Men den indiske ungdom kan også lade sig inspirere til at påtage sig, som deres egen mission, at deltage i den økonomiske transformering af Sydvestasien og Afrika, og på denne måde blive en del af skabelsen af en fremtid for hele menneskeheden.

Virkeliggørelsen af et sådant udviklingsperspektiv er den eneste måde, hvorpå flygtningekrisen kan afsluttes og Europas og USA’s økonomier kan genoplives, og hele Asien kan udvikles.    

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Tirsdag, 1. marts 2016 – Den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier talte i dag på George Washington Universitet og citerede her Franklin Roosevelt og krævede åbne grænser. »Det værste, vi kan gøre, er at forsegle os«, sagde Steinmeier med henvisning til flygtningekrisen i Europa, så vel som til debatten om immigration i USA.

Han lagde ud med at tale om flygtningekrisen i Europa. Han citerede Roosevelts berømte, første indsættelsestale, at det eneste, vi har at frygte, er selve frygten, men henviste dernæst til det efterfølgende, hvor Roosevelt sagde, at frygt »lammer den nødvendige indsats for at vende tilbagetog til fremgang«.

»Vi må inddrage og adressere rødderne til dette problem«, sagde Steinmeier. »Tilhængerne af frygt gør det modsatte. Men vi kan ikke flygte fra problemet. Verden er for indbyrdes forbundet«, sagde han. »At rejse mure er en dårlig idé, uanset, hvem der betaler for dem«, sagde han, med tydelig adresse til Donald Trump.

Han understregede Ruslands betydning. »En del af dette lederskab vil være vores dialog med Rusland«, sagde Steinmeier. »Vi kan ikke undvære Rusland. Vi må inddrage Rusland. Vi må huske den lektie, vi lærte af vore fædre og bedstefædre [der var udstationeret til Sovjetunionens grænser under den Kolde Krig].«

Med hensyn til våbenhvilen i Syrien sagde Steinmeier: »Hver eneste time, hvor våbenstilstanden holder, er vigtig for verden, så vel som for de mennesker, der er direkte berørt af den. Vi må yde de flygtninge, der flygter fra denne krig, beskyttelse. Det er ikke alene en humanitær pligt, men er også indskrevet i EU’s statutter og Genèvetraktaterne. USA har altid været kendt som et land, der har givet et tilflugtssted for dem, der flygtede fra krig og undertrykkelse. Dette vil lykkes os, hvis vi angriber den grundlæggende årsag til denne migration.«

Det første spørgsmål kom fra en repræsentant fra EIR, der spurgte ham, om ikke han var enig i, at vi har behov for en ny Marshallplan for Mellemøsten, der indledningsvis kunne bygge på den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinpings vigtige initiativ for en forlængelse af det økonomiske projekt for Ét bælte, én vej ind i Mellemøsten og herigennem fjerne det grundlæggende problem med regionens manglende udvikling.

Steinmeier kom med et temmelig langt, men noget forsigtigt, svar på spørgsmålet. Han bemærkede, at omstændighederne i det ødelagte Europa efter Anden Verdenskrig var meget anderledes end i nutidens Mellemøsten. I Europa var der en kvalificeret arbejdsstyrke, som omgående kunne sættes til at arbejde. I Europa fandtes der allerede en industriel udvikling, som man kunne bygge på. Dette var generelt ikke tilfældet i Mellemøsten. Alt imens der fandtes nogen kapacitet af denne art i Irak, så var det ikke tilfældet andetsteds. Og selv i Irak, så var en stor del af landets territorium stadig under ISIS’ kontrol. Mange mennesker var allerede migreret til Europa. Alt imens der var behov for økonomisk assistance, især mad og husly, så eksisterede der stadig en militær situation i store dele af regionen. »Vi må først skabe en situation, hvor folk kan vende tilbage til deres hjemlande. Vi må bruge alle vore kræfter til at forsøge at samle disse lande igen.«

En delegation fra Schiller Instituttet, med formand Tom Gillesberg som ordførende, havde foretræde for Folketingets Udenrigsudvalg. Hør talen og se diasbilleder:

Vi står netop nu med en enestående mulighed for at sikre, at den langvarige mareridtsagtige proces med krig og ødelæggelse, der har præget Mellemøsten i årtier, og som har spredt sig til Europa og resten af verden i form af terror fra Islamisk Stat og en flygtningebølge, der er ved at løbe Europa over ende, kan bringes til ophør og erstattes af et nyt paradigme for fred gennem fælles økonomisk udvikling.

Dias til mødet:

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

The English and Arabic version is below the Danish.

På et tidspunkt, hvor flygtningekrisen truer med at blive til en hidtil uset humanitær krise, og som sprænger Den europæiske Unions sammenhængskraft og endda muligvis selve dens eksistens i stumper og stykker, er en vision om håb for udvikling af Sydvestasien og Afrika den eneste måde, hvorpå situationen kan vendes til det bedre. På et tidspunkt, hvor den transatlantiske verdens finanssystem står umiddelbart foran at krakke, er udviklingsperspektivet for en genopbygning af Mellemøsten og resten af Sydvestasien til at udgøre en bro mellem Asien, Europa og Afrika den eneste drivkraft for økonomisk vækst, der kan forhindre Europa og USA i at synke ned i kaos.

På dette programs virkeliggørelse beror således hele menneskehedens skæbne.

28. februar 2016 – Den arabiske version af EIR’s specialrapport, »Den Nye Silkevej bliver til Verdenslandbroen«, i sin fulde udstrækning, er nu færdig og klar til udgivelse og distribuering. Den 400 sider lange rapport (med et appendiks del 6 om Sydvestasien, der omfatter EIR’s Projekt Føniks: En genopbygningsplan for Syrien) er blevet oversat af Hussein Askary (med færdigt layout af Ali Sharaf), og »Den Nye Silkvejs-lady«, alias Helga Zepp-LaRouche, har på smukkeste vis skrevet forordet, som følger:

En Fredsplan for Sydvestasien

Af Helga Zepp-LaRouche

Washington, D.C., 26. februar 2016

Det er muligvis et udslag af et lykkeligt sammentræf eller af Forsynets indgriben, at den arabiske oversættelse af rapporten om Verdenslandbroen udkommer netop nu, hvor udsigten til en våbenhvile i Syrien er ved at blive en realitet. Overenskomsten mellem den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry og den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov har et potentiale til at bringe den fem år lange krig, der har kostet hundreder tusinder af mennesker livet, til en afslutning. Men i betragtning af de enormt komplekse omstændigheder i regionen bør det også stå klart, at en blot og bar kontrakt om at standse kampene vil være for skrøbelig til at vare ved og overleve nye provokationer fra de samme kræfters side, der oprindeligt var ansvarlige for krigen.

Den eneste måde, hvorpå en varig fred kan garanteres, er den omgående iværksættelse af en omfattende udviklingsplan for hele Sydvestasien, med en udviklingsplan for integreret infrastruktur; en plan, der ikke alene genopbygger krigens ødelagte byer og landsbyer, men som anviser en langt mere fundamental fremgangsmåde for atter at forvandle denne region, der engang var en af den menneskelige civilisations vugger, og som på forskellige tidspunkter i historien var hjemsted for tidens mest fremskredent udviklede kulturer, til en af verdens mest avancerede. Målet må være at udløse regionens folks kreativitet og bringe deres produktivitet op på samme niveau som Europas, USA’s eller Kinas.

Dette er absolut muligt, og i særdeleshed, fordi Ruslands og Kinas samarbejde repræsenterer magtfulde naboer, der, sammen med lande i regionen, kan udvirke denne udvikling. Hvis de udviklingsprojekter, som foreslås i rapporten, i bogstavelig forstand bliver gennemført med start fra i morgen, således, at udbyttet ved fred bliver synligt for alle parter i regionen, så kan våbenhvilen i Syrien og gennemførelsen af det, man kunne kalde en Silkevejs-Marshallplan, dog uden denne betegnelses tilknytning til en kold krig, blive en agent for et nyt scenarie for hele verden.

