI and
the CIA. Another thing would be the President; I can understand
why George Bush acted the way he did. I cannot understand why
Barack Obama is acting the way he has. This information is going
to be known; whether it's in 2016, or 2026, or '36, or '46, it
will — like the Pentagon Papers and all these other old scandals
— eventually it's going to come out. I think the legacy of
Barack Obama is going to be stained when the people recognize how
much information was under his control, that he made the
executive decision to continue to restrict from the American
people. So, those are, I think, the principal levers; they all
eventually come to the American people. The American people care
about knowing what their government did in this particularly
egregious action; and if so, will they put enough political
pressure? The most immediate thing is to contact your member of
Congress and urge he or she to vote for JASTA. That bill has had
a roller coaster existence over the last four or five years; it
seems to be closer to reaching its destination today than at any
time during that long period. The key is going to be, will the
House take it up? That's where the pressure needs to be until
that important task is accomplishedâ¦.
        What I think are the most likely three directions after the
28 pages are: One, following up on the leads that were in the 28
pages; such as the role of the then-Saudi Ambassador to the
United States, Prince Bandar. Second, there's been information
developed since the 28 pages were written in the Fall of 2002;
such as the existence of this relationship between a prominent
Saudi family, Mohammed Atta and two of his compatriots in
Sarasota, Florida. Then third, the litigation that is being
frustrated by the sovereign immunity defense; which the Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia has been raising. Those are, I think, the three
major channels in which we will get additional information on the
relationship between Saudi Arabia and the 19 hijackers. The
report, I think, made a case that an investigator reading what
Prince Bandar had done, would say, "I want to pursue this
further." The question is, were those leads pursued? And if so,
to what end? I hope what we'll find is that yes, they were
pursued; and here are investigative reports that carry this case
to its conclusion.

        OGDEN: So, as you could see, yours truly Jeff Steinberg was
on hand to ask Senator Graham a question; and Senator Graham's
emphasis, which he repeatedly came back to, was to open up the
file on Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador. So Jeff, maybe you
want to elaborate a little bit more on where this investigation
needs to go.

        STEINBERG: Well, I think Senator Graham was very clear that
there are 80,000 pages of documents that the FBI has acknowledged
belatedly and begrudgingly exist in Sarasota, Florida. I'm sure
that that was a small fraction of the documents down there, as
Senator Graham said, 13 of the 19 hijackers, at one point or
another, were based in Florida before the attack. Paterson, New
Jersey was another center where the hijackers were living and
training for a period of time. Falls Church, Virginia was both a
place where a number of them were present for a while, but it was
a convergence point; a kind of a staging area. There was a
confirmed report that a high-ranking Saudi minister was at the
same hotel in Falls Church, Virginia as a group of the hijackers
the night before the hijacking. So, there are many leads.
Undoubtedly, between the FBI, the CIA, the National Security
Agency, there's an alphabet soup of 16 intelligence agencies that
undoubtedly have millions and millions of pages of undisclosed
material.
        I think one of the most crucial things — and again, Senator
Graham was very clear on this — the most aggressive and
effective form of forcing out new information on what really
happened is by having the Saudi monarchy reinstated in the
lawsuit. Meaning that the JASTA bill has to pass the House; it
has to pass by a veto-proof majority. Once again, we're back to
the same question: Are you, the American people, going to stand
up and fight for something that's urgently needed? Or, are you
going to treat democracy as a spectator sport? If you choose the
latter, then the consequences are going to be more of the same
and worse. I think that the fact that Senator Graham focussed on
further disclosure — as he said, the bottle is uncorked; but the
contents have been barely trickled out. There's an enormous
amount more that has to be done; and of course, next weekend is
the 15th anniversary of the initial 9/11 attacks. Let's not
forget, it's the fourth anniversary of the second 9/11 attack in
Benghazi in 2012. That's not only a very relevant issue in terms
of the consequences of the original cover-up of the Saudi
involvement, but it's a very immediate and intensive issue
related to the Presidential elections in the US. We've got to be
fairly blunt about that. The cover-up of Benghazi is part of the
continuation of the cover-up of the Saudi role in the original
9/11 attack.

