Afskrift på engelsk:

Schiller Institute New Paradigm Webcast, October 11, 2018
With Helga Zepp-LaRouche

The Stakes In the U.S. Midterm Elections: War or Peace

HARLEY SCHLANGER:  Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger with the
Schiller Institute.  Welcome to our webcast for today.  It’s Oct.
11, 2018:  Our webcast will feature, as always, Helga
Zepp-LaRouche, our founder and chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
We were just reviewing events prior to this webcast, and
there’s so much going on, as we come now with less than five
weeks to the midterm election in the United States, which is
going to be an extraordinarily important in determining whether
the American people are going to step up to the responsibility of
joining the New Paradigm, or whether they’re going to succumb to
the demoralization and the media control.
We’re also seeing things that the LaRouche movement is
famous for, which is economic forecasting.  And Helga, why don’t
we start with that:  We saw a very big drop in the stock market
yesterday, there’s jitters on Wall Street, anxiety around the
world.  What’s going on?

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  The system is disintegrating, and it’s
just a question of time when this will happen.  I find it very
remarkable that the IMF is pronouncing the famous “D” word.
Remember that the “D” word was never to be mentioned, because the
market would supposedly follows the psychology of the markets,
and when you mention the word “Depression,” then that could bring
it on and so was the tale. But now the IMF meeting in Bali,
Indonesia has been warning that challenges are to be faced,
otherwise, the second Great Depression would be looming.
Now, I find this really remarkable, and I think what they’re
trying to somehow prepare the population that thing is really
coming down.  This stock market plunge of more than 800 points —
I think something like 820 — you had President Trump who
basically said the Federal Reserve is “crazy” with their interest
rate policy, which caused a complete reaction by [IMF Managing
Director Christine] Lagarde and so forth, but he kept repeating
it twice.  He said the situation is much too tense to continue
this.  Naturally, this is the reason why you have the reverse
carry trade from the emerging markets, which was mentioned by the
IMF as the biggest threat to the system, and the second biggest
threat or maybe on an equal level, being the indebtedness. Now,
Lagarde also mentioned the indebtedness of the governments, the
corporate firms, and also other categories, like student loans
and car loans and all of this, is 60% higher than it was in 2008.
Then, in addition to all of these things, you have the
collapse of the real economy, with for example home-building
peeked in the United States in January and has been in a free
fall and since about May this was also the case for copper and
timber — all of these have lost between 15 and 20% since the
beginning of the year.  So, these are all markers that this thing
is not continuing.
And then, you have, naturally, on top of that the growing
fight between the EU and Italian government.  You had the famous
letter, or infamous letter by the two EU Commissioners [Pierre]
Moscovici and [Valdis] Dombrovskis, to the Italian government
warning them that their intention not to stick to the EU-imposed
budget deficit of 2.4%, that this would not be allowed, which was
the trigger for a run on the Italian bond, and as a result, the
spread between the Italian and the German values have gone up to
300 points; and it is generally said if it goes up to 400 —
basically that means that the Italians have to pay 3% and more to
refinance their loans — and that could actually really all
contribute to a crisis.
On top of it, by the 15th of this month, that is in four
days, the Italian government will publish the details of their
budget.  And it is expecting that the rating agencies immediately
afterwards will put out some rating, in all likelihood
downgrading the Italian bonds, or downgrading Italy as a country,
which then basically, depending how they are formulating it, if
the outlook is basically neutral, people say this could just go
through; but if they put a negative outlook on it, then that
could lead to a big banking crisis — actually not only of Italy,
but of the entire Western financial system.
It is clear that some of these people in the European
Central Bank and EU Commission obviously think they can force the
Italian government to capitulate, that they can control the
consequences of this, but this is playing with fire:  Because you
have a highly, highly volatile financial system, and I can only
say, in 2008, the whole world was more or less unprepared for the
crash, because they were not listening to the warning this my
husband had already put out, very clearly, on July 25th, 2007  —
this was one week before the secondary mortgage crisis in the
United States exploded.  And he had said at that time, this
system is finished.  All you can see now, is how it comes down.
And people didn’t listen to it. So the crash occurred in 2008 and
they didn’t draw any conclusions out of their own mistakes, and
just kept pumping money — quantitative easing.  And basically
all these instruments of the Central Bank are now completely
exhausted and used up.
And contrary to 2008, when everybody was unprepared, those
people who are now trying to cause the Italian government to
capitulate and continue with the austerity, which the Italian
government was voted in, because they rejected that austerity.
So, if they push too hard, I think one should not forget that
both Italian government coalition parties, the Lega and the Five
Star Movement party, they have Glass-Steagall in not only their
party program, but also in the coalition treaty.
Now, obviously, the Italian government knows what they’re up
against.  They have seen speculators moving in on countries,
driving them into the ground, so they are relatively careful, and
they’re not saying anything terribly provocative.  But if
somebody from the outside pushes them into a crash, I would not
exclude the possibility, or I would actually say it’s quite
probable that they would implement Glass-Steagall as a
self-defense.
So it is quite different from 2008, and I think the only
lesson that one can draw out of all of this, is we need to
amplify our efforts to go for a New Bretton Woods system, which
we have a campaign on internationally, we have a petition; this
has been signed by many people in the meantime, and I would urge
you, our viewers, sign this petition, get it around, prepare
anybody you know — elected officials, mayors, parliamentarians,
congressmen — to prepare for Glass-Steagall, and not only that,
but the Four Laws of Lyndon LaRouche.  Because unless we
reorganize this entirely bankrupt financial system in an orderly
fashion, the danger is an uncontrolled collapse.
You need a New Bretton Woods system, you need
Glass-Steagall, we need to get rid of the casino economy; we have
to have credit for the financing of the real economy, and we have
to have a new credit system to basically finance investments on a
multinational level among all the countries of this world, to get
the world out of this danger of a depression.
So, if the IMF talks about the danger of a Great Depression,
people should take it to heart. Think about what happened in the
Great Depression in the ’30s  — in the United States it was
devastation, but in Europe it was even worse, because it led to
fascist movements and that to world wars.  So people should not
take these things lightly:  Get onboard with us.  Join the
Schiller Institute, join our campaign for New Bretton Woods,
because that’s the only answer one can give to this danger of a
looming crash.

SCHLANGER:  I had a chance to read through the Executive
Summary of the IMF report, and there were two omissions — they
were there in a sense, but they didn’t really acknowledge them,
— both of which your husband was out in front of for many, many
years, in dealing with the IMF.  On the one side, it’s clear that
it’s {their} policy which has failed.  The austerity regime which
the IMF is famous for, these have never led to any economic
development.  And then, secondly, the quantitative easing, the
low-interest credit for speculation, instead of Glass-Steagall —
the IMF was promoting that.  And so, the two things they
promoted, they’re now admitting are failed. Do you have any
thoughts on that, Helga?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think the possibility that the IMF would
reform itself is probably going in the probability towards zero.
I think it requires a different kind of action.  In a certain
sense, you have right now in the whole world, already, a revolt
against these failed neo-liberal policies.  This was expressed in
the Brexit; this was expressed in the election victory of
President Trump; the new Italian government is an expression of
that; also the Austrian government.  And I think that  — in a
certain sense, national sovereignty has to be reasserted, and I
don’t think these supranational institutions which were the main
reason why these policies were imposed, which had created havoc:
Look at what happened to Greece.  The Greek economy was
diminished by one-third.  The Italian economy was destroyed.  The
fact that we have now a totally different government in Italy,
which is pro-growth for the most part, which is for the
relationship with China, for the relationship with the New Silk
Road, all of this is a response to the failure of these policies.
And there are many people in Europe who are expecting that, given
the fact that the EU is basically doing exactly the same thing in
principle, namely, sticking to the neo-liberal austerity, that
you will have an earthquake in the coming European Parliament
elections [in April] which will show that these present policies
will be absolutely out.
I think this is much too long term.  I think the crisis is
upon us now, so I can only say: The only solution is for the
package I just said before:  The IMF is really a bankrupt
organization, and that was stated by my husband in 1975, when he
proposed to replace this IMF with an International Development
Bank, which would provide large-scale, low-interest credit for
development projects in the developing sector; and if that would
have been done, we would not have a migration problem, we would
have prosperous countries around the globe; but now, with the New
Silk Road, this policy is on a good way.
So I can only say, “listen to the wise words of Lyndon
LaRouche,” belatedly, but better late than never.

SCHLANGER: And that was a very popular item, “How the
International Development Bank Works,” that Lyn wrote back in
’76, I think it was.  We used it as part of his campaign — for
his first campaign for President.
Coming up on the midterm elections, there’s a lot of turmoil
that’s been unleashed.  What’s clear is that Hillary Clinton has
not learned anything from the results of November 2016.  You have
a real civil unrest that’s being built, deliberately, because the
Mueller case, the Mueller Russiagate story, is collapsing.  This
can become a very dangerous situation.  Let’s start with what
Trump said — Trump said, the Democrats have gone crazy.  I
assume you would share that assessment, Helga?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  If calling for violence is a sign of
insanity, then I would agree with him.  And it’s funny, I was
looking at the German media, and they all portray this fight,
this very hot situation in the United States, as if it’s all just
electioneering by Trump that he would call the Democrats a “mob.”
But, it is a fact that Maxine Waters already some months ago,
called on everybody to get into the face of Trump cabinet
members, whenever you them — there were some actually violent
incidents; people were not served in restaurants; and also some
other Democrats basically called that you should be “in their
faces” of the Trump camp. And that has created a complete
hysteria, which was amplified by the Kavanaugh case, where even
Alan Dershowitz, who said that he’s a liberal Democrat, he said
that the attempt, for example, Senator Feinstein and Eric Holder,
they said that Kavanaugh should not be accepted, that this would
put into question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court!  I mean
this is really incredible. Dershowitz then correctly said, forget
it, Kavanaugh is now Supreme Court Justice and he will be there
for his lifetime; this was due process, and the Democrats should
go back to being civilized and not violate all the norms and
rules.
I mean, this is incredible:  I’m not an expert on American
constitutional questions, but it seems to me if the Senate, or
some Senators, are putting into question the legitimacy of the
Supreme Court, this is heading towards a constitutional crisis,
or some kind of a state crisis if these people are not stopped.
I think they have lost all barriers, and they have lost all
sense of limit!  This is a completely hysterical situation, and I
can only say that this is very dangerous.  And we have said many
times that Trump is being attacked, essentially,  — I mean, you
can pick on tiny points here and there — but that’s not the
point: The main reason why Trump is being attacked, is because he
tried to get the relationship with Russia on a good basis.  He
had a very successful in Helsinki with Putin.  And at least, in
the initial phase, he had an excellent relationship with China
and Xi Jinping.  And that is why the geopolitical establishment
went absolutely crazy — as a matter of fact, they’re escalating
their campaign, both against Russia and against China, in
unprecedented ways.  And it is the question of war and peace, and
people should really understand that, that the Democrats have
really gone crazy on the issue of Russia and also China, and they
should not fall into this trap, because in the consequence, this
would mean World War III.

SCHLANGER:  One of the other important points, I think is
that what we’re seeing, is again, people like George Soros
funding these rent-a-mobs.  And Soros, of course, has been
involved in this for many, many years.  And I believe, Helga, you
first identified the operation against Trump after the election,
as similar to the “color revolutions” that Soros, combined with
people like John McCain, the National Endowment for Democracy,
the Clinton State Department, to run coups and regime changes,
throughout the former Soviet bloc countries.  I think we’re now
seeing that what you said about the “color revolution,” is
totally accurate, including the danger of a Maidan Square-type
chaos being unleashed.  Sen. Rand Paul said yesterday that he
fears that there could be assassinations.
Is this pretty much what you had seen two years ago, this
color revolution scenario?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  Yeah, because whenever you have George Soros
involved in such, and he financed, according to reports, $50
million to a private group which, according to these reports,
which was called into being by a “senator,” not named, but the
individual involved was formerly an aide to Senator Feinstein, so
the speculation naturally goes in this direction.  This was an
outsourcing of the whole Steele operation to a private group,
basically using $50 million so that this could go on, after
Steele was officially fired from his liaison with the FBI.
Now, this is incredible.  I think this will all come out,
and also following the James Baker testimony, which even if it
was behind closed doors, nevertheless, what came out in various
Fox TV programs and various other revelations, that it was
Michael Sussman, the lawyer of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the
lawyer for the DNC, which was the original trigger for the whole
Russiagate affair.  I find this absolutely incredible and I can
only hope that the American voters draw their conclusion out of
it, because that means that the Hillary Clinton campaign was
involved with a foreign power, namely great Britain, against her
opponent in the election campaign, and then afterwards, basically
against an elected President.  Now, I don’t find this very
“democratic,” to say the least, to use these kinds of secret
service methods, deep state methods, to work against your own
President, who has been democratically elected.
This, in my view, is the biggest scandal, and if it is all
coming out, if all the documents are being declassified, I think
it will go down in history, as the biggest scandal in American
history.  And that is what’s at stake with this midterm election.