På et tidspunkt, hvor flygtningekrisen truer med at blive til en hidtil uset humanitær krise, og som sprænger Den europæiske Unions sammenhængskraft og endda muligvis selve dens eksistens i stumper og stykker, er en vision om håb for udvikling af Sydvestasien og Afrika den eneste måde, hvorpå situationen kan vendes til det bedre. På et tidspunkt, hvor den transatlantiske verdens finanssystem står umiddelbart foran at krakke, er udviklingsperspektivet for en genopbygning af Mellemøsten og resten af Sydvestasien til at udgøre en bro mellem Asien, Europa og Afrika den eneste drivkraft for økonomisk vækst, der kan forhindre Europa og USA i at synke ned i kaos.

På dette programs virkeliggørelse beror således hele menneskehedens skæbne.

Den arabiske EIR-rapport kan bestilles (kun i papirudgave) gennem EIR News Service og alle internationale institutioner, der er associeret med LaRouche-bevægelsen, herunder Schiller Instituttet i Danmark.

The English and Arabic version pdf. of
A Peace Plan for Southwest Asia
by Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
EIR press release in English and Arabic on the occassion of the release of the arabic version of “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.”
(The English, Arabic, and Chinese versions of the report are available from The Schiller Institute in Denmark at: +45 53 57 00 51 or +45 35 43 00 33, or si@schillerinstitut.dk

Download (PDF, Unknown)

22. februar 2016 – Sidste december stod det Tyske Selskab for Fysik (DPG) og Georg-August Universitet i Göttingen i spidsen for et projekt, »Fysik for Flygtninge«, der var henvendt til børn og unge i henved 20 flygtningelokaliteter i hele Tyskland. Hver uge udførte 500 frivillige et fysikeksperiment, der blev gentaget af de unge, på disse steder. De opfandt også en internet-baseret »kalender for kommende fysik«, hvor eksperimenter præsenteredes via YouTube uden at give svaret. Med hjælp fra frivillige blev disse eksperimenter gentaget og løsningerne indsendt.

Projektet har fået støtte fra regeringen og vil fortsætte i en anden form i 2016. Hovedformålet er at give børn mulighed for at koncentrere sig om noget andet end den umiddelbare virkelighed i flygtningecentrene, at vise dem, at de er meget velkomne, og at opmuntre dem til at blive involveret i at udføre fysikeksperimenter på en legende måde. Deres webside siger: »Fysiske fænomener er universelle og globale. For at udføre eksperimenter behøver man ikke et bestemt sprog, en bestemt religion eller et bestemt sted. Det samme gælder for alle mennesker på Jorden, uanset, hvor man er, hvilket sprog, man taler, eller hvilken religion, man tilhører. Fysik er spændende, sjovt og lærerigt – og at udføre eksperimenter skaber selvtillid. Fysik er sjovt – og det er overalt!« https://www.dpg-physik.de/pff/index.html

DPG forpligter gennem sin forfatning sig selv og sine medlemmer »til at stå for frihed, tolerance, sandfærdighed og værdighed og at være sig bevidst, at de personer, der er aktive inden for fysik, i en meget speciel, høj grad er ansvarlige for dannelsen af menneskeligt liv som helhed. Vi besluttede derfor, i denne aktuelle, akutte situation, at tilbyde Fysik for Flygtninge for at engagere særligt børn og unge efter deres lange flugt, gennem at kombinere lærerig og spændende underholdning.«

Frivillige rapporterer, hvordan udførelse af eksperimenter »vækker forskningens ånd«, og at sprogbarrierer meget let overvindes. Projektets særlige virkning er »læringseffekten – på begge sider!«

Foto: Flygtningebørn i Friedland oplever ’Physik im Advent’ med frivillige hjælpere.               

22. februar 2016 – I et forsøg på at stemme op for tidevandet i anti-flygtningedebatten og dækningen i medierne, har flere end 70 prominente tyskere fra den kulturelle verden (især filmverdenen) og fra den politiske verden skrevet et åbent brev, der blev offentliggjort i avisen Die Welt, til støtte for kansler Angela Merkels flygtningepolitik. Brevet udtaler, at Tysklands modtagelse af over 1 million flygtninge i høj grad har hævet Tysklands internationale omdømme, og at Merkels strategi med at forhandle en løsning på flygtningespørgsmålet må opmuntres.

Underskriverne inkluderer Daniel Barenboim (musiker, dirigent), Nico Hoffmann, Jürgen Flimm, Katharina von Garnier (filminstruktører), Herta Müller (forfatter), Lea Rosh (udgiver), Margot Friedländer (overlevende fra Holocaust), Andre Schmidt (tidligere kultursenator, Berlin).

Med næstformand Michelle Rasmussen

Jeg vil begynde direkte med at diskutere den meget dystre trussel om en international konflikt, der nu er ved at rejse sig, især fra den krudttønde, der udgøres af Syrien, Nordafrika og Mellemøsten. Det syriske område, hvor, på trods af den fælles indsats fra udenrigsminister John Kerry og den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov for at finde fælles fodslag, så truer Obamas afvisning af at give Saudi Arabien og Tyrkiet besked på at trække sig med at få det hele til at eksplodere.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Faren for en massiv, endnu større strøm af flygtninge, der kommer fra Afrika og ind i Europa, så vel som også den fortsatte krise centreret omkring Mellemøsten, betyder således, at Europa er absolut dømt til undergang, med mindre der finder et fundamentalt skifte i politikken sted. Og dette betyder, at USA og Europa indledningsvis må række hånden frem mod Rusland og Kina. 

Engelsk Udskrift.

US & EUROPE MUST REACH OUT TO RUSSIA & CHINA TO AVOID WAR

International LaRouche PAC Webcast
Friday, February 19, 2016

MATTHEW OGDEN: Good evening. It’s February 19, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden and you’re joining us for our weekly, Friday
evening broadcast here from larouchepac .com
I’m joined in the studio tonight by Jason Ross from the
LaRouche PAC science team, and we’re joined via video, from a
remote location, by Jeffrey Steinberg of Executive Intelligence
Review. The three of us, along with several others, had a chance
to have a discussion earlier today with both Lyndon and Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, so what you’re about to hear will be informed by
that discussion.
Now, I’m going to just start right off the bat with a
discussion of the very dire threat of an international conflict
arising, especially from the powderkeg of Syria, Northern Africa,
and the Middle East. The area of Syria, where, despite the
efforts of Secretary John Kerry to find common ground with
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Obama’s refusal to tell
Saudi Arabia and Turkey to stand down is threatening to blow this
entire thing sky high. A very accurate discussion of this was
published earlier today in a piece on Consortium News by Robert
Parry, the editor of that publication, in which he says the risk
that the multi-sided Syrian war could spark World War III,
continues, as Turkey and U.S. neo-cons seek an invasion that
could kill Russian troops, and possibly escalate the Syrian
crisis into a nuclear showdown.
What Robert Parry says in this article is that Barack Obama
took questions from reporters on Tuesday, but he did not take the
one that needed to be asked: which was whether he had forbidden
Turkey and Saudi Arabia to invade Syria, because on that question
could hinge whether the ugly Syrian civil war could spin off into
World War III and possibly a nuclear showdown.
Now, this was part of our discussion earlier today with Mr.
LaRouche and what I know Jeff will elaborate much more on, was
LaRouche’s analysis. But in short, what Mr. LaRouche had to say
is that what Putin is doing in this situation, and overall in a
strategic manner, defines the point of action, defines the point
of reference, for action. Everything else is bluff.
So, let me hand it over to Jeff, and he’ll elaborate many
more of the details, and then we’ll come back to our
institutional question for this evening, which Jeff will also
answer. So, Jeff?