OGDEN: Well, Diane, you're right in the middle obviously of
putting together the commemorative anniversary celebrations and
the seminar, and just leading the activism there in New York
City. So, maybe you can just pick up from here.

        DIANE SARE: Well, I'd like to actually take a step back;
because one of the things that Senator Graham brought up about
why this was so important. He said there were three reasons: One
is the question of justice for the family members of the people
who were killed; Two, a somewhat obvious question, which is the
question of security. If we don't root out these networks,
they're there to be used repeatedly. And three, which I think is
really important and cannot be overstated, which is the question
of whether people trust their government. Because once the
population of the United States no longer trusts the government,
which is almost where we are right now, then you lose the
republic. Our republic, going back to the conception of Nicholas
of Cusa and {Concordantia Catholica}, depends on this question of
the consent of the governed. If you don't trust your government,
you will not consent to have it representing you. What Mr.
LaRouche said in the last days, is what we've seen between the
breakthrough that was driven by our work, and then Congressmen
Jones and Lynch virtually threatening — not exactly in those
words — but saying we know that we are immune if we read this
into the record; and what's moving on Glass-Steagall in terms of
the party platforms, is that these Congressmen are beginning to
be forced to represent their populations.
        I would put this in an international context, because what
you have coming up with the Vladivostok meetings going on right
now, and the G20; the trans-Atlantic system is completely
bankrupt. There is nothing Obama and the current configuration,
the European Central Bank, what are they offering to the world?
Negative interest rates? Keep your money with us, and we'll make
you pay! In other words, there is nothing that they can do; but
what you have with Russia and China. China's work — which people
who are following our website will have seen the show on
Wednesday; the New Paradigm show on the question of the far side
of the Moon, or the talk Thursday night. There is an entire
universe — we'll start with the Solar System — which is opening
up, which this collaboration in Asia has to offer. What the
Chinese have done is, they're hosting the G20 meeting, and
they're making President Putin the guest of honor. Then they're
having President al-Sisi as another honored figure at this
meeting. What is Obama's response? He thinks he's going to go
there and somehow push the Trans-Pacific Partnership; which is
bound to be a complete flop, a non-starter. The Russians made
very clear in an interview in Xinhua going into this meeting,
that Moscow and Beijing need Washington as a partner. I found
that somewhat — it made me happy as an American, because I think
the US should be a partner in this. Also, paradoxical. Then the
person who was interviewed, said Washington can be a complex and
unpredictable partner.
        So, I would say that our job as Americans — in a sense —
we've been given a mission that other very important leaders are
saying that the United States is wanted as a valued partner in
this New Paradigm. It is for us to deliver that by straightening
out this criminal regime that we have. Part of what we saw with
9/11 is that the cover-up has gone on through two
administrations; that Obama has been not only complicit in this,
but with his policies in the region, has contributed to the
growth of ISIS, the growth of al-Qaeda, their ability to recruit.
We've lost over these last years, almost 4500 soldiers in Iraq,
which is now known to be a complete lie and a fraud; that's what
came out of the Chilcot Inquiry. The question of 9/11, therefore,
becomes will we get justice? And justice doesn't mean revenge or
retribution; it means will we restore our nation to something
which someone would want to give their consent to be governed by
this government?
        I think when you look at the question of Mozart, which is
the {Requiem} which will be performed, which our chorus is
participating in and working on; Mozart's commitment was that. He
was a supporter of the American Revolution; he was a supporter of
the ideas of creating a republic, and he was murdered. His work
was eliminated; his contribution, what he could have done had he
lived longer. The piece has lived on because it has a quality
which is immortal; which actually embodies the question of human
creativity. What we're seeing here in response is that the people
who are engaged in this are developing a certain kind of passion
which probably was always in them. But because they have a chance
to participate in something which is going to be so profound and
so beautiful, and it has a mission in the real world, they are
becoming passionate again; which is I think is something that's
been very lacking. Everyone can think of conversations that
you've had with your friends and neighbors about the upcoming
election or almost anything; and the population has become
passionless, which is why people don't act when they should or
when they can.
        So, I have a sense that we really are on the brink of a
major breakthrough that the United States will be a part of; even
if many people in the United States don't fully appreciate why it
is here and how they came to be involved in it.