SCHLANGER:  I think it’s very important that Baker, who was
the legal counsel to Comey and the FBI, in his testimony before a
private Congressional hearing, that he acknowledged that Sussman
gave him the Steele report, which was then incorporated into the
original FISA warrant against [Trump campaign advisor] Carter
Page.  That just makes clear that all these Democrats who have
been protesting what Representative Nunes did in his House
Intelligence Committee, that they were wrong, they were lying;
they were trying to cover up for the connection between the
British, the Clinton campaign, and the FBI.
Now, Helga, a couple of other things we need to cover before
we finish today:  One is the very significant stopover in Beijing
by Secretary of State Pompeo.  He had just come from North Korea,
where there was what appears to be quite a successful meeting
with Kim Jong-un.  But when he got to China, it was a slightly
different environment, largely because of the moves toward trade
war.  What happened when Pompeo got to Beijing?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  This was shortly after Vice President Mike
Pence had made this absolute diatribe at the Hudson Institute,
attacking China in the {worst} possible way, and this was taken
very badly by the Chinese government and Chinese media, who
really questioned, does that mean there is a shift in the Trump
Administration, in a total hostile attitude towards China?
Basically, when then Pompeo arrived in Beijing, just a few days
afterwards, he basically reiterated that it is the policy of the
United States to have a good relationship with China, to agree to
the One-China policy, and that the United States is not trying to
stop the rise of China.  And there were several Chinese media
which noted the fact that this was an extremely important
statement to come at this moment.
There was one interesting article in the {Global Times} by
the American analyst and expert, Clifford Kiracofe, who made the
point that there is a clear difference between Pence, who sort of
speaks for the deep state, and Trump, who is trying to change the
U.S. foreign policy, but is being “hamstrung” by this crew on the
side of the deep state.  And Kiracofe basically said the U.S.
establishment is unwilling to learn the lesson from what’s going
on strategically, that the world is changing and that there is a
multipolarity already now.
Now, the significance of this is not only Kiracofe saying
that, but that the {Global Times} is publishing that, which is a
paper which is very close to the Chinese government.  So I think
it’s important that the Chinese are still, despite the trade war
and the escalation coming from ridiculous — like Elizabeth
Economy, who was already on a rampage in 2014, came out with
another major piece, accusing China of all kinds of things — I
don’t need to repeat this stuff;  and I already in 2014 said that
Elizabeth Economy obviously has an “economy-class mind” if she
says these things, and obviously, she has not improved since.
But in any case, I think it is very important that Pompeo
was there to set the record straight, because obviously, the need
to find solutions to the world does require the collaboration
among the major powers of the world.  Those people who are
pushing this insane confrontation, like Hillary Clinton did in
her speech in Oxford, where she was on an absolute rant against
Russia, I mean, these people should really not be listened to, at
all.

SCHLANGER: Another group that shouldn’t be listened to, but
unfortunately is, is the IPCC, which is in the news again, with
the so-called “manmade climate change” theories they have,
demanding that carbon dioxide be eliminated from the universe.
This goes back to the campaign you waged against the
British-backed, German figure John Schellnhuber, who has been
pushing these policies.  And now it looks as though this is going
to be aimed as dagger at the heart of the German auto industry.
And it’s a good thing that Trump pulled the United States out of
the Paris climate change agreement.  But where is this heading?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  This is report which says the climate accord
from Paris was not good enough, we need not stop 2% temperature
increase, but we should stop at 1.5% by 2050.  And obviously,
this is basically what Schellnhuber put out some years ago with
the “great transformation” as he called it, the decarbonization
of the world economy, getting rid of nuclear, getting rid of
coal, oil, gas, just go to “renewable” energy sources; and there,
it is very, very clear that what my husband has developed in
terms of the cohesion and the correlation between energy
flux-density in the production process, and the potential
relative population density, which can be maintained with that
energy flux-density, means that the goal which Schellnhuber set
forth that the Earth can only carry 1 billion people, that that
is what they now want to put back on the agenda.  It’s a
desperate effort by the forces of the Empire against Trump, who
has promised to reindustrialize the United States; especially
against the New Silk Road, against the Belt and Road Initiative,
which now is the new spirit which has captured more than 100
countries already, which work with the Belt and Road Initiative
to their benefit.  And it’s an effort to really throw a monkey
wrench into this dynamic.
But I think it’s desperate, I think it’s dangerous, but I
don’t think it will work.  I don’t think that these people will
convince China, India, Latin America, Africa, the Asian nations,
even some of the European nations, to lie down and die, because
this is what that would mean.
It’s dangerous anyhow, because you can see that it’s needing
a mass hysteria on the CO2 question.  I mean, first of all, we
have long debated that the CO2 emissions is really a minimal
factor in climate change.  Climate change is taking place,
there’s no question about it, but as we have documented many
times in the past, it has to a very large extent to do with the
position of our Solar System in the Galaxy, and it is long-term
cycles from Ice Ages to warming periods, and within that, you
have still smaller fluctuations; and this is determining the
climate.
So the whole discussion of whether the CO2 emission of man
causing these climate changes is just completely absurd.  Now,
it’s very dangerous, because, as you can see, this brainwashing
of the population  — in Europe, for example, one day after the
IPCC put out this quack report, the EU Environment Ministers met
and they decided that the CO2 emission from cars should not be
30%, like they had previously argued, but it should be 35%; and
the German government, which basically initially said 30%, and
then agreed to this compromise — it’s just crazy.
Now, what will that do?  The boss of VW, the largest German
carmaker today came out and said that if this aim is being
implemented to have 35% cut in cars’ CO2 emissions, then this
will cause, alone for VW, 100,000 jobs — and that’s just one
carmaker.  Now, you can add all the other ones, and you will end
up with millions of people going unemployed and the whole
industry collapsing!  Germany, as an economy, is already on
extremely fragile ground because of the exit from nuclear energy,
and if they now are pushing to eliminate coal altogether, this
will be the death of Germany as an industrial country.
Obviously, we will make a big campaign against that.
There is a big worry, because obviously, for example, Poland
is 90% dependent on coal in terms of its electricity production.
And if they force countries to implement that, you will have a
populist explosion in the next vote, if not earlier.
So this is all completely crazy, and it should be stated
very clearly, that with the presently existing technologies, for
a very long time, the world population cannot be maintained
without coal, and there are safe and modern coal plants which are
completely environmentally friendly; and it’s completely
motivated by, not the environment, but by an anti-population
attitude.  We had put out in 2015, a report “‘Global Warming’
Scare Is Population Reduction, not Science,” and in that report,
we had the Queen of England on the cover, because obviously,
Schellnhuber, who wants to be addressed all the time as “CBE,”
Commander of the British Empire,  — we had documented in that
report that these are British policies.  And I think what we see
with this IPCC report, and anti-coal emission campaign; and in
Berlin, they now forbid diesel cars, cars which fueled by diesel
are forbidden from driving in 11 zones in Berlin! Now, the
craftsmen’s association has said that this means that 50,000 cars
of craftsmen will not be allowed to drive in the city, and
everybody who needs the services of a craftsman, who needs a new
roof, or needs a new pump, or whatever, they will not be serviced
any more.
This has nothing to do with real issues:  This is mass
psychosis, and it’s driven by the hedge funds, by Wall Street,
because the CO2 emission trade is a quackery:  We denounced that
in the past, and now, to impose a global carbon tax, which is
also what is being pushed, would mean they have again a good
weapon against national sovereignty, because once you agree that
national economies have to submit to the policing in terms of
their carbon emission, here you go again in the direction of this
globalist eco-fascism.
It’s not scientific, I think it’s the opposite:  It’s
oligarchical and it’s an effort, really aimed, in my view
primarily against the New Silk Road, but naturally also against
Trump, also against Germany, and many other countries.  So, we
should really denounce that, and we will have a whole bunch of
articles about that on this webpage; we will have a whole section
on the Schiller page, where we will have interviews and
statements.  And we invite you, if you have some scientific
contribution to make to this subject, we will publish it on this
website and have a public debate.  Because this is really
dangerous for the future of civilization.
And we have to have the opposite approach:  We have to have
an optimism about man being able to go into fusion power, to
develop completely new scientific methods for energy, safety, for
raw materials security, space travel — I think we should not get
into this scare which is really a tool of the oligarchy to try to
stop the development of the people.

SCHLANGER:  Helga, we’ve gone on a little bit longer than
usual, but I think there’s one other thing we have to bring up,
because we teased it last week, which is endorsements for
Independent Congressional candidate Kesha Rogers in Texas.  In
case, people don’t know this, in the last couple of days, we’ve
two very prominent American Republicans and conservatives —
actually, they may not even be Republicans in the party sense —
but Roger Stone, a longtime friend of Donald Trump, a
self-proclaimed “political provocateur” issued a very strong
endorsement of Kesha Rogers.  And then, Senator Richard Black, a
Virginia state senator, who’s been very involved in exposing the
coup and also exposing the deep state operations against Syria,
he issued a statement endorsing Kesha Rogers.  Helga, do you have
any thoughts on these two endorsements?

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I think it’s great, and I can also add that
the French former Presidential candidate Jacques Cheminade also
endorsed Kesha Rogers, saying that even though he’s not an
American, Kesha’s campaign has international significance,
because she is the flagship against everything which is going
wrong in the United States, right now.  So I think we will have
more such statements, and I really wish all of you to come out
and support Kesha Rogers, because this is a campaign of national
importance and international importance.  [Rogers is an
Independent running in the 9th CD in Texas, against incumbent
Democrat Al Green, who promotes impeaching President Trump
regardless of whether he has committed a constitutionally defined
crime or not — ed.]

SCHLANGER: OK, I think that about does it.  Until next week,
Helga, we’ll see you.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  OK, till next week.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC den 1. august 2018 — BRICS-topmødet i 2018 kan med fordel sammenlignes med Bandung-konferencen for asiatiske og afrikanske nationer i Indonesien i 1955, hvor de tidligere koloniserede nationer mødtes for første gang uden tilstedeværelse af de koloniale herrer. Forskellen fra dengang og nu er, at BRICS nu ikke blot repræsenterer størstedelen af verdens befolkning, men også næsten halvdelen af verdensøkonomien, og langt den største vækst i verdensøkonomien.
     Udviklingen på BRICS Forum i sidste uge, og de mange bilaterale og multilaterale møder på sidelinjen mellem statsoverhovederne og institutionerne i det ”Globale Syden”, demonstrerede, at det nye paradigme allerede eksisterer i verden i dag. Under indflydelse af, ikke nogen nation, men ånden og konceptet om den ”Nye Silkevej”, som blev iværksat af den kinesiske præsident Xi Jinping i 2013, har næsten alle nationerne i Asien, Afrika og Latinamerika, der generelt beskrives som ‘udviklingslande’, sluttet sig sammen for at omdanne verden gennem udvikling, ligesom Kina i løbet af få årtier har taget teten i de fleste kategorier indenfor infrastrukturudvikling og i mange kategorier indenfor industri og videnskabelig forskning, samtidig med at 700 millioner mennesker er blevet løftet ud af fattigdom.
     Et af BRICS-topmødets større resultater var forpligtelsen til, endelig, at løfte hele Afrika ud af den tilstand af fattigdom og underudvikling, der er blevet pålagt kontinentet af de tidligere kolonimagter. Indien og Kina forpligtede sig til at arbejde sammen for at bringe deres videnskabelige og teknologiske erfaring til det såkaldt mørke kontinent. Rusland lovede at ‘oplyse Afrika’ med energiudvikling, anført af atomkraft, tilgængeligt for alle, ‘opbygget fra bunden af’, for at give elektricitet til de 600 millioner afrikanere, der stadig lever i mørket.
     Det andet center for denne dobbelte magtsituation, Vesten, befinder sig i en krise af historiske proportioner. Den Europæiske Union smuldrer både politisk og i flere lande også økonomisk. Det vestlige finanssystem er en spekulativ boble, der er ved at briste. Topmødet mellem den nye italienske premierminister Giuseppe Conte og præsident Trump i mandags har sat en skræk i EU’s oligarker, der advarer om, at den nye amerikansk-italienske “akse” vil forstyrre lederskabet i Tyskland og Frankrig, hvis ledere i stigende grad bliver miskrediteret i deres egne nationer og i hele EU. Husk på, at Conte støttede Trumps intervention på G7-topmødet i juni, hvor Trump informerede disse ‘ledere af det gamle paradigme’ om, at deres sammenslutning i alt væsentlighed er irrelevant, med mindre Rusland er med ved bordet.
     Så spørgsmålet forbliver – hvilken vej vil USA tage? Trump har insisteret på, at USA skal være venner med Rusland og Kina; at der ikke skal være flere ‘regimeskifte-krige’, og at han vil genoprette nationens industrielle infrastruktur, der befinder sig i en tilstand af sammenbrud. Kan han gøre det?
Kesha Rogers, godkendt af LaRouches Politiske Aktionskomité som kandidat til Kongressen for Texas, har udgivet en erklæring: “Kinas tilgang til Afrika viser os, hvordan vi kan gøre en ende på fattigdommen i USA.” Hun udtaler, at USA “lider under ekstrem fattigdom, høje selvmordsrater, stofmisbrug, nedgang i grundlæggende økonomisk infrastruktur og manglende opsparing og finansiering til fremtiden. Alt imens USA har været i et accelereret fysisk økonomisk sammenbrud, har Kina i løbet af de sidste 30 år skabt et økonomisk mirakel med hensyn til bekæmpelse af fattigdom, og løftet i hundredvis af millioner af mennesker ud af fattigdom med målrettede projekter og strategier, som løser de særegne problemer i hver by for sig. Dette har fungeret, ikke kun i Kina, men over hele verden, især i Afrika. Den hurtige udvikling af den fysiske økonomi, igennem byggeri af udviklingskorridorer med jernbaner og modernisering af havne, er nu at ved at ophæve det Britiske Imperiums overlagte kolonialistiske politik med krige og økonomisk ødelæggelse.”
Dette, konkluderer hun, er den model, som amerikanerne skal følge: “Denne model, som i dag gennemføres i Afrika med hjælp fra Kina og BRICS-nationerne, må vedtages i USA for at omdanne vores forsømte samfund, der er blevet ødelagt af kriminel uagtsomhed, til ‘brødkurve’ med økonomisk vækst og velstand. “Dette er midlet, skriver hun, til at opnå de mål der er fastsat af præsident Trump, som har ” forpligtet sig til at genopbygge og udvide den forfaldne amerikanske infrastruktur, og forbedre relationerne til Rusland og Kina samt andre førende nationer rundt om i verden.” (Se webstedet med Rogers kampagne for den fulde erklæring m.m.)
          Rogers har også en anden plan, der omhandler det nye, positive forhold mellem præsident Trump og den nyvalgte præsident i Mexico, López Obrador. Da Trump har erklæret, at NAFTA skal erstattes med en helt ny handelsaftale, bør vi ikke kalde den nye plan for den Nordamerikanske frihandelsaftale, men det ‘Nordamerikanske Bælte- og Vejinitiativ, ‘NABRI. På denne måde kan USA deltage fuldt ud i udviklingen af Mexico og i hele Latinamerika, såvel som i USA selv, sammen med Kina og de andre 100 nationer i Bælt- og Vejinitiativet. Og, som Trump og López Obrador begge er enige om, ved at skabe økonomisk udvikling, job og håb for fremtiden, kan flygtningekrisen løses, og narkotikakartellerne, som nu stort set styrer Mexico, besejres.
Det er dette samarbejde mellem, hvad LaRouche kalder ‘de Fire Magter’, Rusland, Kina, Indien og USA samt andre suveræne stater, der måtte ønske at deltage, der kan gøre en ende på ‘Imperiets’ magt i verden én gang for alle, og frembringe et nyt paradigme for menneskeheden.