JEFFREY STEINBERG: Thank you, Matt. Well, as we were going
through the discussion with Mr. LaRouche earlier today, he
actually drew a distinction between the bluff, and what he said
much more accurately is the folly of what Turkey and Saudi Arabia
are up to. It’s folly because they are caught in their own
madness, and don’t even realize the consequences of what they’re
doing in the real world. They don’t have the capability to carry
out the kind of provocations that they are threatening, and the
danger, of course, is that that does not mean that they’re not
going to try to do it.
Putin stepped into the Syria situation at a critical moment
last September, and the entire situation has shifted radically
since that point. The Russian intention is {not} to simply
accomplish a military victory on behalf of the forces of
President Assad. They’re creating the conditions to force the
intransigents, in this case Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, some of
the other Gulf states, and always lurking in the background when
you’re dealing with Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood is
the British. So, Putin has established a clear sense of control
over the situation. Undoubtedly part of Putin’s configuration is
that Obama has been greatly weakened by the actions of Russia; on
the economic sphere, the actions of China; and there are sane
military forces in the United States who recognize the folly of
what Turkey and Saudi Arabia are doing.
This has been described by Parry, whose article you
mentioned, and by others, as the danger of a Sarajevo 1914 flash
point, along the Syria-Turkey border, but what Mr. LaRouche
emphasized today is that Putin has a very clear sense of the
military correlation in this situation, and has also a very clear
sense that Turkey and Saudi Arabia are acting on the basis of
their own irrationality. And he is luring them in to the kind of
trap that could be basically enclosed on them at any moment. It’s
a gravely dangerous situation, but you have at least one key
player, namely Russian President Putin, who knows what he’s
doing, and who is steering these events in a way that conforms to
an appropriate strategic analysis, and to an understanding of how
to basically defeat these forces that have been trying to destroy
Syria for the last five years, and in so doing, to deprive Russia
of one of its own critical access points in the Mediterranean
region.
Now, what Mr. LaRouche really emphasized, and I think that
this is the crucial point to take away from this issue, is that
the center of gravity of world affairs has dramatically shifted
to where the Asia-Eurasia region, anchored in the cooperation
between China and Russia and India, with other countries grouping
around that, is really where the strategic center of the world
economy has now been shifted. And if you look at the situation in
Europe, in particular, from one end to the other you see nothing
but bankruptcy and political failure. The United States is on the
verge of the same kind of bankruptcy. And so the only place where
you have growth and stability by any measure, and of course Asia
and Russia and Eurasia are not devoid of problems, but relative
to the state of absolute bankruptcy that we see in Europe and in
the United States, we see a disintegration of the political and
economic conditions in much of South America, as well. Of course,
Africa has been on the target list of the British and other
European colonial, imperial powers for the longest time.
But in Asia, you not only have a much more stable and
growing situation, but you have a commitment to an abandonment of
geopolitics in favor of what Chinese President Xi Jinping has
called the ”win-win” strategy. And if you look at the crisis in
Europe right now, leaving aside the fact that the entire European
financial system is bankrupt — hopelessly, irreversibly bankrupt
under the present conditions and terms of thinking that dominate
Europe — if you look at the refugee crisis, you’re beginning to
see a glimmer of sanity, driven by desperation, by certain of the
people who are responsible for creating the European fiasco in
the first place.
So, you’ve got people like Wolfgang Schäuble, the finance
minister of Germany, who was one of the monsters behind the
destruction of Europe, including the German economy itself, now
saying there must be a Marshall Plan to rebuild Syria, to rebuild
other parts of the Middle East, and only on the basis of a
Marshall Plan, which gives people a clear incentive to go back to
their homes, to rebuild their country, only under those
circumstances, and those circumstances alone, can the refugee
crisis in Europe be remotely solved. And of course, what applies
to the Middle East applies doubly for Africa, where the
U.S.-British-French overthrow of Qaddafi unleashed absolute hell
throughout the African continent.
And so the danger of a massive, even larger flow of refugees
coming out of Africa into Europe, as well as the continuing
crisis centered in the Middle East, means that Europe is
absolutely doomed unless there is a fundamental change in policy.
And for starters, that change means that the United States and
Europe must reach out to Russia and China. You had the recent
visit by President Xi Jinping of China to Saudi Arabia, to Iran,
and to Egypt, and what Xi Jinping made very clear is that China
is prepared to move towards the building of the Silk Road
infrastructure, the New Silk Road land route, the Maritime Silk
Route, which will come up through the newly expanded Suez Canal
— China will do that. In fact, just this week, the first freight
train from Eastern China arrived in Iran, and this is part of the
entire European system of not just transportation corridors, but
development corridors that have been put forward by China as the
cornerstone of their foreign policy.
So, they’re presenting a win-win alternative. And in the
case of Europe, there is no alternative. Europe is so politically
and psychologically bankrupt — the leadership of Europe is so
bankrupt that China, through this Middle East development portion
of the One Belt, One Road policy, offers the only viable basis
for this Marshall Plan idea to actually be put into practice. And
were it not for the Putin intervention, beginning last September,
we couldn’t even be contemplating the possibility of that kind of
solution to this seemingly intractable problem in the Middle
East.
Now, Mr. LaRouche emphasized in this context that Europe is
completely gone; it’s completely bankrupt, and there are
solutions, but the present leadership is unprepared to consider
that kind of level of rethinking. In the United States, we’re
very close to the edge, but the United States {can} be saved and
the solution to the problems in the United States begins with
removing President Barack Obama from off ice immediately, and
moving to wipe out the thoroughly bankrupt Wall Street system.
Because until that system is put through basically a bankruptcy
shutdown, then none of the viable and available solutions are
going to be there. But, if you were to get rid of Obama, if you
were to wipe out Wall Street,–and, for example, immediately
passage of Glass-Steagall would be one critical element for that
process to happen almost overnight — then we have a history in
the United States. We had Alexander Hamilton. We had Franklin
Roosevelt. We had glimmers of the same policy with John F.
Kennedy. You go back to a credit system, a government credit
system that kick-starts production, that trains a young
generation that’s right now completely unqualified to serve in a
real economy.
All of that means the United States coming into alignment
with what we see going on with China, with Russia, with India,
with others. In other words, the United States becomes part of a
genuine trans-Pacific collaboration, and under those
circumstances, Europe itself would have no choice but to get on
with the program.
So, what we’re seeing from Turkey, from Saudi Arabia, and as
I said, always watch for the British lurking in the background
with those two countries — you have clinical insanity and folly,
which holds the danger of war. But Mr. LaRouche again emphasized,
Putin knows this. He sees all of this, and he is on top of the
situation, and is prepared to take the appropriate and necessary
actions. And there are some people who are not completely out of
their minds on the U.S. side, within the military-intelligence
community, who understand that partnering with Russia is the only
way to solve this problem.

OGDEN: Thank you, Jeff. Now, just really on the subject that
you ended on here, the bankruptcy of Wall Street and the extended
Wall Street system, and the relationship of that to the
conditions in Europe; that brings us to our institutional
question for this evening, which reads as follows: ”Mr.
LaRouche. The heat is turning up on British Prime Minister David
Cameron, who’s trying to get the upper hand over a referendum
that could result in the UK leaving the European Union. The
potential break-up of the European Union, which is called
‘Brexit’, has elicited warnings about the impact on the UK
economy should voters say that they want out of the EU. A recent
poll showed that 42% of UK voters would opt to leave the EU;
compared to 38% who say that they would vote to stay. This week
will be the first major test as to whether Cameron’s done enough
to secure an agreement to change some terms of the UK’s
relationship with the European bloc. Cameron says that he will
campaign to stick with the EU, if a deal can be reached. This
Thursday and Friday will be the first time that all 28 EU
countries will discuss a package of proposals recently released
by the EU, aimed at addressing the UK’s economic concerns.
Cameron negotiated the proposals with the EU leaders and Donald
Tusk, President of the European Council — the EU’s main
decision-making body. What is your view of a possible ‘Brexit’?”