        OGDEN: Absolutely! I would just echo exactly what you just
said, Diane. In his speech at the Press Club, Senator Graham
quoted the often-quoted anecdote from Ben Franklin at the
Philadelphia Constitutional Convention; when the woman asked,
"What have you given us?" And he said, "A republic, if you can
keep it." The passion that Senator Graham has exhibited around
this, sustaining his role and his fight for 15 years for the
declassification of these documents; where does this passion come
from? Even though the FBI tried to intimidate him personally, and
told him to back down; basically "Get a life!" they said. Senator
Graham has refused to back down, because he sees this — as well
it should be seen — as an existential question for the survival
of the American republic. Not only from justice and the
standpoint of national security, but the very survival of our
nation as a republican form of government. I would assert that
we're looking at exactly the same kind of existential question
when it comes to the restoration of Glass-Steagall. The magnitude
of the implosion of the trans-Atlantic system that we are about
to see — if this thing came down without the necessary
leadership in place around the restoration of Glass-Steagall and
otherwise, to protect the American people from the fall-out from
that kind of financial crisis — this republic would not survive.
        The opportunity is there at our fingertips to join the new
financial architecture and to create the kinds of productive
surges in growth that this nation has never before seen; that
would surpass even what we achieved during FDR's New Deal, if we
were to join the New Silk Road which is being led right now by
China and others. So, it's that same kind of passion which needs
to be applied to that question as well.

DAVE CHRISTIE: Just to add, because I think the other side of
this is what Mr. LaRouche has identified that we're at a point
now where the old concept of sovereignty from the standpoint of
geopolitics; that the moves that are being made in the world by
the leadership of Russia, China, and India, are obviously the
echo of what Mr. LaRouche and his wife Helga have put on the
table for over a 40-year period. The discussion of the new
financial architecture really began when Mr. LaRouche proposed
the International Development Bank; his proposals for a New
Bretton Woods conference, starting in the '90s. That was picked
up by Nestor Kirchner of Argentina. Putin was actually discussing
this concept as well, of the new financial architecture, in the
early 2000s. So clearly, the role of the LaRouches is at the
forefront of this New Paradigm and the potential for that to come
into existence. What Mr. LaRouche has stressed is that we're
going to move beyond the old nation-state system. That doesn't
mean we're going to cease to have nations; but rather, the first
and foremost thought will be of mankind viewing itself from the
common aims of mankind. That humanity will be thought of first. I
think that's what we're seeing with the implications of the New
Silk Road policy and the new financial architecture; it is just
simply to facilitate the expansion of this concept.
        In that light, I think it's important that {The Hindu} just
had an interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche; and in the coverage of
that article, they cite the question of the Bering Strait, which
is the tunnel underneath the Bering Strait to link Eurasia with
North America. I think that's relevant to the ongoing discussion
in Vladivostok; because clearly the ability for Japan, for Korea,
for China and Russia to come together in this part of the world,
represents an amazing potential. Just think of the scientific and
technological potentials of those nations: China's space program;
Russia's space capabilities; the high-tech capabilities of Japan
and Korea. It really represents a very profound potential; and
when you begin discussing the development of the Siberia region,
the Far East region, you're building up that economic potential
right up to the doorstep of the Bering Strait. So, I think that's
obviously reflected in this {Hindu} article which interviews
Helga Zepp-LaRouche and her call to make the New Silk Road become
the World Land-Bridge; which is actually the title of that
article.
        So, I think the importance of what Diane referenced — this
idea of the consent of the governed — in a sense, these
discussions that are going on this weekend with the Vladivostok
conference, the G20 conference, that is what is actually being
discussed. As the Europeans are complaining about Obama, they're
trying to ram the TTIP and the TPP down the throats of the
Europeans; where prominent leadership of Germany and France are
saying, "Wait a second. Aren't we going to be involved in any
kind of discussion about this? Is this a democratic process?" But
of course, for Obama and the imperial interests that control him,
there's no discussion; no democratic process. I think that's
actually what is on the table. Just to come back to it, there's
no other place than space, which is perhaps the greatest
reflection of the end of the idea of the old system of
nation-state. There are no nation-states in space.
        We were discussing earlier the fact that this SpaceX rocket
just blew up; the great privatized space program that we're now
going to have after Obama dismantled NASA. It turns out that its
payload was a satellite launched by Facebook to run broad band in
Africa. This is the level of technology that we have in the
United States, or that we're concerned about. Whereas, if you
look at what China's doing with the far side of the Moon, look at
this collaborative effort; that can be the way to bring Asians on
this planet together to actually realize the common aims of
mankind.