Kesha Rogers annoncerer, at hun stiller op som uafhængig kandidat til Texas’ 9. Kongresdistrikt.

Den 7. december annoncerede Kesha Rogers, medlem af LaRouche Political Action Committee, LPAC, sit kandidatur som uafhængig for Texas’ 9. kongresdistrikt, der i øjeblikket holdes af kongresmedlem Al Green. I en videoerklæring, hvor hun annoncerer sin kampagne, udfordrer Rogers kongresmedlem Greens nylige resolution for Trumps impeachment som spil for galleriet, der intet gør for at adressere de sande behov eller interesser hos befolkningen i det 9. distrikt. I et interview i dag skitserede Rogers hovedelementerne i sin kampagne, som følger:

»Der har ikke været nogen økonomisk opgang i mange af indbyggerne i det 9. distrikts liv, siden finanskrakket i 2008, og mange i distriktet er fortsat fanget i brutal fattigdom, bandevold og narko. På det nationale plan har Wall Street fortsat de samme politikker, der førte til kollapset i 2008, og i hele verden hvisker de informerede bag lukkede døre, at et nyt kollaps er umiddelbart forestående. Vi lider fortsat under, at man forsømmer den nødvendige infrastruktur, der skabte den tragedie, der kendes som Orkanen Harvey. Der er ingen overbevisende vision for fremtiden og de nødvendige videnskabelige og andre former for uddannelse, der må ledsage dette, for vores ungdom.

På den anden side af verden i Kina bliver et helt andet perspektiv for fremtiden virkeliggjort af det store Ét Bælte, én Vej-projekt, det største infrastrukturprojekt, mennesket nogensinde har bygget. Hele nye byer bliver udtænkt og bygget. Højhastighedstog bringer borgerne over store afstande på minimal tid. Vareproduktion finder sted på en moderne platform. Rumforskning er blevet en national prioritet. Og hvad der er vigtigst, så er befolkningen optimistisk med hensyn til fremtiden; nye ideer er genstand for passioneret debat og diskussion. Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har længe forudset dette projekt og ført kampagne for det. Præsident Trump, som kongresmedlem Greene ønsker at afsætte ved en rigsret, udforsker, hvordan USA kan opnå fordel af dette storslåede projekt. For eksempel har Vest Virginia netop fået en investeringspakke på $83,7 mia. som resultat af præsident Trumps forhandlinger med sin ven, præsident Xi Jinping. Houstons borgmester har for nylig også været i Kina for at søge lignende former for investering.

Jeg annoncerer mit kandidatur for Texas’ 9. kongresdistrikt for at bringe lederskab og adressere nødvendige løsninger til de problemer, som ikke alene dette distrikts borgere, men nationen som helhed, står overfor. Mange af jer ved, at dette har været begrundelsen for mine tidligere kampagner og grunden til, at jeg opnåede et betydeligt stemmetal og vandt to primærvalg til Kongressen og fremtvang en 2. valgrunde i en kampagne til USA’s Senat. Jeg stod for det rumprogram, som Obama opgav. Jeg stod for fundamental investering i at bygge fremtidens byer og infrastruktur. Jeg stod for at genintroducere videnskab, klassiske former for musik og kultur og at gøre opdagelser, i vore unge menneskers uddannelse. Jeg stod for at regne ud, hvordan vi skaber en ny, menneskelig renæssance og for at sikre, at alle borgere havde produktive jobs. Der er aktuelt ingen i Washington, der udtaler noget, der tilnærmelsesvis er de løsninger, vi har brug for eller, hvad værre er, de fortsætter med de samme, fejlslagne politikker med endeløse krige, økonomiske bailouts og partiske hårdknuder. Ingen i USA’s Kongres fra nogen af partierne udtaler en positiv vision for USA i verden.

Tiden er kommet til, at nogen træder frem og erklærer, at USA må tilslutte sig det internationale Bælte & Vej Initiativ, der anføres af Kina, og lancere en dristig, ny æra for hurtigt videnskabeligt og kulturelt fremskridt, der atter sætter vort folk i arbejde og opbygger en fremtid, vi kan være stolte af, lige her. Som kongresmedlem vil jeg være placeret til på enestående vis at tage denne kamp til Washington, D.C., og til at sikre, at mine vælgere atter kan være optimistiske og skabe en bedre fremtid. Det er grunden til, at jeg annoncerer mit kandidatur som uafhængig for 9. kongresdistrikt – for at være en fornuftens og optimismens stemme for fremtiden, over de politiske partipamperes skrig og hyl i deres svigt af det amerikanske folk, som der ikke findes noget forsvar for.«

Følg Kesha Rogers her: https://larouchepac.com/kesha-rogers

»Tiden er inde til at forsvare præsidenten, overvinde kuppet, overvinde Det britiske Imperium og gå ind i en totalt ny og fremgangsrig, skøn fremtid. Jeg mener, dette er et vidunderligt perspektiv.« (Citat af Helga Zepp-LaRouche.)

Vært Matthew Ogden: God aften. Det er 8. december, 2017; jeg er Matthew Ogden, og dette er vores fredags-webcast med en strategisk oversigt fra larouchepac.com.

Jeg vil straks lægge ud med en meddelelse, som nogle af vore seere måske så i går, fra Kesha Rogers; nemlig, at hun opstiller som uafhængig kandidat til USA’s Kongres, for en plads i Texas’ 9. Kongresdistrikt. Mange af jer kender Kesha fra hendes tidligere kampagner for føderalt embede. Hun har to gange tidligere stillet op som demokratisk kandidat, både i 2010 og i 2012, hvor hun stillede op til USA’s Repræsentanternes Hus. Dernæst stillede hun op som kandidat til USA’s Senat i 2014. I denne kampagne fik hun stemmer nok til at fremtvinge en anden valgrunde (mellem de to kandidater, der får flest stemmer). Alle disse tre kampagner for føderalt embede tiltrak national, og faktisk international, opmærksomhed, pga. den valgplatform, på baggrund af hvilken Kesha dristigt kørte sin kampagne.

For nylig har Kesha været omtalt i en video fra New York Times, om orkanen Harveys ødelæggelse i Houston, Texas, og som på tragisk vis kostede Keshas far og stedmor livet. Hun har nu registreret som kandidat til USA’s Repræsentanternes Hus, hvor hun igen opstiller i Texas’ 9. Kongresdistrikt som uafhængig kandidat. Jeg vil nu afspille Keshas video, som hun optog ved Udenrigsministeriet, efter at have indgivet sit kandidatur med det nødvendige papirarbejde. Kesha Rogers:

(Video)

Her følger engelsk udskrift af Keshas video og resten af webcastet:

KESHA ROGERS:  Good afternoon everyone.  This is
Kesha Rogers, and I’m here to announce some very exciting news to
you.  I have just filed here in Austin, Texas with the Secretary
of State for an independent candidacy for the House of
Representatives District 9 for the US House of Representatives.
I look forward to bringing more news and information concerning
this campaign that I’m launching at a very timely and needed
circumstance as we find ourselves with a void of leadership in
the country.  Where the discussion of real economic policies,
real solutions for the country are being avoided and you have
much grandstanding going on by political media [inaud; 02:57] and
Congressional representatives.
But what is clear is that there is a shift going on in the
world that’s ready for economic development and cooperation, and
I’m ready to lead the fight in the United States.  Many of your
recognize my campaigns from before, of providing real solutions
to the American people.  So, as I said, I wanted to just bring
that information, that bit of news to you, that I will be running
an independent candidacy for the 9th Congressional District from
the state of Texas for the US House of Representatives.  So, look
forward to more breaking developments around the campaign.  Thank
you.