STEINBERG: Well, you know, you’ve got ”Brexit” that was
preceded by ”Grexit”, and probably we’re going to have a much
larger lexicon; that all comes down to the fact that people have
the sense that the European Union, particularly the European
Monetary Union, is a sinking ship. And therefore, if the ship is
sinking, or the movie theatre is on fire, you get to the exit as
fast as possible. But the reality is, that the European Union —
and within that, the European Monetary Union — are the problem.
So, therefore, unless you address the more underlying issue,
which is that Europe is financially and economically bankrupt;
then it really is almost of secondary significance whether
Britain stays in or leaves. If Britain leaves the European Union,
then that’s virtually it for the European Union. Other officials
in Europe, even including Schäuble at the Davos Conference
earlier this month, said that if the Schengen agreement, the open
borders agreement in Europe is broken, then the European Union
will cease to exist. And already in Poland, in Hungary, in other
countries on the edge of Europe but within the European Union,
they’re already building those walls. So in effect, the European
Union, as it’s presently constituted, is a dead letter; it really
doesn’t exist. And the countries of Europe, either collectively
or individually, are going to have to come to face the reality
that their banking system is thoroughly bankrupt; they’ve lost so
much productive capacity that Europe from a physical standpoint
is no longer capable of self-reliance, self-preservation. So, the
whole thing is going under; and of course, there’s a certain
irony in the British threatening to leave the European Union,
since the bankruptcy of the entire trans-Atlantic system is
largely the result of policies that were created in London, and
were then spread about Europe and the United States. You could
almost say that Europe was doomed from the moment that Margaret
Thatcher launched the Big Bang in 1985, and turned London into a
safe haven for speculative gambling operations, drug-money
laundering, anything other than investment in the real economy.
So now, we’re 30 years into that process, and Europe is
finished. So, the issues that are being negotiated between
Cameron and Tusk and the others on the European Commission, are
tiddlywinks; they’re not the real issues. Unless Europe comes up
with its own version of shutting down the City of London and Wall
Street, a genuine full-scale Glass-Steagall separation of
legitimate commercial banking activity from all of the gambling,
then Europe is completely doomed. And the only hope that they
will have is that some sane future leaders, who emerge out of
this political rubble, recognize before it’s perhaps too late
that aligning with China and Russia — which is exactly the
opposite of the policies that are being pursued in Europe right
now — is the only answer. So, I think that that’s the context in
which the question can be answered; and so the issue is merely
that Europe in its present circumstance is doomed. And whether
Britain leaves the European Union or stays in, they are part of
that system of doom that’s going to have to be changed in a much
more fundamental — I’d say ”revolutionary” — way. And the
opportunities are there; they’re presented there because Europe
is at the western end of Eurasia; and the Chinese have already
established the rail links between central China and Germany.
There are opportunities galore under the umbrella of the ”One
Belt-One Road” policy; but the first step is that the European
leaders are going to have abandon their folly. And that’s a
difficult proposition to conceive of, given who the current
European leadership is.

OGDEN: Absolutely. And, let me just elaborate a little bit
what Mrs. Helga Zepp-LaRouche emphasized, which is that if you
just look at the refugee crisis, for example, and the absolute
breakdown of Europe to even absorb and handle this under the
current economic conditions. This has pushed people to begin to
discuss the possibility of what the LaRouche movement has been
advocating for quite a long time; which is a new Marshall Plan, a
new program of economic development for the Middle East and North
Africa. It is what was published by the Schiller Institute and
{Executive Intelligence Review} in a major book-length
publication a number of years back, called ”A New Marshall Plan
for Southern Europe and the Mediterranean”. What Helga LaRouche
emphasized is that at the point that the EU is really detonating
underneath people’s noses, there is no solution within the
current geometry.
The only solution is to go with this kind of Marshall Plan,
and to work with China and the BRICS and other countries, to
extend the Silk Road project into this region and to develop the
Middle East and North Africa in order to have an incentive for
millions and tens of millions of refugees not to leave to seek a
better condition. And Helga LaRouche’s emphasis was that this is
a very substantial example of what Xi Jinping has called the
”win-win” paradigm; the ”win-win” system. It is a win for
everybody, for Europe and the United States to work with China
and Russia to develop the Middle East and North Africa along the
Silk Road routes. This kind of cooperation between China and the
rest of the world is what China is seeking in inviting the rest
of the world to engage in; and this is the only way to solve the
crises and shift the geometry overall which is creating the
existential threat which is now being faced by Europe.
Now, this new paradigm; this is exactly what we have been
talking about for quite a while, but I think the foundation for a
new paradigm cannot be seen as merely some sort of extension of
former or present geopolitical ideas about how the world works.
This is not merely a rearrangement of political and economic and
strategic alliances between countries that would still be
dominated by the same axiomatic world view which is what has
brought us to this crisis point to begin with. Rather, there
needs to be a true renaissance; a new calibration, a
re-examination of what our view of mankind is. What our view of
man as a species is, and what mankind’s role within this galaxy
and his relationship to the entire universe; and indeed, what his
responsibility is as a uniquely creative species in this universe
must be.
So, on that subject, Jason Ross is joining us from the
LaRouche PAC Science Team, and I think we’re going to have a
somewhat exciting discussion of what are the implications of the
really profound work that Albert Einstein engaged in over a
century ago; and which is now grabbing the headlines again in the
form of this experiment that has revealed the affirmation of
Einstein’s hypothesis concerning the shape of space-time.

JASON ROSS: Thanks. As I imagine everyone has heard by now,
on September 14th of last year, a gravitational wave was detected
by the interferometer experiments that we had set up in
Washington state and in Louisiana. Over a few months, that signal
was studied to make sure that that really was what had occurred;
and a paper was submitted in January and published in February
announcing the news that a gravitational wave phenomenon
representing the merging of two black holes had been detected.
This meant that a change in space-time had been experienced in
that detector; where maybe we don’t know how the experiment
worked.
Very briefly, two tracks at right angles to each other,
allowed light to move up and down those tracks. Those tracks
reach 4 kilometers long. Due to some very clever engineering, the
effect of length was 100 times that; and by the motion of these
gravity waves — meaning a change in the shape of space due to a
varying intensity of gravity due to these two black holes
spinning around each other — the length of the two tracks varied
by an amount that was about 1/10 the diameter of a proton over a
track length of 4 kilometers. This is equivalent to the star
nearest to us getting closer and further away by the width of a
hair. It’s amazing that was actually able to be measured; that’s
an astonishingly tiny change.
And it says something about the difficulties and why it’s
been — as Matt said — it’s been a century since Einstein had
proposed the existence of these gravity waves; and now they’ve
been detected. So, the recent upgrades to these detectors here in
the US made this possible; there are other detectors around the
world. Some of them are being upgraded; new ones are being
brought on line. There is a proposal for a space-based
interferometry experiment — the Lisa experiment; which NASA had
been a part of, and has now left it to the European Space Agency,
currently scheduled to launch in 2034. Perhaps it’ll be sent
sooner than that, based on this news.
But what does all of this mean? What does it tell us about
— what are the implications? Well for one thing, this means we
really have an entirely new tool for looking at the universe that
we live in. All of our knowledge about the heavens beyond us,
comes from sight, or various forms of sight. You can’t smell a
star, you can’t taste it; you can’t hear it, you can’t fell it.
You can see it. So various forms of seeing are the way we learn
more about our surroundings. From simple observations with the
eyes here on Earth, which were all that were available to Kepler
when he determined how the planets moved; the use of telescopes
in the optical range — simple telescopes that could be seen with
the eye — into more complex telescopes, including ones that see
what we wouldn’t typically call light; radio telescopes.
Telescopes in Earth orbit, looking in other wavelengths of the
electromagnetic spectrum; infrared telescopes, ultra-violet
telescopes, x-ray telescopes. We’ve got a lot of ways of