        OGDEN: If you go back to the inaugural speech that John F
Kennedy made in 1961, when he was elected President; that was
obviously the focus of a previous generation of this country. He
said, we must move beyond the age of war; because all-out war is
not conceivable anymore in the age of nuclear weapons. This would
lead to the extermination of not just one country or another, but
the entirety of the human race. Instead, what we must do, is move
beyond the age of war to an age where nations are collaborating
to achieve the common aims of mankind. He said, our mission must
be to explore the stars, to conquer the deserts, to cure poverty
and disease, and to bring an end to the age of war itself.
        When you look back one year at the speeches that Vladimir
Putin and Xi Jinping made at the United Nations General Assembly
meeting in New York, that was exactly what the subject matter
was. It was the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II, and
the framework that was put together by Franklin Roosevelt after
that war before he died, was intended to be a framework of
international relations based on bringing the New Deal, bringing
the awesome achievements that the United States had accomplished
under the American System to the rest of the world. And, bringing
an end to imperialism and colonialism once and for all. So, they
harkened back to that framework in which the United Nations was
originally conceived, and said this must be the foundation of the
paradigm going forward. Immediately after those speeches at the
United Nations General Assembly, Helga LaRouche issued a call for
a new security architecture for the planet. If you look at how
much has changed just over the past one year, in terms of what
now exists in actuality in those terms; that new security
architecture, the new economic architecture, this new
international order has now begun to coalesce.
        As Diane was saying, it's incumbent on the American people
to impress upon yourself how rapidly the situation in this
country could change, if the necessary steps are taken in order
to bring the United States into that new framework. If you bring
yourself outwards by a couple of months or one year from the
present date, and look at how much has changed since that
previous United Nations General Assembly meeting; you can see how
rapidly things could change for the better. I know that's been
Helga's assertion over and over again. The future is so close;
it's at your fingertips. It would be so easy to achieve. But
there are bold actions that must be taken in the United States;
and absolutely that starts in the month of September with the
convening of an immediate vote on Glass-Steagall, and ramming
that through the United States Congress.

        STEINBERG: I think that Mr. LaRouche has emphasized
repeatedly that winning this fight in the United States,
basically restoring the United States to its historical tradition
— which was an anti-colonial, anti-imperial, specifically
anti-British Empire nation that came into existence through a
struggle against all those principles of empire that have been
gradually more and more adopted by the last two administrations;
by the Bush 43 administration and equally so if not even more so
by Obama. The fact of the matter is, that we can at this point —
as the 28 pages fight indicated, as the momentum for
Glass-Steagall indicates — we can win this fight in the United
States; but it's got to be done now, and it's got to be done in a
timely fashion where people realize that there are critical
flanking battles that must be fought. Many other things are
merely irrelevant or distractions; and should just be ignored. We
win the fight on Glass-Steagall; we win the fight on the full
exposure of the Saudi 9/11, because that is really a
British-Saudi story that goes deep into our own national security
structures. So, these are the things that are going to be
measured in the next immediate days and weeks ahead. It has
virtually nothing to do with the election show that's going to be
more and more of a dominant factor.
        We've got to win this fight for Glass-Steagall; we've got to
win the JASTA fight. Those things can be won in the Congress in
the immediate several weeks ahead of us. That's going to take an
enormous mobilization, a focussed mobilization of the American
people. It means a lot of institutions that can be dragged in
many different directions, have to have the same kind of laser
focus that Mr. LaRouche is calling for and demanding of our own
forces. AFL-CIO actively involved in Glass-Steagall. Now is the
moment to pull out all of the stops and force the issue; because
Glass-Steagall is merely the starting point. It begs the issue of
a national system of credit; of national banking; of establishing
priority projects. Including, first and foremost, reviving NASA;
reviving our government-backed space program. Because these are
the things that are the only way that you're going to revive real
productivity in the US economy, given how far down it's sunk
already.