OGDEN:  Kesha Rogers said in that video announcement, and what
has in fact been the reality over the last few months, is that
there is, indeed, a shift going on in the world in the direction
of economic development.  Of course, led by the initiatives from
China, the Belt and Road Initiative and the New Silk Road.  That
is absolutely the paradigm shift which the United States must
join, and we need leadership that will bring us into that
paradigm.
Now, there’s one thing to note about this announcement by
Kesha Rogers, who made saving NASA and the US manned space
program, the restoration of the US space program, a central
feature of all of her Federal election campaigns.  This
announcement by Kesha Rogers came on the 45th anniversary of the
Apollo Moon landing; that occurred December 7, 1972.  This was
the last time that human beings walked on the surface of the
Moon.  The last living astronaut of that Apollo 17 mission,
Harrison Schmitt, gave an interview which was published also
yesterday, to the {Albuquerque Journal}, in which he outlined the
tragedy of the decision that was taken in the aftermath of the
assassination of John F Kennedy to abandon the US commitment to
the manned space program.  To make the next step after the hugely
Apollo missions to the Moon, the logical next step would have
been a permanent settlement on the Moon and manned missions to
Mars.  What Harrison Schmitt said is that the decision that was
made by the Johnson administration to cut NASA’s budget, and
especially to cut back on the Saturn V class program, the Saturn
V rocket program, the heavy lift rockets; in effect killing the
US space program and preventing us from taking those next steps.
The permanent settlement on the Moon, and the landing of a man or
a woman on Mars; both of which, he said, could have already been
accomplished in the last 45 years.  So, the article in the
{Albuquerque Journal} began by saying the following, and I think
this was right to the point.  It said, “A settlement on the Moon;
mankind well on its way to Mars.  A potential clean power source
so powerful that about 200 pounds could provide electricity to a
major city for a year.  New Mexico astronaut Harrison Jack
Schmitt says that these are a few of the possibilities that might
well have been a reality by now, had the administration of
President Lyndon Johnson not decided to limit production of the
massive Saturn V rockets that carried Apollo astronauts —
including Schmitt — to the Moon.”  The article quotes Harrison
Schmitt, and I’d like to put that quote on the screen [Fig. 1]
here.  He says, “We really gave up on deep space exploration.
Had things gone differently, we could be much farther along now
than we are today.  No question, we would have had a settlement
on the Moon, and would seriously have a program going to Mars if
not already there.”
Then, Harrison Schmitt pointed out in the interview the
importance of mining resources on the Moon which are not readily
available here on Earth; most notably, Helium-3.  He said, “Those
are resources derived from the solar wind and particles of the
Sun.  One of those, Helium-3, isn’t readily available on Earth,
but is embedded in the lunar soil.  It is a nearly ideal fuel for
fusion power.  If we had it here on Earth, I’m convinced we would
be using it right now.”  He went on to say, “It doesn’t produce
neutrons, but it does produce alpha particles and protons; and
those can be converted directly to electricity without any waste
products.  We would have a plentiful, clean power source.  It’s
still there, and it’s not going anywhere.  Two hundred and twenty
pounds of Helium-3 would provide the power necessary to serve
Dallas for a year.”
Then later, the article actually points out that China is
already working on plans to mine Helium-3 on the lunar surface.
Then it concludes by saying the following:  “Schmitt believes
that the current administration” — the Trump administration —
“is committed to continuing construction of a large rocket for a
space launch system.  He said that this new spacecraft, which is
larger and much more powerful than the original Apollo capsules,
is ‘built to take humans farther than they’ve ever gone
before.’|”  Then it ends by quoting Harrison Schmitt, saying that
another benefit of America having this large rocket system is,
“Settlements off the Earth can be very important philosophically
into the future.  It is one way in which the human species can
perpetuate itself against the very remote possibility of a very
large asteroid impact on the Earth.”
So, this is an extraordinary interview with Harrison
Schmitt, talking about the kinds of manned missions to the Moon,
lunar settlements, manned missions to Mars, Helium-3 mining on
the Moon, fusion power here on Earth, and the idea that we have
to protect mankind against the possibility of an asteroid impact
here on planet Earth.  So, I think that’s a very clear statement
of exactly the sort of vision which is needed right now.  And it
really requires the type of political leadership that you heard
from Kesha Rogers to make that happen.  Absolutely, those are a
number of the things that the LaRouche Movement has been focusing
on and calling for, really for decades; going all the way back to
Lyndon LaRouche’s initiative back in the 1980s around his
nationally televised video “A Woman on Mars”, and all of the
crash programs for fusion and space exploration that the LaRouche
Movement has led for decades.
With everything else that we reported on in the recent
period in terms of the New Silk Road and the mega-projects which
have been initiated by China, the same really is true of space.
In that article, they did point out that China has already taken
the initiative to begin a program for exploring the mining of
Helium-3 on the Moon, and really some breakthrough projects in
terms of lunar exploration.  The article that I pointed out, that
article cites the fact that the future is being led by China.
And you can really look at space exploration, I think, as the
fourth facet of this Belt and Road Initiative.  We focus mainly
on the aspects here on Earth.  We can look at the rail
connections over land, that’s the One Belt, One Road.  We can
look at the Maritime Silk Road via sea, we’ve even discussed the
idea of the Silk Road on Ice for the development and exploration
of the Arctic.  But look at the fourth aspect here, and you can
see that China is also leading the way.  The Interplanetary Silk
Road in Space you could call it, for the development of cislunar
space — that’s the space between the Earth and the Moon — not
just low-Earth orbit where the ISS [International Space Station]
is right now, but the other aspects of this cislunar space.  The
settlement and development of the lunar surface, which includes
this Helium-3 mining; and the manned exploration of Mars and
beyond.
In fact, this was said really beautifully in an interview
with a former astronaut from Romania, which was published in
Xinhua this week.  This is Dumitru-Dorin Prunariu; he was the
first man in space from that country, from Romania.  He said the
following.  This is the interview [Fig. 2] “China Values
Cooperation in the Aerospace Industry”.  This is the quote:
“After the Belt and Road Initiative, I think China has a Galactic
Initiative in mind.  China has invited all developing countries
to conduct experiments on its space station, planned to operate
in orbit in 2022.  In 2022, China will have its own space
station, and it is currently encouraging the developing countries
to take part in space programs for the benefit of mankind.”
So, that’s a beautiful quotation.  He says, “After the Belt
and Road Initiative, I think China has a Galactic Initiative in
mind.”  And indeed, the Chinese have just announced that they are
actively planning the next steps of their lunar exploration
program.  This will follow the robotic missions to the Moon that
are being launched over the next two years.  There are various
possibilities that are being discussed in terms of a permanent
lunar research station to be built by the Chinese.  Either
unmanned with robots carrying out scientific research and
technical experiments on the surface of the Moon, or a manned
permanent research station there on the lunar surface.
A Chinese space science professor by the name of Joao
Weixing from Beijing University was quoted in an article by the
{Global Times} saying the following:  “By constructing lunar
research stations, we can carry out lunar explorations which
would be much larger in scale and richer in content than are
possible with short-term forays.  Such a station could slash the
cost of returning rock samples to the Earth.  It would enhance
lunar geology studies,” he said, “and would have better energy
efficiency than lunar rovers, as the station can deploy a much
bigger solar power generator.”  So, in other words, the lunar
rovers could be stationed at that station, and could go out on
exploration missions, but then come back to recharge; leading to
a much more permanent presence there for research purposes and
exploration on the surface of the Moon.  So, with the
construction of that lunar station, obviously that would require
a heavy lift rocket, similar to those Saturn V class heavy lift
rockets which carried the Apollo astronauts to the Moon almost 50
years ago.  But indeed, China already has a rocket of that
magnitude under development.  In the meantime, China is moving
right along with its other lunar programs, the Chang’e V mission,
which would bring back lunar samples from the Moon, from the
Earth-facing side of the Moon.  And also, a Chang’e 4 mission
which is still in operation and on board, which will land on the
completely unexplored far side of the Moon, which has never been
done before.
So, those two missions by China are already in motion, and
may be launched as soon as next year.  Then close on the heels of
those two missions, there are reports that there a number of
other very significant missions by China that are on the books,
to investigate the geological structure and the mineral
composition of the Moon’s South Pole which has never been
explored before; and to return samples from the Moon’s polar
region.  So, extremely ambitious and extremely important lunar
research missions.  That’s exactly what we would have already
been doing over the last 45 years, Harrison Schmitt said, if we
had not abandoned the commitments that the United States had
under the Apollo Project.
Now, not coincidentally, the LaRouche Political Action
Committee has just announced the pending publication of a new
pamphlet, which is a revival and a further exploration of the
immediate necessity of the implementation of Lyndon LaRouche’s
Four Economic Laws.  And the final of those four economic laws is
to adopt a fusion-driver crash program; which really encapsulates
the subsuming principle from which the other three of those four
laws flow:  1.  Reorganizing this bankrupt financial system with
an immediate Glass-Steagall reform.  2.  The creation of a
Hamiltonian national bank.  3.  The issuance of massive amounts
of Federal credit to swiftly upshift the productive powers of the
US labor force.
But all of those are towards the goal of achieving a giant
leap in the technological platform of our economy as a whole, by
means of this fusion-driver crash program.  That’s the fourth law
as Lyndon LaRouche stipulated it in those Four Laws in his
original 2014 document.  As he states in the conclusion of that
document, and I’m going to put the quote right here up on the
screen [Fig. 3].  This is Lyndon LaRouche’s description of what
the ultimate goal of this program is.
“Man is mankind’s only true measure of the history of our
Solar System and what reposes within it.  That is the same thing
as the most honored meaning and endless achievement of the human
species now within nearby solar space, heading upwards to mastery
over the Sun and its Solar System; the one discovered uniquely as
a matter of fact, by Johannes Kepler.  A fusion economy is the
presently urgent next step and standard for man’s gains of power
within the Solar System and later, beyond.”
So again, that’s Lyndon LaRouche in his June 10, 2014
document, “Four Laws To Save the United States Now”.  And that is
the subsuming principle behind the entirety of that integral
document, that Four Laws vision in terms of what must be done to
immediately mobilize an economic recovery and a dramatic
transformation in the economy of the United States.  Now, since
LaRouche published that document, there have been extraordinary
breakthroughs in terms of the commitment to exactly that kind of
vision that’s coming out of China.  That is this New Paradigm
that we continue to discuss, with these mega projects and the
development of these completely undeveloped parts of the planet.
That’s coupled together with what I just demonstrated as China’s
commitment to a lunar and extra-terrestrial exploration for their
space program there.
Now, what Kesha Rogers stated in that video announcement,
and what she has consistently stood for in her campaigns for
Federal office, is exactly that kind of vision.  We see the
continued campaign to bring the United States into this New Silk
Road; and there have been major advancements along those lines
just even over the last few weeks.  Including with President
Trump’s recent “state visit-plus” to meet with President Xi
Jinping, and their very important personal relationship and this
new era of cooperation in US-China relations.
Now, I should state that 50 days from now, President Trump
will be delivering his first State of the Union address to the
Joint Session of Congress.  It’s been announced that this State
of the Union will take place on January 30th; this will be
President Trump addressing both the House of Representatives and
the US Senate, in addition to the other representatives of the
branches of government — the Supreme Court and the Cabinet.
This will be his first speech to this full Congressional body
since his Joint Address which he delivered in February of this
year.
Now, I think it’s worthwhile to go back and recall a few
aspects of that speech that President Trump made.  Both in terms
of demonstrating what his commitment was when he first came into
office, which he in large measure has retained this commitment,
despite the kind of ongoing, 24-hour around-the-clock attacks on
his Presidency.  But also as sort of a measuring rod against
which we should hold up this next 50 days, as we now initiate
this countdown to the first State of the Union address on January
30th, and recommit ourselves to the implementation of this Four
Laws, Hamiltonian economic program that the LaRouche Political
Action Committee has been leading the fight on over the last
year.
So, let’s recall a few aspects of President Trump’s speech
in February of this year to the Joint Session of Congress.  In
that speech, he said the following — and I’ll put the quotes up
on the screen here [Fig. 4]:  “In nine years, the United States
will celebrate the 250th anniversary of our founding.  250 years
since the day we declared our independence.  It will be one of
the great milestones in the history of the world.  But what will
America look like as we reach our 250th year?  What kind of
country will we leave for our children?  I will not allow the
mistakes of recent decades past to define the course of our
future.”  Then he listed a series of promises [Fig. 5].  He said,
“Dying industries will come roaring back to life.  Crumbling
infrastructure will be replaced with new roads, bridges, tunnels,
airports, and railways gleaming across our very, very beautiful
land.  Our terrible drug epidemic will slow down and ultimately
stop.  And our neglected inner cities will see a rebirth of hope,
safety, and opportunity.”
Now, to accomplish these goals, President Trump referenced a
few key aspects of what he would later identify, correctly, as
the American System of economics.  He quoted Abraham Lincoln,
stating the following.  President Trump said [Fig. 6] “I believe
strongly in free trade.  But it also has to be fair trade.  It’s
been a long time since we had fair trade.  The first Republican
President, Abraham Lincoln, warned that ‘The abandonment of the
protective policy by the American government will produce want
and ruin among our people.’  Lincoln was right, and it’s time we
heeded his advice and his words.”  Then later in the speech,
President Trump cited Dwight D Eisenhower [Fig. 7]. He said,
“Another Republican President, Dwight D Eisenhower, initiated the
last truly great national infrastructure program — the building
the interstate highway system.  The time has come for a new
program of national rebuilding.  America has spent approximately
$6 trillion in the Middle East.  All the while, our
infrastructure at home is crumbling.  With this $6 trillion, we
could have rebuilt our country twice, and maybe even three times.
To launch our national rebuilding, I will be asking Congress to
approve legislation that produces a $1 trillion investment in
infrastructure of the United States, creating millions of new
jobs.”
Then later in the speech, he returned to his theme of the
coming 250th anniversary of the founding of our country with the
Declaration of Independence [Fig. 8].  He said, “On our 100th
anniversary in 1876, citizens from across our nation came to
Philadelphia to celebrate America’s Centennial.  At that
celebration, the country’s builders and artists and inventors
showed off their wonderful creations.  Imagine the wonders our
country could know in America’s 250th year.  Think of the marvels
we can achieve if we simply set free the dreams of our people.
Cures to the illnesses that have always plagued us are not too
much to hope.  American footprints on distant worlds are not too
big a dream.  This is our vision.  This is our mission.
“But we can only get there together.  We are one people with
one destiny.  The time for small thinking is over.  The time for
trivial fights is behind us.  We just need the courage to share
the dreams that fill our hearts.  The bravery to express the
hopes that stir our souls.  And the confidence to turn those
hopes and those dreams into action.  I am asking all members of
Congress to join me in dreaming big and bold and daring things
for our country.  I am asking everyone watching tonight to seize
this moment.  Believe in yourselves, believe in your future, and
believe once more in America.”
Now, that was February of this year.  Again, we have 50 days
until the State of the Union address.  But I think that for any
{honest} member of Congress, or political-minded citizen of this
country, this is the yardstick according to which President Trump
and President Trump’s actions should be measured.  Has he
accomplished these stated objectives for the good of the people
of the United States?  Granted, those are very ambitious and
beautifully stated visions for what the United States could
accomplish over the coming eight, nine years until our 250th
anniversary celebration.  Indeed, over the last several months,
President Trump has repeatedly returned to some of those stated
missions and has clearly retained his commitment to that kind of
bold vision for the United States.  But indeed, we have yet to
see an significant action along the lines of the central core
aspect of what he called for in that speech to Congress, which
was the $1 trillion infrastructure investment.
Now, this must come not in the form of public-private
partnerships or PPPs, or any of those kinds of ill-conceived
concepts; but must come in the form — as we’ve repeatedly made
clear — of a Hamiltonian national infrastructure bank.  This was
stipulated as such in Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Economic Laws.  The
necessary precursor to that is absolutely the restoration of
Glass-Steagall.  We are on the cusp of what could possibly be
another massive trans-Atlantic financial crisis.  So in
anticipation of that, we must immediately erect that kind of
Glass-Steagall firewall.  But, an infrastructure bank, or a
national bank of the form that Alexander Hamilton created, could
then secure these massive amounts of Federal credit flows for the
rapid increase of the productive powers of our labor force;
exactly what is spelled out there in Lyndon LaRouche’s Four Laws
document.
That’s not to say that the kinds of joint investments that
President Trump secured from China, as in the case of the $87
billion in investment in the state of West Virginia; that’s not
to say that that’s not significant.  Of course, that very much is
significant.  But that comes nowhere near the $1 trillion plus
that’s necessary in terms of this massive Hamiltonian Federal
credit investment in the infrastructure of the United States.
But what should be said, and this directly goes to the core of
what we must be telling members of Congress, including those
Democrats such as Al Green from the 9th District of Texas who
would rather spend their time introducing completely unfounded
articles of impeachment against this President.  These articles
of impeachment, by the way, failed miserably; notably the day
right before Kesha Rogers announced her candidacy to run in Al
Green’s district.  These members of Congress should be ashamed
that instead of getting to work, accomplishing jointly in
collaboration — Republicans, Democrats beyond these party
factions.  Instead of getting to work accomplishing these goals
that were set out by President Trump in this speech 10 months
ago, they have spent the majority of their time engaged in
partisan politics and getting swept up in this political hit-job
or witch hunt against President Trump around the so-called
“Russia-gate” collusion.
We have a 50-day countdown, and we should seek to make very
rapid progress in securing these very specific goals that are
contained in the Four Economic Laws of Lyndon LaRouche, between
now and the State of the Union address on January 30th.  And
indeed, this is the context for Kesha Rogers’ announcement for
her candidacy for the US Congress.
Now, this is what should be being discussed on the morning
talk shows, in the editorial pages of the leading national
newspapers and magazine covers. But rather, what are you hearing,
day in and day out?  Russia-gate, collusion, Mueller
investigation, etc., etc.  How much coverage did this ill-fated
impeachment resolution receive, despite the fact that the
majority of the House of Representatives voted against it,
including two-thirds of the Democratic Caucus.  And in spite of
the fact that a CBS poll has just put out that nearly 50% of all
Americans are very clear that this Russia-gate investigation is
100% politically motivated; it has nothing to do with justice.
But what are you hearing about?  Al Green’s grandstanding speech
was played over and over again on Wednesday.  That’s what you’re
hearing about.
What are you not hearing about?  Well, what’s not being
reported is the fact that the entire Mueller apparatus is coming
apart at the seams.  This entire thing is taking on water; and as
the {Wall Street Journal} rightly but uniquely stated in a signed
editorial earlier this week titled “Mueller’s Credibility
Problem; the Special Prosecutor Is Stonewalling Congress and
Protecting the FBI”.  This editorial is the notable exception to
the rest of the propaganda and hype out there from these national
news outlets.  But this is the quote from the {Wall Street
Journal} [Fig. 7].  It says, “The public has a right to know
whether the Steele dossier inspired the Comey probe, and whether
it led to intrusive government eavesdropping.”  Then they say
that they doubt “that Mr. Mueller’s ability to conduct a fair and
credible probe of the FBI’s considerable part in the Russia-Trump
drama.”  This of course is with regards to the bombshell
revelation that has come out about the now-fired FBI agent Peter
Strzok; who was not only responsible for changing the language in
the Clinton prosecution announcement, which led to her being
taken completely off the hook.  But also was central in the
operation to set up General Flynn.  It’s come out through his
text messages and his emails to his mistress, that he was 100%
virulently politically biased against President Trump and in
favor of Hillary Clinton.  But also, it’s not only him; it’s the
entirety practically of this Mueller team, which is hopelessly
biased and conflicted when it comes to their anti-Trump politics.
This was elaborated in detail by Representative Justin Amash
during the hearings yesterday in Congress; also by Representative
Jim Jordan.
Then, as the {Wall Street Journal} goes on to say, “The
latest news supports our view that Mr. Mueller is too conflicted
to investigate the FBI, and should step down in favor of someone
more credible.  The investigation would surely continue, though
perhaps with someone who doesn’t think his job includes
protecting the FBI and Mr. Comey from answering questions about
their role in the 2016 elections.”  So, this should really serve
to demonstrate, along with all the other initiatives that are not
being reported but are steadily proceeding in the US Congress by
Senator Chuck Grassley and others, this should serve to
demonstrate how effective the LaRouche PAC campaign to expose
this entire coup network has been.  With the special
investigation dossier, the “Robert Mueller Is an Amoral Legal
Assassin”, that special report which came out from LaRouche PAC;
this is now going into its second printing.  This has penetrated
the very highest levels of the US Congress and those who are
involved in this investigation on both sides.
So, this is the fight of our lives in terms of the battle
which is now raging over the heart and soul of the US Presidency
and what policy the United States will adopt.  I think if we
juxtapose these two channels, in terms of on the one side, this
ongoing daily ghost of Russia-gate McCarthyism-style propaganda
that you’re being inundated with.  But then on the other side,
this clearly inspired commitment of this reinvigoration of the
vision of the United States.  What Kesha Rogers stands for, and
what she has now initiated in terms of her campaign for US
Congress once again; and then also what is coming from abroad in
terms of the initiatives from China and elsewhere, in terms of
this One Belt, One Road initiative.  And then, as was
characterized, a Galactic Initiative that China has now
undertaken.  This is what Harrison Schmitt is calling for us to
rejoin now 45 years after the shutting down of the Apollo
mission.  The last man to walk on the Moon, 45 years ago today.
So, let me end this broadcast with the words of Helga
Zepp-LaRouche.  She said, during a discussion earlier this week
with associates the following:  “Countries which do not cooperate
with the Belt and Road Initiative are going to be sidelined to
the detriment of their populations.”  She said that this tectonic
shift which is now underway globally with the collapse of the old
trans-Atlantic financial system of speculation and short-term
profit, she said the collapse of that system and then the
tectonic shift which is occurring with the rapid rise of the new
system, this Belt and Road Initiative, we’re seeing an
unbelievable dynamic which is now going on.  She said, as we
covered extensively, “There are conferences every single day from
all across the world; be it South America, Africa, Europe, Asia.
There are more countries, more forces, more businesses and
industries now joining this New Paradigm.  The recent statement
by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe,” she said, “that Japan
will cooperate with the Belt and Road Initiative is extremely
important.”  She said, “Countries which do not cooperate, indeed,
are going to be sidelined and left in the dust of history.”  She
said that “The Chinese policy, contrary to what you’re being fed
in the Western media, is not a policy geopolitically against any
nation.  Nor is it somehow a conflict between the United States
and other countries.”  She said “This is a question of joining
the future, joining this vision for an absolutely fantastic
perspective of ‘win-win’ cooperation and development for the
entire world.”
So, she said, “Our campaign must be focused on Lyndon
LaRouche’s Four Economic Laws; on LaRouche’s economics.  On the
United States joining the New Silk Road; on US space cooperation
with other countries.  And I think,” she said, “this is a perfect
moment to turn all of the United States towards an optimistic
campaign.  This can become the absolutely decisive turning force
for the whole United States.  Now is the time to defend the
President, to defeat the coup, to defeat the British Empire, and
go into a completely new and prosperous, beautiful future.  I
think this is a wonderful perspective,” she said.
So, with that as our final word, I’d like to thank you for
joining us here in our broadcast today.  There are going to be
rapid developments that occur over the coming days and weeks, and
we implore you to continue to stay tuned to larouchepac.com.  To
keep your eyes out for the second printing of this dossier on the
Mueller coup apparatus, and to also keep your eyes out for the
coming publication of a new pamphlet on Lyndon LaRouche’s Four
Economic Laws.   We enter now a 50-day countdown between now and
the State of the Union address, and I think we have our work cut
out for us.  So, thank you again for tuning in, and please stay
tuned to larouchepac.com.