side of the Moon, where China is going to be within just a
few years sending a lander. The potential to do long wavelength
radio telescope work from that location; this represents
something new.
But what we’ve got with this successful detection based on
the change in space-time with the LIGO [Laser Interferometer
Gravitational-Wave Observatory] experiments, this is something
totally different. This is like bringing in a new sense all
together. We’ve been seeing the universe; now we can probably
hear it would be the best analogy. It represents a vibration,
like the sound vibrations our ears are able to pick up. Only this
time, it’s incredibly faint, and it’s about space itself
vibrating; that really is what it is. So, that’s tremendously
important.
On the history of this, it’s important to keep in mind
people are very excited about this; there’s good reason to be,
it’s quite a development. But this can only indirectly be called
a scientific breakthrough; the science behind this — Einstein
proposed this in 1916. He had some more thoughts and wrote
another paper in 1918; some more discussion about it. Hypotheses
about black holes, breakthroughs in computing ability to try to
model these types of things; all of that took place. But what
could be called the fundamentally scientific change occurred 100
years ago with Einstein’s theory of relativity; with gravity
waves being one of the implications. Being able to detect them is
wonderful; it’s an amazing technological advancement. It shows
that we are capable of precision that was totally undreamed of in
Einstein’s time, certainly, or even a few decades ago. The
development that we’ve made has been tremendous.
But I think it’s fair to say this was not a scientific
breakthrough in the real sense of science. It is a new sensation;
it is a new technology. It is a whole new way of looking at
things; and that is tremendously important. I think that if we
look back at what Einstein did that made his hypothesis possible,
we can compare it to the really awful influence of Bertrand
Russell.
So, first on Einstein. We’ve got to recall that what
Einstein did in laying out his revolutionary theories was not
something that he derived; it wasn’t something that he proved. It
wasn’t something that he showed was true based on what was
already known. What Einstein said about the universe contradicted
the Newtonian view of space and time that had become dominant.
Einstein said that that simplistic view of space and time, which
went along somewhat intuitively with our senses, was in fact
untrue; and that basic concepts like simultaneity, or knowing
that two events happen at the same time, such a basic concept as
that. That there’s one time that applies everywhere; Einstein
showed that was untrue. That’s a very unintuitive thought. The
idea that space could have a shape to it; that’s a very
unintuitive thought. It’s not suggested by appearances.
But what Einstein was doing was implementing a world outlook
that goes back to Cusa — although I’m not going to talk about
him right now — but to Leibniz and to Bernhard Riemann. If we
consider the work of Leibniz, 1646-1716, the founder of physical
economy; there’s plenty to say about him, and plenty will be said
on this website. One of the specific things that he looked at was
in the world of physics, Leibniz’s demonstration that there was
no absolute space; that there was no absolute time. This was
contrary to Descartes, Newton, and others. Leibniz said there’s
no distinction between rest and motion, for example. If there’s
no absolute space, you can’t say that anything is at absolute
rest; that was a concept used by Descartes. Absolute space was a
concept used by Newton. But Leibniz was in a fight about this,
saying that space was a relation between concurrently existing
things; but it didn’t exist on its own. In a debate that he had
with a top Newtonian — Samuel Clarke — this seemingly physical
discrepancy about is space absolute or not, turned into very
directly a political one. That, both of these two — Leibniz and
Clarke — used their concept of space to make a point about God,
and implicitly also about government; about the basis of the
legitimacy of a ruler.
Clarke, the Newtonian, said that because everything could
have been created anywhere in space once God decided to do the
Creation, that showed that God made a choice without any
necessity; that it was just because God felt like doing then and
felt like doing it where he did, because he felt like doing that.
Sort of like a dog deciding to his business wherever he feels
like it. Leibniz said that if God had to do something without a
good reason, that God would be only all-powerful, but not good or
wise. And Leibniz said that that conception of God has to include
those perfections as well; goodness, wisdom, and power.
Now between the lines, what these two were also saying was a
view of government and a view of society. Implicit in this is
Leibniz’s view that the legitimacy of a ruler or of government is
not simply from having gathered power; but from using it in a
wise way to achieve good ends. That may seem a little bit far
afield, but it’s true; and this is part of the background on this
concept. That from the necessity for goodness came the
nonexistence of absolute space; that’s how Leibniz showed that.
He was right.
Bernhard Riemann, in 1854, delivered a presentation, wrote a
paper on the shape of space. And Riemann said that since the time
of Euclid up to his time, no one had ever really taken on in a
realistic way, what the basis of the shape of space is. That
Euclid said things like the sum of the angles in a triangle are
180; Riemann said that may or may not be true. On a curved space,
for example, it’s not true. The most important aspect is that
Riemann didn’t propose replacing Euclid with a similar geometry;
it’s that he said that the basis of our understanding of space
has to be the physical causes that make things occur within
space. He was right; that was Einstein’s approach. With
relativity, he said that our understanding of space can’t start
from a box; it has to start from physical principles that give
rise to the effects in space, and to the relationship of objects
in space. So light, gravitation, these became the basis of space
for Einstein; and those concepts lie outside of space. They
aren’t geometrical concepts in the way Euclid’s concepts were
geometrical. Light is a real thing; gravity is a real principle.
So, Einstein, in following on this and implementing it, and
developing his theories, developing his breakthroughs of
relativity, created something that contradicted; he made a new
hypothesis. To contrast that, let’s look at the past 100 years.
We’ve now affirmed something that Einstein had proposed 100 years
ago; but where are the new Einsteins? Where are the new theories
that contradict? Where are the new concepts that don’t follow
from what we already know, but introduce fundamentally new
principles? And more importantly, why is that not understood as
what science really is?
To say just a little bit about Bertrand Russell’s role in
all of that, LaRouche has called Russell the most evil man of the
20th Century; and we have given ample demonstrations of that.
Some of the more straightforward evidence of it is his views
about keeping the world population down; especially dark-skinned
races, who Russell particularly was upset about there being more
of. Proposing a scientific dictatorship, using murder to
eliminate people who became intelligent and opposed the ruling
class, keeping science secret from the majority of people; this
is some of the nice outlook that Russell had on things. He also,
in his own work as a ”professional” you might say, worked on
destroying the concept of science and turning it into
mathematics. He did this before and after the year 1900; this is
somewhat earlier in his life, where he wanted to throw away what
Einstein ended up doing, which was creating a new concept that
contradicted the past. And say instead, that every thought in the
future, will have to derive from thoughts in the past; that we
can replace creativity with logic.
Russell really put that into practice. Many people who are
familiar with Russell might think of him as being an anti-war
demonstrator, as being a peace-loving activist. Somebody who was
opposed to war, to conflict; especially to nuclear weapons. And,
included in that, technology itself; the concept that science is
dangerous, that perhaps science should be held back, because
these technologies allow us to exterminate ourselves. The idea
that the appropriate response to that would be to eliminate
technologies, rather than to have a productive, future-oriented
basis for relations among nations. This really sprung up in a
major way around anti-nuclear activism, of which Russell was a
major proponent.
So, I think what we can reflect on, what we can take from
the excitement around these gravitational findings, is that: 1)
it’s an opportunity to really go back and really develop and
understanding of who Einstein was. How did he think? Who was this
man, who a century ago, put forth the hypothesis that was
detected in this way only this year. Who was Riemann? How did he
actually think? We can reflect on the opportunities that we have
for the use of these kinds of instruments to provide us an
entirely new window to understanding the universe around us. Not
only are we seeing things in a different band, we’re using a
different sense all together. We’re hearing the universe; we’re
able to listen in on a completely different kind of physical
process than the electromagnetic ones that are the basis of all
astronomy otherwise. Using light, radio waves, x-rays and that
sort of thing. And I think it also demonstrates that the ability
to develop new technologies, to rise to a challenge, certainly
exists. And we saw this in the Apollo program, which similarly,
going to the Moon itself did not involve as much new science as
it did new technologies, new social organizations to implement
those technologies. Which we saw with some of the breakthroughs
of the truly amazing apparatus used to detect these gravitational
waves. But we have to have grand objectives. I mentioned the LISA
experiment; a space-based interferometry experiment, similar to
ones which did this recent detection, which NASA had been a major
player in and then pulled back on, as part of the Obama
destruction of a national mission, a natural future. NASA, as the
leading representative of that future orientation of the nation.
So, we have to have human objectives for the nation, for
ourselves. We have to, as a nation, have objectives like what
China’s doing now; as represented by China’s moves towards the
Moon from the Helium-3 standpoint. From the sheer excitement of
the population of China being asked to put forward proposals for
experiments to take up to the Moon. This is something that people
are actually thinking about as citizens of this nation. ”Wow!
What are we going to send up there?” ”What are we going to take
to the Moon for the next trip?”
We’ve got a lot of objectives that have been defined that we
have just been sitting on for decades. And if we eliminate the
source of this culturally, the frankly unscientific view of
science, this anti-human view of humanity, we can do great
things. And we can do it by removing Obama and giving this nation
a future-oriented mission again.

OGDEN: Well thank you very much, Jason. I think that’s
certainly exciting; the idea to be able to directly perceive
changes in space-time itself. So, I’d like to thank Jason for his
presentation, and I’d like to thank Jeff for joining us remotely
today. And I’d like to thank all of you for joining us; and
please stay tuned to larouchepac.com. Good night.