OGDEN: I would just say one thing. Those two subjects — the
forcing of the reopening of the 9/11 investigation and the
immediate mobilization around Glass-Steagall — these are
featured in this week's edition of {The Hamiltonian}; which is
hitting the streets today. That is a direct focus in terms of
activism that everybody needs to be involved in, is the
saturation of New York City, specifically with this weekly
publication that is now coming out — {The Hamiltonian}. So,
maybe before we conclude this broadcast, Diane, you can give us a
quick update on how that's changing the situation on the ground
in New York; and what people have to do between now and next
weekend in order to maximize the effect of the events that are
coming up in a week.

        SARE: I would say that people should certainly contact the
Manhattan Project office about coming to our meeting tomorrow in
Manhattan; where people can pick up copies of {The Hamiltonian}
and can join us on the distributions. We've been getting them out
all over the city and in the neighboring boroughs, and getting a
very favorable response. It's amazing; this one we're printing
now is only the fourth issue, but we already clearly have a
following of people saying, "Do you have the next one?" I think
it's also shaping the perception of what people are willing to
say. It may have been a coincidence, I don't know, that we ran
our first issue on Hillary Clinton as a stooge for Obama's wars
and Wall Street; and that week, Maureen Dowd came out with her
column on Hillary Clinton as the pro-war perfect replacement for
Dick Cheney was the idea. As we've seen in the past, there are
certain things that we take the point on, and we change what
people are allowed to discuss. Like when Mr. LaRouche, years ago
during Cheney and Bush, talked about Leo Strauss; and we produced
a series of reports — ultimately a book — on this policy of
lying and ramming it down people's throats as a way of
terrorizing the population to go along with fascism. The next
things you knew, the {New York Times} was running this big
article about Leo Strauss, who I'm sure most people had never
heard of until we did this.
        If you go back to what happened with the 28 pages, Obama had
absolutely no intention to ever release those pages. We created a
situation where he could not not release them; he had to do it.
Therefore, people should take heart in a certain way, that what
you used to consider as the powers that be, or the things that
are unmovable, or what can't be changed; that is no longer the
case. Now is really the moment to pick up — Jeff said it clearly
— the American Constitution, Alexander Hamilton; what our nation
is actually supposed to represent in the world. Now is the moment
for Americans to find their guts and stand up on their hind legs
and demand that nothing lower than that standard is going to be
tolerated by us at this point.

        OGDEN: Absolutely. So, I would encourage everybody to please
contact the New York office if you're in the area, or if you can
travel there. There's going to be a series of events that you can
participate in over the next week; and it's very significant. If
you have not yet, please subscribe to our YouTube channel, but
also, watch the two latest features that have been posted on the
LaRouche PAC YouTube channel and the LaRouche PAC website. As I
mentioned, the full press conference that Bob Graham delivered at
the National Press Club is available; the short address of that
is lpac.co/graham-press-club. We'll put that in the description
of this video here today. Also, the 20-minute video called "The
New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge: a Tour"; which is
very well-composed overview of exactly what the New Paradigm and
the new economic architecture looks like. Again, we'll put the
URL of that video in the description as well.
        So, thank you very much for joining us here today. I think
this was a very important discussion. Please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com. Thank you very much; good night.