New York Times har produceret en 8 min. lang video med titlen »Into the Deluge«, om katastrofen i Houston, og som er centreret omkring Kesha Rogers’ (medlem af LaRouche PAC Policy Committee) forældre, der mistede livet i oversvømmelserne, men som også giver et indblik i nogle af redningsfolkene, de mange tragedier og ødelæggelserne. Kesha skriver: »Her er New York Times’ dokumentar, der dækker Harvey, og hvori min familie og andre optræder. De begynder med mig, der siger, ’Jeg har en mission. Vi har alle en mission.’«

Jeg vil indlede vores diskussion med at påpege, hvad hr. LaRouche i de seneste dage meget klart har sagt: Vi befinder os i en ekstraordinært farlig periode i verdenshistorien. Det kan ikke ses tydeligere end af disse militærmanøvrer, der finder sted på de østeuropæiske grænser (Ruslands vestlige grænser). Disse kombinerede NATO-øvelser, der finder sted hele vejen op og ned langs Ruslands grænse, fra De baltiske Stater, ind i Polen og derfra mod syd. Dette er en kombination af fire forskellige, angiveligt uafhængige krigsspil, men det involverer live troppemanøvrer, af hvilke den største hedder ”Anaconda 2016”. Denne manøvre involverer 30.000 tropper fra 24 forskellige lande, inkl. 14.000 amerikanere, 12.000 polakker, 1000 faldskærmstropper og den virkelige krydsning af nøglefloden dér, Vistuta-floden; samt træning af natlige angreb, tungt militærisenkram, 35 helikoptere, 3.000 militærkøretøjer, flådemanøvrer osv.

Engelsk udskrift.

 WE MUST BECOME TRUE AMERICANS AGAIN!

LaRouche PAC Friday Webcast; June 10, 2016

        MATTHEW OGDEN: Good Evening! It's June 10th, 2016. My name
is Matthew Ogden, and you joining us for our weekly Friday
evening webcast here from larouchepac.com. As you'll notice,
we're taking a little bit of a different format than customary
today. We have a roundtable format, joined in the studio by Megan
Beets and Ben Deniston, from the LaRouche PAC basement science
team; and also Kesha Rogers and Mike Steger are both joining us
from the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee via video. So, we're going
to have a little bit of a freer kind of roundtable discussion
here.
        I'd like to begin our discussion by just pointing out, what
I think has been said very, very clearly in the recent days by
Mr. LaRouche, that we're in an extraordinarily dangerous period
of world history. This couldn't be made more clear than seeing
these military maneuvers which are happening on the eastern
border of Europe (the western border of Russia). These combined
NATO maneuvers which are happening all the way up and down the
border of Russia, from the Baltic States, into Poland, and then
south from there. This is a combination of four different,
supposedly independent, war games, but it involves live troop
maneuvers, the largest of which is called "Anaconda 2016." That
one involves 30,000 troops from 24 different countries, including
14,000 Americans, 12,000 Polish soldiers, 1,000 paratroopers, the
actual crossing of the key river there, the Vistula River; and
the exercise of nighttime assaults, military hardware, 35
helicopters, 3,000 military vehicles, naval maneuvers, and so
forth.
        If you take that, together with the three other maneuvers
that are happening right now, you have approximately 60,000
troops that are engaged in military maneuvers all along the
border of Russia. As Helga LaRouche pointed out, this the
greatest troop and military hardware maneuver that you've had on
Russia's border since World War II — the mobilization by Hitler
of the Nazi forces prior to the invasion of what was then the
Soviet Union. Obviously, this many troops engaged in live
military maneuvers, not only creates a very strong possibility
for some accident occurring, which could trigger a rapid
escalation towards a very hot war, which could escalate very
quickly; but also it's very clearly a provocation, which is being
taken by NATO with Obama in the leadership, directly towards
Russia. And it's being seen as such in the context of other
things, by the Russian President and other leading members of the
Russian military. It's also being recognized as such by various
forces within Europe. {Der Spiegel}, one of the leading news
magazines in Germany, put out a story on Wednesday, saying these
war maneuvers along the Russian borders, are "going too far", and
"are playing at real war". Clearly, any war that were to break
out between NATO and Russia would very quickly lead to not a
limited, not a tactical, but an all-out strategic, thermonuclear
war.
        If you combine this with Obama's upcoming to trip to attend
the NATO Heads of State Summit in Warsaw, Poland, while these war
games are actively taking place, along with his refusal to sit
down with President Putin to discuss the deployment of these
AEGIS anti-missile systems along the Russian border, which have
been characterized as a "Cuban Missile Crisis in Reverse," along
with the trillion dollar allocation that Obama has recently
signed off on, to modernize the U.S. military arsenal, including
these B61-12 nuclear warheads, and the long-range LRSO [Long
Range Standoff] cruise missiles; all of these, taken together,
along with the simultaneous provocations that are happening by
U.S. forces against China in the South China Sea.
        Any sane person should be asking themselves, "Why are we
driving the world towards the point of a war of extinction, when
we could be taking up Chinese President Xi Jinping's offer to
engage in a new strategic and economic architecture for the
planet, based on win-win cooperation?" This danger, and also the
very real possibility of a paradigm shift, were both put on the
table at a very significant seminar sponsored by the Schiller
Institute that occurred on Wednesday in San Francisco,
California. Both Kesha and Mike were participants. It was titled,
"Will the U.S. Join the New Silk Road? Global Scientific
Development, or Nuclear War?" Mrs. Helga LaRouche gave an
extensive and very thorough overview of this war danger in her
keynote address; and Mr. LaRouche, in his remarks, said very
clearly — this is the very beginning of what Mr. LaRouche said,
"The key thing I'm concerned about, is the threats to the
existence of the human species in the total area right now;
because right now, at this time, the existence of the entire
human species continues to be on the edge of jeopardy. And
therefore we have to attune ourselves to understanding what the
problems are that are involved in this, and what are the remedies
for which we can get an escape for humanity in general. Humanity
in general right now is under serious threat of jeopardy on a
global scale." So, that's very clearly said by Mr. LaRouche.
        Also, I consider very significantly, in response to a
question which was posed from former United States Senator Mike
Gravel, who was also a participant, a speaker in this seminar. He
posed a question to one of the other participants, Sergey Petrov,
the Consul-General of the Russian Consulate in San Francisco, to
which Mr. Petrov said that there is no such thing as a limited
nuclear war, as some as some people would be delusional enough to
believe. What the Consul-General of Russia said at the Schiller
Institute gathering in San Francisco, is the following: "I share
the understanding that we are very close to a major conflict. And
I add that there is no possibility of a 'limited nuclear war.' If
that starts, it will be the end of the world."
        I think the starkness of this statement, combined with what
Mr. LaRouche and Mrs. LaRouche both had to say, really
underscores the sobriety with which we have to approach the
discussion which we will have here today. Since both Kesha and
Mike were participants in that seminar, I'm going to leave a
little bit of the further discussion of the proceedings of that
event until a little bit later in the show. The seminar also
involved Mr. Howard Chang, an internationally renowned expert on
water projects.
        But before we open up the discussion, I would like to play a
short — approximately 10 minute — excerpt from the keynote
speech that Mrs. Helga LaRouche gave. This is the concluding
excerpt of her remarks. She asked two questions: (1) How did we
get here?; and (2) What is the solution to the crisis we now
face? I just want to underscore, what you'll hear Mrs. LaRouche
say in this excerpt, is what Mr. LaRouche reiterated, and I think
is the subject that we have to pay attention to here today: that
both the LaRouche movement in general, and Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche
as individuals, {have played the crucial, central, historical
role} in not only creating the possibility for a solution to this
crisis, going all the way back to their proposal for the Eurasian
Land-Bridge: the New Silk Road, in the aftermath of the collapse
of the Soviet Union; but also continued to play the crucial role
in providing the possibility for humanity to escape this crisis.
        This seminar in San Francisco was a crucial element of that,
but it's part of an ongoing series of interventions
internationally, which include a very prominent conference in
Europe that the Schiller Institute is sponsoring, coming up
within the next two weeks. So, we'll have more discussion on all
of that after we hear this short except from Mrs. Helga
LaRouche's keynote speech.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Okay, now, let me introduce the third
[subject I want to talk about]. The solution to all of this would
be a piece of cake. It is already there! A New Silk
Road is integrated. We called it at that time, first, the
Productive Triangle; in 1991 we called it the Eurasian
Land-Bridge: the New Silk Road, which was the idea that when the
Iron Curtain had fallen, [to integrate] the populations in the
industrial centers of Europe with those of Asia, through
development corridors. This New Silk Road program would have
changed the world in the direction of a peace order already in
'91, but, unfortunately, you had Bush, Sr., you had Margaret
Thatcher, you had François Mitterrand, who all had completely
different ideas. They [wanted to reduce Russia] from a superpower
into a Third World, raw-material-producing country, and they
imposed the "shock therapy" in the Yeltsin period. They
dismantled the Russian potential in three years , and
they had no intention to allow Germany to have any kind of
economic relation with Russia. So it did not happen.
        You had the '90s, which were genocide against Russia. You
had all of the consequences of the Bush period. You had the eight
years of Clinton, which was a certain interruption; but then with
Bush, Jr. and Obama, you went back to the old project of an
American Century doctrine and the idea of a unilateral world.
        Fortunately, in 2013, President Xi Jinping announced a New
Silk Road to be {the} strategic objective of China. In the almost
three years which have passed since, this idea to end
geopolitics, to establish in the tradition of the ancient Silk
Road, a win-win cooperation among all nations on the planet, is
progressing extremely quickly. Remember, the ancient Silk Road
was a fantastic cooperation in terms of exchange of culture,
goods, paper, technology, porcelain, silk, silk-producing, and
many other cultural manifestations. It led to a tremendous
benefit for all the countries which participated, from Asia to
Europe.
        The New Silk Road, obviously, is doing exactly that. The
amount of projects which have been concluded between China and
ASEAN countries, China and Latin American countries, China and
Europe, China and African countries, China and East European
countries, and now, in a very clear fashion, the economic
integration between the Eurasian Economic Union, headed by
Russia, and the New Silk Road, [is progressing very well. An
alliance] has been formed between Russia and China, with India
being the third factor in the situation. Many, many other
countries have been joining.
        Contrary to what you read and hear in the mass media, China
is not doing badly. They are shifting their economic orientation
from an export orientation, because the export markets in the
trans-Atlantic sector are shrinking. They are now going more in
infrastructure investment in many countries in the world, and to
develop the inner region of China. [To raise the] consumer [to a]
higher standard of their own population, since they have lifted
600 million people out of poverty, [into a] decent living
standard in China. This is indeed the absolute correct policy, to
say we will uplift the remaining people who are still poor, and
also make them participate in the Chinese economic miracle.
        Xi Jinping has [offered] to President Obama that the United
States [should] not only by helping to ,
which I think is the moral obligation of the United States, given
the fact that they were the key reason why these countries are
now in such disarray; by participating in the building of Africa,
which I think the West has an absolute moral obligation. The
reason why you have millions of people as refugees, not only
risking their lives, drowning in the Mediterranean, dying in the
Sahara, which has even more victims than even the Mediterranean.
Fifty years of IMF policy has denied economic development to
Africa! The reason why people are taking a risk of a 50% chance
that they will die, to cross the Mediterranean, is because they
are running from war, from hunger, from epidemics, and this is
the result of Western policy denying this continent economic
development! We have a moral obligation to join hands to develop
southwest Asia, to develop Africa.
        The United States also needs a Silk Road. If you look at the
figures of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, productivity has
collapsed over seven years in a row. All the indexes are going
down. The United States population is in a terrible condition, or
at least in the poorer parts; while the rich become more rich and
Wall Street is having a heyday with cocaine parties and plotting
destruction for the rest of the world.
        The United States needs an infrastructure project. The roads
are bad, the traffic is ridiculous. People spend hours and hours
every day in commuting, risking to disappear with their cars into
a pothole. They have no rail system. China has built 20,000 km
fast train system up to the end of last year; they plan to have
50,000 km by the year 2020, uniting every major city in China
through a fast train system, which are fantastic — they're
smooth, they're fast, they're quiet. How many kilometers of fast
train systems has the United States built? Zero!
        So, for the United States to build its own Silk Road, to
connect with the global development perspective is a question of
its own best self-interest. We have to get the United States off
this confrontation course, and simply say, we have to shift this
policy and all this trillion-dollar investment in modernization
of nuclear arsenals and the largest military budget in the world,
trying to maintain an empire which is collapsing anyway.  Rather,
shift, get rid of Wall Street, impose Glass-Steagall, get back to
a policy of Alexander Hamilton, a credit policy; invest in
infrastructure and go in the direction of a win-win cooperation
with the other nations of the world — with Russia, China,
European nations, India; build up Latin America, build up Africa
and Southwest Asia.
        This is really the choice before the United States. I know
this is very difficult for you to think how this should be done,
but you know, think about Kennedy; think about the kind of
optimistic country the United States used to be. Think about the
idea that America was built to be "a beacon of hope and a temple
of liberty," where people from the whole world would go and try
to be free. The U.S. singing the National Anthem, "the land of
the free." Is the United States the land of the free today? I
don't think anybody who is in their right mind would say that
today.
        Go back to the values of the American Republic, as it was
founded by people like Benjamin Franklin, or George Washington;
go back to the policies of Alexander Hamilton, Franklin D.
Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King. I think if the
United States could mobilize itself to bring back that nation,
the whole would world would love to be friends of the United
States again. Right now, I can tell you, the rest of the world
has almost given up on the United States, and when they look at
the election process, the choice between a very, very irrational
Donald Trump and unfortunately a very, very predictable Hillary
Clinton, given her statements about confrontation against Russia
and China. I think you have to really mobilize now. And I think
the 28 pages, Glass-Steagall — these are flanks which can derail
the situation long before this election is going to take place.
        We have to have a completely new world. Remember, mankind is
not a beast, and mankind is not bound to do what seems to be
inevitable. Mankind is the only species capable of reason,
capable of free will, of defining and designing a beautiful
future, and then going to implement that. The last time was with
Kennedy, the Apollo Project. I think we can absolutely do it
again! I think you have a great possibility in front of you. I
would encourage you — be American! Be true Americans again, and
the whole world will be the most happy and embrace you!