2. februar, 2016 – EU-kommissionens præsident Jean-Claude Juncker bekræftede i går, at de 3 mia. Euro, der er blevet lovet til Tyrkiet, ikke vil blive regnet med som en del af donorlandenes underskuds-grænse.

Dette kom frem i forbindelse med den seneste kontrovers mellem den italienske regering og EU-kommissionen angående en suspendering af budgetreglerne, hvilket Italien havde forlangt til gengæld for de ekstra udgifter til indvandrer-politikken – men som blev afvist i det italienske tilfælde.

Juncker sagde, at afgørelsen om, at stabilitetspagtens regler vil blive suspenderet for penge lovet til Tyrkiet, blev truffet og stadfæstet allerede sidste december. En talsmand for kommissionen sagde imidlertid, at italienske anmodninger om at holde 0,2 % af dets nationalbudget uden for de samme regler, på grund af Italiens udgifter til landets eget rednings- og hjælpeprogram, vil blive gransket i detaljer ”til næste forår”.

Premierminister Matteo Renzi hævede stemmen som sædvanligt. ”Vi Italienere mener, at indvandrere alle er lige. Det er ikke muligt at betragte de liv, der reddes i det Ægæiske Hav, som anderledes end dem, der reddes i det Tyrrhenske Hav. At udgifter til at redde børn, der sejler fra Tyrkiet til Grækenland, holdes uden for stabilitetspagten, er sluttelig en positiv kendsgerning. At betragte udgifter til at redde børn fra Eritrea, der kommer til Sicilien på anden vis, forekommer mig absurd og ulogisk. Kun en bureaukratisk perversion kan skelne mellem liv, der bør reddes.

“Vores job er at lede Europa, ikke at tage imod ordrer. Vi vil yde vort bidrag til Tyrkiet. Hvis de [Bruxelles] ønsker at anlægge et søgsmål mod Italien, så lad dem.”

Renzi blev hurtigt affejet af Manfred Weber, chef for den Europæiske Folkepartigruppe (EPP) i Europaparlamentet, der sagde, at ”der er ikke mere plads til fleksibilitet”, og at Renzi bør efterleve ”europæiske forpligtelser.”

Uafhængigt af resultatet af konfrontationen mellem Rom og Bruxelles/Strasbourg sætter afgørelsen om at holde de 3 mia. Euro til Tyrkiet uden for de berygtede budgetregler en præcedens, der kan bruges til at fremme ideen om en Marshall plan. Hvis det kan gøres én gang, kan det gøres igen, især, fordi midler, der er bevilget til produktive formål, vil skabe indkomster, der i det lange løb vil kompensere for underskuddet.

Flygtninge fra Afrika med kurs mod Italien.

(Zepp-LaRouche 32 min.)

Kun, hvis man anvender en Marshallplan, en Silkevejs-Marshallplan i regionen, hvor alle disse lande … arbejder sammen og siger: Vi vil tage hele området fra Kaukasus til den Persiske Golf, fra Afghanistan til Middelhavet, som ét område, og vi vil sætte en reel udvikling i gang. Vi erklærer ørkenen krig; vi skaber nyt vand! … Så kan man udvikle landbrug. Man kan udvikle skovbrug. Man må bygge infrastruktur, der er lige så tæt som f.eks. i Tyskland. Tyskland er et perfekt eksempel på et infrastrukturmæssigt meget veludviklet land. Så kan man bygge nye byer, og man kan opbygge industrier.

GDE Error: Requested URL is invalid

26. januar 2016 – I takt med de daglige rapporter om mænd, kvinder og børn, der drukner under turen fra Tyrkiet over Ægæerhavet til Grækenland, bliver det til overflod klart, at den Europæiske Union er ude af stand til at håndtere krisen. Den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble gjorde ligeledes dette klart, da han opfordrede til en »koalition af villige« til gennemførelse af en Marshallplan for Mellemøsten – som EU er ude af stand til at gennemføre. Men kun en virkelig Marshallplan, der søger Afrikas og Mellemøstens integration i den Eurasiske Landbro (Verdenslandbroen), kan løse problemet.

EU-indenrigsministrenes uformelle møde om flygtningekrisen, der blev holdt i Bruxelles den 25. jan., demonstrerede endnu engang EU’s fiasko.

Grækenland, gennem hvilket de fleste af flygtningene kommer, blev genstand for absurd pres og krav. Som svar herpå fordømte den græske, stedfortrædende minister for indvandringspolitik, Yiannis Mouzalas, der er læge og stifter af Doctors of the World (Læger i Hele Verden), kravene og truslerne om at udstøde Grækenland af EU’s visa- og rejsefri Schengen-zone. Med kommentarer til Grækenlands private SKAI TV fordømte Mouzalas et belgisk forslag – at Grækenland skulle etablere en lejr til 300-400.000 flygtninge i Athen!

»Schengen er en del af et spil om at uddele ansvar: Hvis du ikke gør dette eller hint, så gør vi det her ved dig. Det er en straf«, sagde Mouzalas og tilføjede, at Grækenland ikke ønskede at deltage i en proces, der ikke ville føre nogen vegne hen. Han sagde, at europæiske lande uberettiget er »i panik« over spørgsmålet. Mouzalas har moralsk autoritet til at udligne denne kritik, eftersom Grækenland har været indstrømningspunkt for henved en million flygtninge alene i løbet af de seneste seks måneder samtidig med, at landet også må håndtere sin egen dystre, økonomiske krise. Landet har modtaget meget lidt hjælp fra EU. Han advarede ligeledes om, at flygtningekrisen i Grækenland ville blive en humanitær krise, hvis tusinder af flygtninge skulle blive indespærret i Grækenland.

I en artikel i Financial Times lancerer Gideon Rachman et forslag om flygtninge-for-gæld for Grækenland, hvorved Tyskland ville annullere en stor del af den græske gæld, og Grækenland ville være vært for flygtninge i lejre på græske øer, finansieret af Tyskland eller EU. Flygtningene ville dernæst blive sendt tilbage til Syrien, eller Irak, når krigen først stopper.

En sådan model har åbenlyse problemer, som Rachman indrømmer. Det første problem er den nødvendige ændring af asylreglerne; hvis krigen trækker ud, kunne flygtningene sidde fast i lejre i årevis. Det andet åbenlyse problem er, at Grækenland selv befinder sig midt i en katastrofal, økonomisk krise. Rachman medgiver, at »en ophobning af flygtninge i Grækenland lyder rystende …«

Rachman skriver, »Denne plan lyder, som om den er langt ude. Men den kunne allerede delvist være på vej, gennem forsøg og fejltagelse. Det vides, at EU-embedsmænd overvejer at ’afgrænse’ Grækenland ved at blokere grænsen mellem Grækenland og Makedonien, som er hovedruten mod nord. Ifølge en rapport i Financial Times menes denne plan ’at finde støttet i Berlin’.

Foto: Yiannis Mouzalas

26. januar 2016 – EIR’s forum i dag ved National Press Club i Washington, D.C., med Schiller Instituttets præsident Helga Zepp-LaRouche, internationalt anerkendt ekspert i den Eurasiske Landbro (Verdenslandbroen), og Thomas Wysmuller, tidligere NASA-meteorolog og talsmand for »De rigtige klima-fakta« (»The Right Climate Stuff«) tiltrak 38 personer, af hvilke de 19 var gæster. Dette fremmøde skete på trods af 90 cm sne, hvilket fik Kongressen til at aflyse sammentræde for hele ugen. Vejret skabte et kaos, der lukkede skoler, regeringer og andre virksomheder frem til i dag.

Deltagerne inkluderede en fremtrædende raketvidenskabsmand fra Kennedy-æraen, en demokrat fra området, der stiller op til Kongressen, russisk presse, internationale handelsfolk, repræsentanter fra ambassader og lokale tilhængere.

Hele EIR-forummet er tilgængeligt på video. (Se nedenfor.)

Thomas Wysmuller åbnede mødet med 12 stærke grafiske fremstillinger, der blev uddelt til alle deltagere og gav dem mulighed for, billede for billede, at følge hans afsløring af påstandene om, at forslagene fra COP21 skulle kunne reducere CO2; grafiske fremstillinger, der viste, at 7.500-års stigningen i havniveauet i tiden efter istiden affladedes i løbet af de seneste 8.000 år, og meget mere – enkelt og ligetil. Dr. Wysmullers fremlæggelse havde en stærk effekt på publikum.