OGDEN:  So, that was a short excerpt from Helga LaRouche's
opening remarks at the San Francisco seminar; and the full
proceedings of that seminar will be made available as they are
processed.  The first panel is available on YouTube now.  And as
I said, both Kesha and Michael Steger were participants in that
event; so maybe I can just throw the discussion open to one of
the two of you guys right now, to follow up on what we just heard
from Helga.

        MICHAEL STEGER:  Sure, thanks Matt.  One of the most
interesting, one of the key aspects of this whole process and
what our organization does, was demonstrated at the discussion
process in San Francisco on Wednesday.  You have key people in
their areas:  Obviously, Senator Mike Gravel represents what is a
true American political tradition; to recognize that you fight
for what's true, you go against popular opinion and peer
pressure.  And he was very clear on that question; you don't go
along to get along.  As Lyndon LaRouche often says, "You can't
fight politically and go along with the popular opinion."
        Dr. Howard Chang is a leading civil engineer; obviously the
Consul-General of Russia was someone who spoke on behalf of his
country.  But the key question is that the standards our
organization represents in this existential crisis is something
unique; it gives these individuals an opportunity to wage a
political fight at the level necessary that inspires them towards
what mankind can accomplish, and also addresses the real crisis
in the world today.  It's far too often that people who want to
address the economic crisis, people who want to address the
increasing and escalating war danger, fall far short of the
necessary to want to work with us.  And two, to recognize the
quality of method which is necessary to address these problems.
These problems are of great scope and magnitude; it's not fixing
a pothole, although we have many potholes to fix as Helga points
out.  And apparently, the Chinese won't even be allowed to build
— they wanted to build a small segment of high-speed rail
between Los Angeles and Las Vegas; very easy.  Actually, east of
Los Angeles in the desert.  And I guess apparently they won't
even be allowed to build that in the United States.  So, we can't
build any high-speed rail; it's just been outlawed basically.
This just came out.
        But the size and scope of these problems cannot be — steps
cannot be taken that simply alleviate one's guilt; or the tension
on one's own identity regarding the dangers of nuclear war, or
the increasing crisis that the economic collapse presents to many
Americans.  Too many people want to look for a quick solution; an
easy mechanism that "Maybe I can vote for this person, or that
person."  At this point, I think most people realize they can't
vote for either of these people; yet you'll still find them
consumed to discuss "Well, who do you vote for, though?"  They're
not willing to recognize that there's a higher method which is
required to act to address this kind of crisis.  And I think if
you look at Lyndon LaRouche's comments at the discussion, he
makes this somewhat clear in his remarks.  Because there is
something unique towards mankind's ability to advance.  Mankind
does not advance — unlike any other animal species on the planet
— simply because it doesn't like the problems it sees.  It's
able to advance and evolve because of a unique creative capacity;
essentially to become more beautiful, to become more creative. To
make the discoveries about the Universe that have not been
discovered before.  And that commitment, that approach is
oftentimes what's lacking; and as Helga said, we need real
leadership in the United States, we need leadership in Europe
today.  The problem can be solved so easily.
        The New Silk Road, the Eurasian development projects are so
extensive, they're ongoing; there are collaborations between
China, India, and Russia.  And then the nations of central Asia,
of Southeast Asia; the strategic intervention in the war domain
in Southwest Asia; all of these are now being addressed in a
fundamentally different way than they were by the United States
and NATO for the last 15 years since the 9/11 attacks.  Which has
just been ongoing war and destruction.
        So, there's a comprehensive picture that the United States
and Europe could participate in.  So, why aren't we?  Why don't
we take those steps?  Simply raising red flags that we're near
nuclear war, or simply complaining and trying to figure out which
of the lesser evils you vote for, are just obviously
insufficient.  So, why does that remain the discussion?  The
discussion has to take on a higher standard; and I think that's
what Lyn has already recognized over these 50 years.  Because if
you think of it, 50 years ago, there was a quality of leadership
of this nature.  John Kennedy recognized that the way you uplift
and strengthen a country is to set out on a mission that's never
been accomplished before; but it wasn't just the Moon.  It was
the largest water projects, and the development of Africa.  John
Kennedy's view of the world and of the Universe had a great scope
and magnitude to it, to help uplift the population; it wasn't a
practical campaign.  Someone like Martin Luther King had a
similar outlook; and you saw that inspire people like Bobby
Kennedy and Malcolm X, but there was a resonance.  You saw the
same thing from the great scientists like Krafft Ehricke; the
visionaries in the space program didn't look at it as kind of fun
engineering projects.  They saw it as something of a cultural
advancement of the human species. And there was a resonance with
this quality of leadership politically, that unfortunately, I
think what was made clear by the seminar, is that many people are
attracted, they gravitate towards this quality of leadership if
they have a sense of honesty; but that the ability to demonstrate
this method, to act upon that quality of the human mind and human
creativity is a challenge for much of the population in the
United States and Europe today.  And the standard that they have
to come up to, is not just acknowledging the dangers, but a
standard of operating to embolden and strengthen the population
to solve these problems and to move our civilization upwards.
        And I think that really was the culminating nature of the
discussion on Wednesday at the seminar; and it really is to bring
more people into this quality of an organization.  Of what we are
as a political organization, but that we are must become what the
nation is.  And that requires our population must become better;
they must become more courageous, more intelligent, and more
beautiful if we're actually going to address these problems.
Because they're not going to be addressed from any simple
mechanisms; and I think that really was the fight we waged here
for the seminar, and I think the only way to deal with the
current crisis you presented at the beginning.

KESHA ROGERS:  I want to continue with that theme, and add that I
think what we have to look at is the unique role of Mr. LaRouche
over these years to identify a science of physical economy; which
characterizes him in a way that was the understanding of both
Krafft Ehricke and other leaders from the standpoint of the
rejection — shall we say people that Michael brought up, such as
John F Kennedy, such as Lincoln, Martin Luther King.  A rejection
of a limits to growth policy.  And this is what Mr. LaRouche has
organized as the founding principle of his economic policy in
terms of what is the essential role of the advancement of
mankind.
        During the presentation, I had an opportunity to actually
work with Michael and others there for the conference that was
just held in San Francisco.  And I presented on the unique role
of Krafft Ehricke, the German space pioneer; and what he
represented from the standpoint of putting forth the epistemology
and the philosophy on human nature's identity in terms of
creating an open world system.  Which was this idea that you
reject the Club of Rome meadows and foresters limits to growth
population reduction; the Malthusian policy that human beings are
nothing more than small lily pads, mindless beings.  That they
have no conception of advancing human creativity.  And this is
what was the unique role defining Krafft Ehricke from the
standpoint that he knew that is was not just a matter of
promoting technological advancements; but what do these
technological advances do to improve upon the conditions of human
life and the progress of mankind overall.
        And this has been something that Mr. LaRouche understood is
crucial in his science of physical economy, from the standpoint
that you're not just looking at technological advancement from
speaking of just one leap.  But you're talking about a succession
of leaps in economic progress in society.  And during the
relationship that Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche developed with the
identity and role of Krafft Ehricke as a scientist and genius of
his time, is really exemplified in what Mr. LaRouche continued to
develop around his policy for a Moon-Mars colonization program. I
think that people who have not actually studied the significance
of Mr. LaRouche and why he became a threat to this zero-growth
policy, because he continued to push the limits, push mankind
beyond the so-called limitations that have been put on mankind;
just as Krafft Ehricke understood that our extraterrestrial
imperative was to actually remove all limitations and barriers
from the progress of mankind.  And the best way to do this was
through the advancement of man into the colonization of space.
        And I think it's important to note, that some people start
to put themselves into this smallness of thinking, in this
mindless thinking.  "Well, how are we going to travel into space
if we can't actually solve the problems here on Earth?"  And Mr.
LaRouche made it a priority to actually organize an understanding
of what real technological advancement is; this was exactly the
thinking of John F Kennedy in the progress of the commitment of
the Moon landing, of sending a man to the Moon and bringing him
safely back to Earth.  That this was going to lead to
technological advancements that would pay themselves off several
times over; but what was going to be essential for it, is that
you had to have breakthroughs as Mr. LaRouche called for, in
several categories of technology that was actually going to be
essential for bringing about an increase in the productivity of
society.  You take the example; you look at this massive
undertaking of what Krafft Ehricke did in the design and
development of what took men to the Moon, in terms of the Saturn
V rocket.  It wasn't something that was just thrown together on
the cheap; you couldn't have just Wall Street and Elon Musk going
in there and saying, "OK, let us just throw a spacecraft up."
This took some real engineering; it was a total transformation in
terms of the economic conditions of society.  Thousands, millions
of people were put to work; the spin-off technologies that went
into it.  Mr. LaRouche called for the advancement of four
categories of technology, in thermonuclear fusion and related
plasma technologies; or development of electromagnetic radiation
of high energy density.  Basically promoting new synthetic
materials or the production of the colonization of Mars; that you
were going to actually have to have flotillas in developing
low-Earth orbit.  And putting materials on the Moon to actually
lead to the colonization of Mars.  How are we going to get there?
We had to have engineers, we had to have astrophysicists.
        The technical considerations are all laid out very
prominently, but I think what it really represents is a
transformation of the human species; and that's what Mr. LaRouche
was very crucial in, saying that you had to actually have a
different identity of who we are as human beings.  That we are
actually distinct from the animal species; and that no
limitations can be put on mankind to keep them in a state of
bestiality.  And the question of technological advancement is,
are these advancements being made in a so-called barbaric society
that wants to keep human beings down and keep them enslaved; and
promote a policy of limitations on growth and population
reduction so these policies would not be advanced.  Or, are we
talking about a cultural Renaissance, where these advancements
are made as Krafft Ehricke understood, from the standpoint of a
new conception of mankind.  This is what has really brought
together the minds, and why Mr. LaRouche sees Krafft Ehricke as
extremely fundamental to how we overcome the threats facing us
today in society.

        OGDEN:  Well, I think that's something that certainly you
elaborated very clearly in your speech at the conference, and I
think as we had a discussion with Mr. LaRouche yesterday;
everybody who is on this show was engaged in that discussion. Mr.
LaRouche put a very emphatic emphasis on the personality of
Krafft Ehricke and his courage in fighting for a vision which was
not a popular vision even among the people in the space
community.  And Mr. LaRouche asked that more research be done on
this; and I know that both you, Ben, and Megan have been immersed
in this a little bit in the recent few days and weeks.  So, maybe
you want to give people a broader idea of some of this.

MEGAN BEETS:  Well, I can say something briefly.  I was just
looking back at comments that were made by both Helga LaRouche
and Lyndon LaRouche at the memorial conference that was held in
honor of Krafft Ehricke in 1985, following his death in 1984. And
both Lyndon and Helga LaRouche reflect something which I think
really does go to the essence of the importance of the
personality of Krafft Ehricke in what we were able to achieve in
the space program.  And what they both reflected was the fact
that his life made a contribution to moving the species as a
whole forward; but why?  It's exactly because he was not
motivated by the kinds of practical considerations that were
impinging on most of the population at the time; and both Lyn and
Helga reflected the fact that Krafft Ehricke was motivated by a
total cultural optimism.  That not only was it necessary, but it
was also possible to move mankind forward into the Age of Reason;
to move man into a paradigm where we completely left the cultural
vestiges of the beast behind us.  And if you look at Krafft
Ehricke's work, which ranges from extremely technical papers on
the use of liquid hydrogen fuel to fictional stories which are
envisioning the first manned mission to Mars; but all of them I
think are motivated by this passion and vision for a better
mankind as a whole.  And he came to the conclusion himself as a
young man, that the way to realize that had to be space travel;
had to be space colonization.
        Just to add one more thing, Mrs. LaRouche was reflecting on
a speaking tour that Krafft Ehricke did with the Schiller
Institute in the 1980s in Germany.  And what she reported was,
that at that time, the resistance from the Greenie movements was
so intense at some of these meetings, the police had to be called
in.  What Krafft Ehricke reflected on at the time was that these
Greenie movements were very reminiscent of the fascist movements
of the 1930s; and that's why the only way to move forward had to
be by addressing exactly what you just raised, Kesha.  The
essence of the cultural morality of mankind; is mankind a culture
of beasts, or is mankind actually representing a culture of what
Schiller would call beautiful souls?

        BENJAMIN DENISTON:  I think highlighting the fight for that;
he fought for that.  He went against the opposition even within
the scientific community for that kind of idea; and I think that
also goes back to something that Michael was saying about what's
needed today.  It's people like that; it's people who are going
to fight for what's true.  Not because they think it's what their
neighbors will like, or because they think it's what will make
them popular; it's because they have an internal drive that they
know that's what's needed.  You pulled up this quote — it's just
one thing among many — I just thought it was indicative; this
quote of Krafft testifying in Congress in, I believe it was in
1960, the early '60s.  And really emphatically pushing the need
for nuclear power for space; he said, the Universe runs on
nuclear power.  The stars are run by nuclear power; this nuclear
power is an inherent part of the Universe and mankind is going to
be obsolete in his attempt to be part of the Universe more
broadly — go beyond Earth, fulfill this extraterrestrial
imperative — if we reject nuclear power.  That's one thing.
Already in the early '60s, he said, if we don't do this by the
end of the decade, we're going to be obsolete in terms of our
space efforts.  Nuclear power is one issue; one critical issue,
obviously, for mankind as a whole, for space development.  But
you see this visionary quality of fighting against the opposition
to these breakthroughs; and being the force that says, "No, this
is what's needed," against massive opposition.  The tragedy is
that the opposition has taken over.
        We had, under the leadership of Krafft Ehricke and people
working with him, we had a nuclear rocket pretty much built by
the early '70s; it was basically a few steps away from being
ready to go, and it was just cancelled.  It was not found to be
too difficult; it was not found to be some failure; it was not
found to be too expensive; it was just cancelled.  And we've had
this zero-growth policy take over at that crucial pivot point —
the late '60s, early '70s — when Lyn really came on the scene
and started to continue this fight.  Obviously, Krafft resonated
with that, and came to work with the LaRouches directly based on
that; but you see the failure of departing from this visionary
quality and this fight to move into the future.  But I think he
exemplifies what's needed from the US population right now;
you're not going to find solutions from the existing cultural,
social framework.  It's failed; that's expressing the failure of
society.
        We heard at the beginning, one of the things that strikes me
in discussing this whole war danger and the fact that we're
taking steps towards nuclear war, which I think it's important,
it was stated clearly.  There's no limited nuclear war; there's
no small nuclear war, you don't take small steps.  If it happens,
everything's over; it's gone.  But what's potentially even more
striking than that actually being a reality on the table?  Who's
talking about it?  We have a Presidential election; are these
candidates raising this as an issue?  Is there any discussion
about this?  I think it just underscores the importance of that
quality of leadership needed; and exemplified by what was done in
San Francisco.  We're going to be having, coming out of the
Schiller Institute conference in Germany coming up; and what
really this movement represents in the United States.
        And I think this should also be an appeal to our viewers.
Really, this is a time when we need escalation; we need increase;
we need more support; we need more people to be these type of
creative leaders like Krafft Ehricke, like Lyndon LaRouche.
That's the only thing that's going to save the country at this
point.

OGDEN:  Yeah, Michael made a point which I thought was very
significant.  That, at a time like this, when it's very clear how
huge the dangers are, you cannot allow yourself to be any less
than the magnitude of the crisis challenges one to be.  And the
magnitude and scope of thinking which is necessary to solve a
crisis of this sort, of a civilizational scale, must be huge in
those terms.  And I think one thing out of this discussion about
Krafft Ehricke, that occurred to me is, when you're thinking
about where the entire idea of the geopolitics of the last 70
years has been rooted; it is rooted in the zero-growth
technology, no development kind of paradigm.  The idea that there
are limited resources that a growing population is fighting over,
and these territories and so forth; that is the fundamental tenet
of the geopolitics that has dominated this paradigm which has now
failed.  When you talk about a New Paradigm, when you talk about
"win-win" as Xi Jinping says it, instead of winner take all, all
are winners.  That fundamentally requires, it begs a new attitude
towards our concept of growth; that there is no idea of limits to
growth, of fixed natural resources.  But that you have an
ever-expanding possibility of ever-increasing potentials of
growth.  I think as very demonstrated, China, in a certain way,
does understand that in the way that Krafft Ehricke understood
it; is a central element of their current policy, is not only the
One Belt, One Road policy, but it is also this exploration of the
Moon. Now just going to the Moon, as a sort of space race or
setting your foot on a foreign body or something like that; but
saying we're going to discover fundamentally new about the
Universe.  And as Mr. LaRouche has been emphasizing, this Chang'e
mission to explore the far side of the Moon and everything that
is there to be discovered.  We don't even know; we don't know the
extent to which we will discover brand new things about the
structure of the Universe when we explore this new territory.
That, I think, speaks to this idea that the idea of a New
Paradigm, a new "win-win" system, is rooted in overturning the
last 70 years of this Malthusian concept of zero-growth, zero
technological development, and fixed resources.
        And it's only natural that Krafft Ehricke understood it in
those terms.

        DENISTON:  Anything else just goes to the longer legacy of
the Zeus vs. Prometheus fight.  You talk about this zero-growth
paradigm; where did this come from?  The British; the British
royal family.  People like Prince Philip; people like Prince
Bernhard.  This oligarchical mindset.  These guys are so
explicit, their view of mankind is just disgusting cattle to be
managed.  Zeus would just pal up with these guys; they wouldn't
even need to introduce themselves.  They would just get together
like they've know each other for ages.  That mentality of this
imperial conception of the management of mankind as a bestial
species; that's where this zero-growth paradigm came from in this
recent period, but it stretches back through history.  You look
at the writings of Aeschylus on the Prometheus vs. Zeus fight;
the attack on Prometheus.  And you see that as a reflection of a
true negative principle of society at the time, which is carried
through to today.  This hatred of human progress; this hatred of
creative development; this desire to keep mankind suppressed to
this lower level.  What angered Zeus wasn't just that he had
something stolen from him; it's that he had a whole class of
people he was managing, that Prometheus then gave an ability to
uplift and realize their own humanity.  And for that, Zeus
punished him.
        It's the same fight today; but today, Zeus has thermonuclear
arsenals at his fingertips.  We're at a clear, and I think this
was very well expressed even in the discussions back in the '80s
that we're talking about, with the need to move to the Age of
Reason.  We're at the point where mankind has developed
technologically to the point where if we allow that type of
process to continue, you're talking about mankind annihilating
himself; and that's what we're talking about right now, with
these NATO deployments.  It's complete insanity.  But again, as
we're saying, it's not going to be solved in the negative, by
just saying, "Stop that. Don't do that."  It's going to have to
be resolved in the higher realization and actualization of the
true nature of mankind as a Promethean force; as Krafft Ehricke
represented.  Today, as much as then, this need for an Age of
Reason is the imperative; and space is emblematic of the Age of
Reason, the age of mankind, really.

OGDEN:  Well, I think it's important in the context of everything
that we've discussed, also to note that we really are on the edge
of a meltdown of the trans-Atlantic financial system.  It was
noted this week that now major European banks are beginning to
cease their investment into the ECB, because of the ECB's
negative interest policy.  They said, why should we be putting
money into the ECB if they're just going to be charging us for
putting our money there?  So, Helga LaRouche said, there's a lot
of European bankers who are sleeping with billions of dollars
underneath their pillows in the current days.  But this is, even
without the instability of what could happen in the build up to
the Brexit vote at the end of this month.  I know our
institutional question for this week, which we haven't addressed;
was on the subject of the Brexit.  And Mrs. LaRouche said, if
this means that Ireland and Scotland are going to leave the UK,
and the UK will break up; then sure, I welcome this.  But in
seriousness, we are on the verge of the meltdown of the
trans-Atlantic financial system; the productivity of the United
States is through the floor; unemployment in this country is
unbelievable, especially youth unemployment.  It's at levels that
are unprecedented in the modern history of this country.  And at
the same time, you have the possibility of an entirely economic
paradigm presenting itself in the form of the New Silk Road;
everything that's coming out of the BRICS.  We have the visit by
Narendra Modi to the United States this week; he spoke to a joint
session of Congress.  There's a lot that could just happen; as
Helga LaRouche said, it would be very easy.  It would be a piece
of cake for the United States to join this New Paradigm; and I
think that's the ongoing of the LaRouche Movement
internationally, is making that possibility very, very real.  It
requires a policy revolution in the United States to bring that
about; but as was clear from the seminar in San Francisco this
week — and I think will continue to be clear in our
interventions in New York City around the Manhattan Project that
Mr. LaRouche has initiated; and then this upcoming conference
that's being sponsored by the Schiller Institute in Europe in the
coming weeks.  The activities of the LaRouche Movement
internationally are crucial; and it's very significant that we're
at the breaking point in terms of several aspects of this.
        Mrs. LaRouche also put a big emphasis on the continued fight
around the declassification of the 28 pages, because of what this
would imply in terms of the potential to bring down the entire
Anglo-Saudi empire.  And also everything that was contingent on
the lies that were told in the aftermath of 9/11; and what that
has led to in terms of the perpetual war policies, the refugees
who are coming into Europe from North Africa and the Middle East.
        So, all of these things taken together, represent a
situation which is dynamic, it's changing very rapidly, and it is
fertile ground for the types of interventions that the LaRouche
Movement is making internationally right now.
        So, let me invite Kesha or Mike, if you want to say anything
more, in terms of reflections at the conclusion of this
discussion, you're welcome to.

        STEGER:  I'd say, let's get rid of Obama and join the New
Paradigm.

        ROGERS: Yeah.  I think it's true; we are at the end of an
era of representation of barbarism, war, and these limits to
growth consequences that Krafft Ehricke was very well aware of.
We're seeing the emergence of a new system of cooperation, a new
collaboration and dialogue among civilizations that's being led
by Russia and China.  And I think the continued question being
presented by our activity is, will people actually join with
LaRouche and join with the nations who are representing this new
direction for mankind?  And that means doing what Krafft Ehricke
did, and breaking with all practicality, and as you said Ben,
popularity; and actually going out and doing that which is
seemingly impossible.  I think China gives us the light and the
inspiration as to human beings; that is our mission, that is what
we do.  We do those things which seem almost impossible.  And we
do those things that actually help to bring about the solutions
that are going to lead to a greater condition for mankind.  So, I
think that's what we're representing right now, and we're on the
brink of a total breakthrough; unlike anything that's been seen.
But also, as Mrs. LaRouche said in her opening remarks, this
breakthrough is going to come with rejecting the absence of any
discussion on the threat of this thermonuclear war and what
mankind really faces.  Because the question is, what kind of
society are we going to actually demand be brought into
existence?  What kind of future are we going to actually bring
about for those generations not yet born?  And Mr. LaRouche is
committed to that, and many more people as we've stated, need to
do the same.

        OGDEN:  OK.  Well, thank you very much, Kesha.  With that,
I'm going to bring a conclusion to this webcast here this
evening.  I'd like to thank both Kesha and Michael for joining
us; and also thank you to Megan and to Ben.  So, please stay
tuned to larouchepac.com; and as I think you can tell, we have a
very busy few weeks ahead of us, and a lot of responsibility. So,
thank you very much; good night.

14. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Den kinesiske avis Global Times udgav i dag et indsigtsfuldt synspunkt på afstand i det truende kollaps af visse amerikanske institutioner og udbruddet af massestøtte til en præsidentkandidat à la Mussolini – som, bemærker avisen, bryder frem som følge af økonomisk nedgang.

»Trumps tilhængere består for det meste af hvide fra den lavere klasse, og de mistede meget efter finanskrakket i 2008«, skrev avisen. »USA plejede at have den største og mest stabile middelklasse i den vestlige verden, men mange har oplevet en nedtur. Så var det, at Trump dukkede op. Stor i munden, antitraditionel, direkte med indslag af overgreb, er han den perfekte populist, der havde let ved at provokere offentligheden … han er endda blevet kaldt en ny Benito Mussolini eller Adolf Hitler af nogle vestlige medier … USA konfronteres med udsigten til fiasko for de etablerede institutioner, der meget vel kunne blive udløst af en voksende mængde problemer i det virkelige liv.«

Det samme sker i hele Europa, hvor et mønster, der spreder sig, med stemmer til den ekstreme højrefløj, som vi atter så det i denne weekend, hvor partiet AfD, Alternativ for Tyskland, skød frem med 15-20 % af stemmerne i valget i nogle af forbundsstaterne, efter at partiets leder truede med at skyde immigranter på stedet. AfD’s stemmeprocent svarede i bogstavelig forstand til arbejdsløshedsprocenten i den ene stat efter den anden.