Dernæst gav Helga Zepp-LaRouche en 50 minutter lang tur horisonten rundt om den strategiske situation: truslen om atomkrig med en understregning af, at der i dag ikke findes nogen »adfærdskode«, som der var mellem Kennedy og Khrusjtjov i 1960’erne; det umiddelbart forestående finanssammenbrud, som tidligere BIS-formand William White påpegede under Davos-forummet; planen for en global bail-in (ekspropriering af bankindeståender), som ikke kan fungere, og flygtningekrisen, de er ved at flå Europa fra hinanden. Helga sagde, at, hvis selv den tyske finansminister Schäuble kan sige, at Mellemøsten behøver en Marshallplan, så viser det, at verden kan forandre sig, og det viser betydningen af den internationale LaRouche-bevægelses arbejde, der ligger bag potentialet med løsningen med den kinesiske Landbro (Silkevejen).

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 27. januar 2016 – Med advarslen » Endnu ét skridt, og vi mister vores menneskelighed«, skabte Helga Zepp-LaRouche et magtfuldt fokus for sin præsentation den 26. jan. i National Press Club Forum i Washington, D.C., som EIR var vært for, med titlen, »Kun en videnskabelig og kulturel renæssance kan standse den Mørke Tidsalder, der nu er ved at sænke sig over menneskeheden«. Forud for fr. Zepp-LaRouches tale holdt Thomas Wysmuller en tale. Thomas Wysmuller er en tidligere meteorolog ved NASA og en førende talsmand for »De rigtige fakta om klimaet« (»The Right Climate Stuff«) – en gruppe bestående af tidligere NASA-videnskabsfolk med hjemsted i Houston ved Johnson Space Center, der offentligt tager til orde imod svindelen med den menneskeskabte klimaforandring.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche fremlagde et bevægende billede af flygtningekrisen i Europa, inklusive ikke alene situationen med lidelse og død, men også den krise, der ligger i mange af de såkaldte EU-lederes depraverede respons til flygtningenes lidelser. Det er det samme, umoralske standpunkt, der nu begår, eller går med til, handlinger, der er i færd med at fremme det økonomiske kollaps og bringe os stadig nærmere en atomkrig. Dette gjorde fr. Zepp-LaRouche krystalklart.

Men vi kan handle, sagde hun. Vi er ikke henvist til blot at beskrive og fordømme, »hvad er det, der …«. Vi kan koncentrere os om, hvad vi kan gøre. Hun opfordrede alle til at ’tage fremtidens standpunkt’. I smukke detaljer fremlagde Zepp-LaRouche et udviklingsprogram for hele området i Sydvestasien og Nordafrika – en Silkevejs-Marshallplan for ’Mellemøsten’.

Sæt dette i kontrast til nogle af de aktuelle, dødbringende begivenheder. For eksempel: Den mere end 50 år lange britiske, kongelige ’grønne’ kampagne for affolkning har nu nået et stadium i USA, hvor hele kulsektoren er ved at blive lukket ned. Den seneste indsats i denne henseende kommer fra Californien, hvor Jerry Browns guvernørskab den 25. jan. meddelte, at forsikringsselskaber, der har erhvervsaktivitet i staten Californien, må skille sig af med alle forretningsinteresser, de måtte have i kulselskaber. Uden finansiering og med hastigt faldende indkomster er kulselskaber ved at gå fallit; kulminer lukkes i Appalacherne, og tusinder af minearbejdere kastes ud i arbejdsløshed.

Lyndon LaRouche kommenterede, at dette er den »britiske« plan. De er i færd med at gøre det af med produktionsevnen.

Men – som respons til Helga Zepp-LaRouches opfordring – kan vi hellige os til »at finde vores menneskelighed«. Det begynder med en mobilisering for tiltag, der kan fjerne Obama og bane vejen for de presserende nødvendige forholdsregler, der skal sikre vores fremtid.

25. januar 2016 – Indenrigsministrene i EU holdt et stridbart møde i dag i Amsterdam, hvor de forsøgte at komme overens om, hvorvidt man skulle forlænge grænsekontroller i en periode på to år i overensstemmelse med bestemmelserne i Schengen-aftalen, der i øjeblikket tillader rejser, arbejde og ophold uden visa blandt medlemslandene. Forlængelsen beskrives som »midlertidig«, men reflekterer følelsen af panik og hysteri over, hvordan man skal håndtere indstrømningen af flygtninge, samt frygt for, at Schengen-aftalen, og med den EU, kunne smuldre inden for få uger, rapporterede The Guardian i dag.

Seks EU-nationer har allerede gennemført grænsekontroller under nogen form, men iflg. BBC sagde den hollandske minister for indvandring, Klass Dijkhoff, at medlemsstater inviterede Den europæiske Kommission til at forberede det juridiske og praktiske grundlag »for fortsættelsen af midlertidige grænseregler gennem artikel 26 [af Schengen-aftalen]«.

Ifølge flere rapporter deltog flere EU-ministre i angreb på Grækenland og truede endda med helt at udstøde dette land fra Schengen-arrangementet. Den østrigske indenrigsminister Johanna Mikl-Leitner sagde til Die Welt, at, hvis »Athen ikke omsider gør mere for at sikre EU’s ydre grænser, så må man åbenlyst diskutere Grækenlands midlertidige eksklusion fra Schengen-zonen … Grækenland har en af de største flåder i Europa. Det er en myte, at den græsk-tyrkiske grænse ikke kan kontrolleres«. Den belgiske minister for indvandring Theo Francken advarede, at grækerne må »bære konsekvenserne, og vi vil satse på en form for sanktionsmekanisme«, rapporterer Associated Press.

Ikke alle var enige. Talsperson for EU-kommissionen Natasha Bertaud tweetede, at »der er ingen, der taler om ’suspension fra’ eller ’eksklusion af’ Schengen – en sådan mulighed eksisterer ikke. Vi vil redde Schengen ved at gennemføre Schengen«. Den tyske udenrigsminister Frank-Walter Steinmeier hævdede, at ideen om en græsk udstødelse af Schengen er en »foregiven løsning«. Også Italien og Luxembourg afviste enhver tanke om en udstødelse.

Grækenlands minister for indvandring Ioannis Mouzalas svarede vredt og hævdede, at andre EU-medlemsstater havde forsømt at forsyne Grækenland med lovet personale og både til at afpatruljere øerne i Ægæerhavet. Athen havde behov for 1.800 officerer fra Frontex-organisationen til grænsekontrol, men fik kun 800, sagde han; og kun 6 ud af de 28 skibe til kystvagten, som man havde anmodet om, var ankommet.

Forskellige forslag kastes rundt, inklusive et om at oprette permanente lejre i Grækenland til husning af 300.000 flygtninge, samt lignede lejre i Italien.

25. januar 2016 – Den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble har en kronik den 24. jan. i Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, hvor han erklærer, at Europa må yde et større bidrag end tidligere for at stabilisere Sydvestasien. »Vi berøres mere end andre kontinenter af det, der foregår i dette område. Og vi kan sikkert ikke undgå at blive mere engageret i en stor del af Afrika.«

Han tilføjer, at Rusland spiller en nøglerolle i enhver løsning på konflikten i Syrien og således også i enhver løsning på flygtningekrisen. En europæisk strategi for Mellemøsten og det øvrige Sydvestasien kan afgjort ikke fungere uden Amerika, men den har også brug for Rusland: »Hvis jeg har forstået Ruslands sikkerhedsinteresser mht. islamisk terrorisme korrekt, så har Rusland snarere problemer med sunnimuslimsk relaterede aktiviteter. Hvorfor kan vi således ikke udvikle en fælles strategi sammen med Rusland for at deeskalere konflikter mellem den saudisk-ledede sunni-koalition og den iransk-ledede shia-koalition?«

Eftersom termen »Marshallplan«, som Schäuble brugte ved forummet i Davos den 21. jan., da han krævede investeringer i størrelsesordenen milliarder af euro til genopbygning i Syrien, ikke forekommer i denne kronik, må man antage, at den blev skrevet før dette forum.