Vi befinder os i realiteten i en tilstand med institutionernes sammenbrud i USA og Europa. Det kommer efter 15 år med økonomisk stagnation, massearbejdsløshed og indkomsttab, samt en hel stribe af frygtelige krige, som blev startet af Bush og Obama, samt af disse let bevæbnede, men rasende krigere, Storbritanniens Cameron og Frankrigs Hollande. Der har været så mange af disse massemordskrige, at den seneste, med Obama, Cameron og Hollande, der hjælper Saudi-Arabien med at ødelægge Yemen, knap nok omtales i de fleste medier.

Obama kan stilles for en rigsret alene pga. disse forfatningsstridige krige.

Men, hvad der er værre en tabet af respekt for nogen institution, så blev USA’s og dets borgeres mission – på den fremskudte grænse af teknologisk fremskridt – dræbt af Obama, da han afsluttede NASA’s planer for udforskningen af Månen og rummet.

En genopbygning af NASA’s programmer – der mobiliserer amerikanernes kreativitet i en genoplivning af USA’s rumudforskningsfremtid – er den centrale kraft, der kan vende dette kollaps omkring.

De økonomiske midler hertil er dem, der stod deres prøve under præsident Franklin Roosevelt, for at løse problemet med Wall Street og skabe statskredit til en økonomisk genrejsning. Men, det større mål er atter at have denne mission, menneskehedens fremtid i rummet.

Anfører af denne missions genrejsning er den demokratiske LaRouche-leder Kesha Rogers fra Texas, der identificerer dette som den enkelte, sikre vej til at vende det økonomiske kollaps, som Kinas Global Times ser. Og hun kræver, at dette gøres i samarbejde med især Kina, som nu er den nation, der hurtigst går frem i rummet og i opbygning af infrastruktur på Jorden.

Det er denne form for menneskets potentiale for at transformere vores magt, transformere vores relation til selve Solsystemet, som de kinesiske tiltag i dag kan tilbyde. Og det er denne fornemmelse af mening, denne fornemmelse for mobilisering og forpligtelse over for fremskridt for hele menneskeheden, som er det, vi nede i Texas minder folk om. Det, som Kesha Rogers minder folk om – selv folk, der var en del af disse store præstationer for 40 eller 50 år siden, og som nu måske har mødt en fornemmelse af demoralisering, pga. handlinger siden den tid. Vi trækker folk ud igen til en forpligtelse til denne mission. Og Kesha viser atter engang, at USA kan, og må, forpligte sig over for denne form for formål for hele menneskeheden.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

6. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Da Barack Obama annullerede USA’s planer om udforskning af rummet, begik han den største af sine forbrydelser, selv i sin egenskab af en »Vinder af Nobels Fredspris«, der udartede til en krigspræsident og massedræber. Rumprogrammet var Amerikas kultur, dets mission og fremtid, og Obamas handlinger vendte i realiteten den historiske kurs omkring og drev USA tilbage.

Tilstanden for økonomien i USA – for ikke at tale om Europa – er i en håbløs spiral for nedadgående og dræber millioner af mennesker gennem håbløshed, narko- og medikamentafhængighed og krig, som truer hele den amerikanske befolkning.

En total genoplivelse af udfordringerne i forbindelse med udforskning af rummet kan ændre alt. NASA’s rumprogrammer, der nu er skåret væk og suspenderet, er Amerikas eneste potentielle center for økonomisk håb.

For at vende degenerationen af USA og dets befolkning omkring, er den totale genoplivelse af rumprogrammet, på et højere niveau, den eneste farbare vej.

LaRouche-demokraten Kesha Rogers fra Texas fører an på denne vej, med den mobilisering, hun har genlanceret sammen med veteraner fra NASA, for at bringe rumprogrammet tilbage. EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche kalder dette for videnskabeligt arbejde af højeste rang; det er den eneste, videnskabelige aktivitet i USA, der har ægte betydning for menneskehedens fremtid.

Og Amerika vil stå foran et samfundsmæssigt kollaps, hvis vi ikke meget snart gør dette.

De eksempler, som USA må samarbejde med om enhver bestræbelse inden for rumfartsvidenskab, som der gives mulighed for, er Kina og Rusland.

Dér, hvor den amerikanske »fremskridtskultur« engang blomstrede – i udforskningen af rummet – dér er Kina nu den drivende kraft. Kinas plan for de næste fem år er centreret omkring rumforskning. Med målet om at undersøge galaksen fra Månens bagside inden for de næste to år, inkluderer Kinas nye plan for økonomisk og samfundsmæssig udvikling »en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

­Under en diskussion om det økonomiske program den 5. marts sagde chefen for Kinas største rumforskningslaboratorie: »Rumforskning er uadskilleligt fra Kinas innovationsdrevne udvikling. Hvis Kina ønsker at være en stærk, global nation, bør det ikke kun varetage sine umiddelbare interesser, men også bidrage til menneskeheden. Kun dette kan vinde Kina verdens respekt.«

USA har mistet verdens respekt under Bush, og især under Barack Obama. Obama må fjernes fra embedet, omgående, og hans onde »værk« må omstødes. Og mere presserende end alt andet må hans mord på Amerikas rumforskningsprogram vendes omkring i en total genoplivelse af rumforskning – »for en forståelse af universets oprindelse«.

Titelfoto: NASA’s adm. dir. Griffin præsenterer en billedmontage for formand og adm. dir. ved Kinas Akademi for Rumteknologi, dr. Yuan Jiajun, i 2006, under det første besøg i Kina af en NASA-direktør.    

3. marts 2016 (Leder fra LaRouchePAC) – Hvad er nationer? Hvorfor har vi dem? Hvorfor er de der? Deres formål er i realiteten intet andet end at forbedre vilkårene for menneskeheden, som John F. Kennedy sagde, da han annoncerede missionen om at sende end mand til Månen og få ham sikkert tilbage til Jorden, ved slutningen af de for længst hedengangne 1960’ere. Midlet til denne fremgang for menneskelige vilkår – det er både målet og midlet på samme tid – er gennem ægte opdagelse eller noesis. Det, der er sandt for en nation, er endnu mere sandt for en alliance af nationer som BRIKS, den Eurasiske Økonomiske Union eller Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen. Selv om de stadig er nye og skrøbelige, så peger sammenslutningerne af eurasiske nationer allerede frem mod menneskehedens fremtid.

Netop nu, i dette øjeblik, har den russiske præsident Putins bemærkelsesværdige og uventede succes med hans intervention i Barack Obamas og Hillary Clintons morderiske sammenkog i Syrien, tvunget den erkendelse, at det transatlantiske samfund har været en fiasko – en historisk fiasko – op til overfladen. Vi må rette vort blik mod Eurasien, og USA må fremover snarere være orienteret mod Stillehavet end mod Atlanterhavet.

Obama skinner tydeligt igennem som en britisk agent, og intet andet end en britisk agent, der har dræbt mange mennesker. Og Hillary Clinton er af samme støbning.

Det transatlantiske samfund er en tabt sag netop nu; det kan ikke, og vil ikke, komme tilbage i denne form. Hvis det skal komme tilbage, må det fødes på ny. Resterne af det transatlantiske samfund, i denne form, er færdigt. Vi må skabe en ny form for samfund, som det er blevet gjort i fortiden – af Karl den Store, f.eks. Det er, hvad vi må kæmpe for: en fremtid, som virkelig vil være en fremtid.

Dette er betydningen af Kesha Rogers’ yderst intellektuelle og yderst inspirerende kampagne for at vende tilbage til vores fremtid gennem udforskningen og erobringen af rummet i vort Solsystem og vor Galakse. Nøglepersoner tiltrækkes allerede mod Kesha fra hele landet og fra hele verden.

Betydningen af dette er det, som Lyndon LaRouche sagde i en diskussion den 1. marts:

»Vi må sige én ting. Én ting: intet vil lykkes, med mindre nationerne erkender opdagelsen af princippet om Månens bagside. Med andre ord, så kan man ikke sige, at man kan tage det, der foregår netop nu, og fortolke det til en god effekt. Man må annullere dette og sige, ’Problemet er, at vi endnu ikke har forstået, hvad det er, der ligger bagved Månen’. Og når vi finder ud af, hvad der findes bag Månen, hvilket kineserne og andre arbejder på, og vi går tilbage til det oprindelige rumprograms ABC, uden at gå tilbage til disse ting, som Obama beskar – Obama slog disse programmer ned, og dette burde han blive straffet alvorligt for, for sine forbrydelser i denne henseende. I stedet for at forsøge at fortolke noget og give det et andet og bedre spin – det fungerer ikke. For, uden rumprogrammet, hvilket vil sige den anden side af Månen i særdeleshed – uden en sådan tilgang får man ingenting, man kommer ingen vegne. Man må gøre dette! Det er ikke en mulighed, man kan tilvælge eller fravælge. Man kan ikke afvise det: man må erkende, at det er, hvad man må gøre.«

Foto: Præsident John F. Kennedy får en forklaring på opsendelsessystemet Saturn V, det system, der sluttelig skulle bringe mennesket til Månen, af dr. Wernher von Braun (i midten), på Cape Canaveral i november 1963.  

31. januar 2016 – Hej, alle sammen, jeg er Kesha Rogers fra LaRouche Komite for Politisk Strategi (LPAC), og jeg er her i dag ved NASA’s Johnson Space Center, hvor jeg var for seks år siden, da jeg lancerede en kampagne for Den amerikanske Kongres og krævede en rigsretssag mod præsident Barack Obama for hans nedbrydning og afmontering af det bemandede rumprogram, privatisering af det bemandede rumprogram og ødelæggelsen af det, der var vores nations vision under præsident John F. Kennedy. Det var Kennedys plan at gennemføre et forpligtende engagement for videnskab som reel drivkraft for økonomisk fremgang.

Det, vi har set i de seneste seks år under præsident Obama, og tidligere også under præsident Bush, er en fortsat degeneration af vores kultur; en håbløshed, og fortvivlelse. Vi har set et rekordhøjt tal og en stigning i selvmord, stigning i narkomisbrug blandt folk, der normalt er mere velhavende og velstillet, især blandt de mennesker, der ser på minoritetssamfund som dem, der ville være berørt af narkoepidemien; nu er det folk blandt den hvide befolkningsgruppe i aldersgrupperne 25 og 35 til 45 år.

Hvorfor er dette sket? Der er sket, fordi vi har fjernet en vision, vi har fjernet følelsen af at have en mission. Vi har ikke længere en videnskabelig drivkraft i nationen, og det skyldes præsident Barack Obamas bevidste politik, og den bevidste politik for ødelæggelse af denne nation gennem at kapitulere til Wall Street. Nu har vi så en situation, hvor vore unge mennesker befinder sig i dyb fortvivlelse og håbløshed.

Og det er ikke bare unge mennesker! Det er den kendsgerning, at denne nations befolkning ikke har nogen muligheder. Den største ulighed og ødelæggelse har ramt vores nation; hele det transatlantiske finanssystem er bankerot.

Hvad er løsningen? Kina har foreslået en løsning. Kina fremstår med visionen om en »win-win«-strategi med en stor mission for samarbejde, til beskuelse og inspiration for ikke alene Kina, ikke alene USA, men for hele verden, nemlig, at vi kan samarbejde om store projekter, såsom at minere Månen [for helium-3],[1] og atter betragte Månen som en affyringsrampe for hele udforskningen af rummet og forståelsen af menneskets rolle, menneskehedens rolle i galaksen. Det er gennem dette, at vi må inspirere mennesket.

Hvis vi gør dette, kan vi lukke Wall Street ned, og vi kan faktisk skaffe den nødvendige kredit, som det var Alexander Hamiltons hensigt, så vi ikke behøver at gå til Elon Musk eller nogen af disse folk med deres kæmpemæssige pengebank, der allerede er bankerot. Vi kan faktisk gøre det, Kennedy gjorde, som Franklin Roosevelt gjorde, og vi kan anvende den nødvendige kredit til at opbygge et videnskabsdrevet program og atter opbygge en stor mission for denne nation.

Vi kan sørge for, at vore unge mennesker ikke tager deres eget liv, at de gives en vision med en ægte kultur. Dette videnskabsdrevne program ville sikre, at vi har energi til Jorden, med helium-3 fra Månen, i flere generationer fremover. Vi kan sørge for, at folk bliver inspireret ikke alene af et videnskabsdrevet program, men et, der er forbundet med en storslået kultur, en storslået musikkultur, som hr. LaRouche har lanceret i vores Manhattanprojekt i New York. Og vi kan forene disse to kræfter og atter give inspiration til forpligtelsen over for menneskehedens fremskridt, der engang var den håbets bavn, der inspirerede hele menneskeheden, og atter bringe USA tilbage i spidsen for denne form for vision.

Tak.

[1] Se: Tema-artikel: Udvinding af helium-3 på Månen for en menneskehed med fusionskraft, http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=1894

LaRouche-kandidat Kesha Rogers mobiliserer vælgere til at afsætte præsident Obama. De traditionelt regeringsbærende partier blev undsagt ved EU-valget i Frankrig, England, Danmark og Grækenland. De etablerede partier kan miste deres rolle, hvis ikke de tager deres nationale ansvar alvorligt. Et stadigt tættere samarbejde mellem Rusland og Kina står til at få deltagelse af Indien efter det nylige parlamentsvalg. Den strategiske trekant: Rusland-Indien-Kina vil ikke være slave til et vestligt imperium. Voksende modstand i Tyskland, Frankrig og Italien imod konfrontations- og krigspolitikken over for Rusland og Asien.

KAMPAGNEAVIS NR. 11, SOMMER 2010

Download (PDF, Unknown)