Størstedelen af denne kronik domineres af Schäubles favoritemne, nemlig at bruge denne krise til mere europæisk integration og overførsel af suverænitet. Han mener f.eks., at det ikke var en god idé at lade de nationale centralbanker forblive autonome vis-à-vis Den europæiske Centralbank. Han erklærede også, at en europæisk bankindskudsgarantifond og et europæisk bankopløsningsreglement er en nødvendighed, med vanskeligt at virkeligøre i øjeblikket, hvor nationale regler stadig mangler at blive harmoniseret.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/naher-osten/f-a-z-exklusiv-schaeuble-will-zusammen-mit-russland-fluechtlingskrise-loesen-14031573.html

Foto: Flygtninge på grænsen mellem Makedonien og Serbien.    

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

24. januar 2016 – Fuldstændig uventet for de fleste brugte den tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble lejligheden som deltager på diskussionspanelet om »Europas fremtid« på det Økonomiske Verdensforum i Davos, Schweiz den 21. jan. til at foreslå, at en »koalition af de villige« skulle investere »milliarder« i udviklingen af Mellemøsten og Afrika. Dette kommer mindre end en uge efter Zepp-LaRouches seneste artikel om spørgsmålet, med overskriften: »Løsningen på den europæiske flygtningekrise er en Silkevejs-Marshallplan!«.

Vi må »investere milliarder i disse områder« for at dæmme op for strømmen af folk, der flygter til Europa, sagde Schäuble. »Vi behøver en Marshallplan for de områder, der er ved at blive ødelagt«, erklærede han. Og i betragtning af, at en række europæiske lande har nægtet at acceptere påtvungne kvoter af flygtninge, foreslog han en »koalition af de villige« til at finansiere en udviklingsplan og lovede støtte fra Tyskland. Han erklærede sig endda enig med den græske premierminister Tsipras i, at de ville være skamfuldt for Europa at forvandle sig til et »fæstning« og nægte de mennesker, der befinder sig uden for grænserne, adgang.

Stifter af Schiller Instituttet Helga Zepp-LaRouche har længe foreslået et initiativ i lighed med Marshallplanen for Sydvestasien og Afrika, og hun er medforfatter af en EIR-Specialrapport om projektet for Verdenslandbroen, der inkluderer netop disse områder. I en artikel med et internationalt overblik, skrevet 22. jan., (»Kinas Ny Silkevejspolitik er løsningen på flygtningekrisen!«) spørger hun, hvad man skal mene om den tyske finansministers tilsyneladende pludselige skift i dette spørgsmål: At netop Schäuble, super-europæeren og bankernes mand og Trojkaens nedskæringsfortaler, pludselig skulle have åbnet sit hjerte for disse staters udvikling? Allerede Henrik IV forsvarede det synpunkt, at, for den gode sags skyld behøvede ikke alle at være motiveret ud fra de højeste idealer; for at opnå målet kræves der hos mange også, at deres egen skjorte brænder. For Schäuble ved, at, uden Schengen – aftalen om at ophæve grænsekontrol inden for EU – ingen euro, og uden euro, intet EU. Eftersom der ikke er nogen solidaritet i EU, er det bedre ikke at udøve pres, der blot gør nederlaget for Lissabontraktatens EU endnu mere åbenlyst, men blot forlade sig på ’de villige’«.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche fortsætter sin artikel med at understrege betydningen af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jingpings nylige besøg i Mellemøsten og hans tilbud om, at disse lande kan gå med i politikken med den Ny Silkevej. Og det på et tidspunkt, hvor det overforgældede finanssystem har kurs mod et nyt kæmpekrak. Som finansminister er Schäuble udmærket klar over dette. Hvis han derfor er seriøs mht. en Marshallplan for Mellemøsten og Afrika, må han promovere Glass/Steagall-reformer i hele Europa, som den eneste måde, hvorpå en reglementeret afskrivning af den giftige gæld og en udvikling af realøkonomien kan organiseres.

Dette er, slutter Helga Zepp-LaRouche, prøven, der skal vise, om Saul virkelig har konverteret til Paulus.

Dette nye koncept for relationer mellem nationerne er en virkeliggørelse af det samme, højere plan som i coincidentia oppositorum, modsætningernes sammenfald, der kom til udtryk i Nicolaus af Cusas skrift De Pace Fidei, som han skrev som respons til Konstantinopels fald i 1453. Det er ideen om, at der i skabelsesordenen findes et højere niveau og en højere sandhed, hvor modsætninger kan overvindes. Denne tankegang er også til stede i den konfucianske filosofi i Kina i form af »Himlens Mandat«, alt imens den i den europæiske, humanistiske filosofi er udtrykt i ideen om naturret, som er ideen om, at der findes naturlove (universelle love), der sluttelig også er virksomme i menneskehedens anliggender, og som mennesker må holde sig til, hvis de ønsker at eksistere på længere sigt.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Med formand Tom Gillesberg

9. januar 2016 – Jo før, flygtninge får job og jo før, deres børn kan komme i skole, desto nemmere kan flygtninge blive integreret, sagde Katharina Lumpp, ny forkvinde for UNHRC’s gren i Tyskland (FN’s Flygtninge-højkommission), til Frankfurter Rundschau. Dette vil også, som hun tilføjede i sine bemærkninger – hvilket skiller sig positivt ud blandt alt det fremmedfjendske sludder, der dominerer den offentlige debat i Tyskland – gøre flygtninge fra muslimske lande immune over for rekrutteringsforsøg fra kriminelle og ekstremistiske organisationer. Disse organisationer drager fordel af gråzonen med de mange tvivlsspørgsmål, som de fleste flygtninge er overladt til i uger og måneder, sagde Lumpp.

Der findes i øjeblikket kun et eneste, strategisk tiltag, der kan skabe en løsning på de forskellige kriser – den finansielle, økonomiske, flygtningerelaterede og moralske krise – og det er den kinesiske regerings tilbud om samarbejde om opbygningen af den Nye Silkevej, på basis af en win-win-strategi. Vi må omgående gøre en ende på City of Londons og Wall Streets kasinoøkonomi, til hvis undersåtter Schäuble, Spahn, Kerber og den tidligt falmende Jörg Asmussen hører, gennem den omgående vedtagelse af en bankopdelingslov i traditionen efter Franklin D. Roosevelts Glass/Steagall-lov. Og dernæst må vi have et kreditsystem som det, Tyskland havde med KfW (Kreditanstalt for Genopbygning) under genopbygningen efter Anden Verdenskrig. 

Titelbillede: Forsiden til Sebastian Brants satiriske skrift, ‘Narreskibet’, fra 1494.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

2. januar 2016 – I et fælles memo, der blev udgivet ved årets slutning, kræver 29 kommuner i Tyskland, at året 2016 bliver det år, hvor et forceret program for nyt boligbyggeri igangsættes – ikke mindst pga. tilstrømningen af flygtninge, der alle har behov for anstændige boligvilkår. Herudover er der også behov for boliger til ikke-flygtninge, eftersom de fleste bymæssige områder i Tyskland mangler billige lejligheder, især til borgere fra lavindkomstgrupper, og til familier.

Der må bygges mindst 400.000 enheder om året over en periode af flere år for at fjerne boligsvælget, iflg. memoet. Apellen blev også underskrevet af byggeriarbejdernes fagforening, den nationale lejerforening og flere selskaber inden for byggeindustrien og håndværkersammenslutninger.

I denne nyhedsorientering har vi valgt at bringe en række uvurdelige, strategiske vurderinger vedrørende kampen imod Islamisk Stat, flygtningekrisen i Europa og det igangværende finanskollaps, som er fremkommet i løbet af december måned på de ugentlige webcast, der finder sted hver fredag aften amerikansk tid på www.larouchepac.com. LaRouchePAC er en amerikansk politisk aktionskomité, grundlagt og vedvarende inspireret af den amerikanske økonom og statsmand, Lyndon LaRouche. Jeffrey Steinberg (t.v.) er en ledende medarbejder til Lyndon LaRouche og er også efterretningsredaktør for tidsskriftet Executive Intelligence Review. Ben Deniston er leder af LaRouchePAC’s Videnskabsteam.

Download (PDF, Unknown)