Vært Matthew Ogden: Det er 13. april. Som seere af vores webside vil vide, og som LaRouchePAC-aktivister vil vide, så gik verden i mandags ind i et alarmberedskab, svarende til Rød Alarm. LaRouchePAC og LaRouche-organisationen gik ind i en generel mobilisering for at stoppe det, det ville være en katastrofal, ødelæggende og meget farlig beslutning om at lancere et angreb mod Syrien. Et angreb, der meget vel omgående kunne kaste os ud i begyndelsen til Tredje Verdenskrig. Denne mobilisering har haft en enorm effekt. LaRouchePAC gik omgående i offensiven og udgav et flyveblad, som I ser her på skærmen. Flyvebladet kan downloades via linket, I ser her.  (Dansk: http://schillerinstitut.dk/si/?p=24629)

Dette flyveblad omdeles nu overalt og er også blevet omdelt til hvert eneste kontor i Repræsentanternes Hus og USA’s Senat.

Her følger engelsk udskrift af webcastet:

Let me just read you a little bit from this leaflet.  This
is not all of it, but these are some relevant excerpts.  It
begins by saying the following:
“We, the United States, are about to launch an attack on
Syria and, possibly, the Russian troops therein, based on
perfidious British lies; based on what may turn out to be
history’s final and blackest intelligence hoax, the one that
eliminated the human race. At the same time, President Trump’s
personal lawyer’s office was raided today, April 9, 2018, based
on a referral from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. These two
outrageous events are completely related. Unless you rise up with
us right now to stop it, this country is in grave, graver peril.
The outright attempt to blackmail this President into the war he
was elected to stop has been escalated beyond anyone’s
imagination.
“In 2016, millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump
because he said he would end useless, perpetual wars on behalf of
an intellectually dead and financially bankrupt Anglo-American
system, the imperium which dates to the immediate aftermath of
World War II. Donald Trump sought better relations with China,
now emerging as the world’s most powerful economy, and Putin’s
Russia. Trump’s determination to establish decent relations with
Russia and China and that determination alone, set into motion
the hellish coup against the President, led by the British and
those many useful idiots in our elites who are in their thrall.
“That coup, whose manifesto was the fake “dirty dossier” on
Donald Trump authored by MI6’s Christopher Steele and paid for by
Hillary Clinton, was on its last legs when Britain began its
present offensive. Senators Charles Grassley and Lindsay Graham
had referred Christopher Steele to the United States Department
of Justice for criminal prosecution and patriots in Congress were
pursuing a genuine effort to identify and prosecute those
responsible for the coup against our President. Then, on March 4,
2018, a Russian who spied for Britain, Sergei Skripal, and his
daughter were allegedly poisoned in Salisbury, England. Skripal
runs in the same British espionage circles associated with
Christopher Steele. Prime Minister Teresa May immediately
pronounced to the world that Russia was behind the attack but has
never ever produced any proof for any of her bellicose
statements. President Trump was bum rushed by his traitorous
advisors, including H.R. McMaster, who throughout his military
career was a captive of Britain’s International Institute of
Strategic Affairs, into supporting Britain’s completely unfounded
claims. The message to the President from our traitors is clear,
join us in the march to war and maybe, maybe, we will let up with
the coup.
“Ultimately, Britain’s own chemical weapons experts at
Porton Downs refused to say that the agent used on the Skripals
was manufactured in Russia, despite the evidence-free claims of
Teresa May and her insane Foreign Minister, Boris Johnson”.
“Despite voicing support for Teresa May, Donald Trump still
sought to make good on his promise to the American people. He
congratulated Putin on his election and invited him to the White
House for early talks, citing the escalating and dangerous arms
race between the United States and Russia. The British and their
American friends completely lost it in response. A hammer needed
to be dropped on this President who now was even talking of
pulling American troops out of Syria and rebuilding the United
States.
“Enter a second British authored poisoning hoax, this one in
Syria. The Russians, Iranians, and Syrians not only assisted in
the defeat of ISIS, but were mopping up the last remnants of
remaining jihadis, such as Jayish Al Islam, a rebranded Salafist
Jihadi group controlled by the Saudis, and the Al Nusra front or
Al-Qaeda. The final military operations consolidating victory
were concluded in the last days in Gouta, a suburb of Damascus.
Having achieved victory, under the narrative our war mongering
media would have us believe, Assad launched a chemical weapons
attack to celebrate that victory, knowing he would bring down
holy hell upon himself from the West.
“The pictures of dying children which President Trump
reacted to so emotionally a year ago, when he launched missile
strikes on Syria, have been presented to him again. There is
every reason to believe they are fake. Russia and Syria had been
warning about just such a false flag attack involving chlorine
gas for over a month as they closed in on victory in Gouta. The
only information claiming such an attack occurred is coming from
the White Helmets, an aid organization founded by the British,
implicated as being militarily involved with Al-Qaeda, and deeply
implicated in past hoaxes concerning Assad’s alleged use of
chemical weapons.
“The White Helmets are jointly funded by British and
American intelligence components dedicated to regime change in
Syria. They have received millions upon millions of dollars for
this purpose. They are critical components of the interventionist
and regime change foreign policy Donald Trump was elected to
eradicate.
“In 2013, when Obama threatened war with Russia over
Syria, the American people intervened, raised the roof of
Congress, and stopped it. This is what is needed now. Russia sees
an unrelenting information warfare offensive coming from the
British and their dupes in the U.S.  They correctly see this as
the first steps toward war. We need to reverse this starting right
now. Call your Congressional Representative or Senator, tell them
to stop the drive to War and Shut Down Robert Mueller, Now.
“[The] Capitol Switchboard is (202)224- 3121. Raise the
roof! Call the White House and tell the President not to step in
a British trap.  [And the White House switchboard number is]
(202)456-1111.”
Now, that leaflet is available in the description of this
video.  As we’ve received reports, calls have been inundating
Congress, and we’ve received word that the White House
switchboard has also been overwhelmed with calls over the last
several days from American citizens responding to this call.  The
call, that LaRouche PAC issued to immediately go into an all-out
mobilization to stop this war.  As I mentioned, this leaflet is
being circulated around the country.  Rallies are being held in
cities around the country by members and activists with the
LaRouche Political Action Committee.  Here, I’m going to show you
a couple of pictures.  This is a picture from the streets of
Manhattan, and that graphic there — “No Strike on Syria” —
which had listed the White House phone number and the
Congressional phone number.  The next there, you see “Chemical
Weapons Hoax Is another British Lie”.  There is somebody signing
up, leaving their information to become a volunteer and an
activist with LaRouche PAC.  The next one here, you see a banner
“Fire Mueller, Not Missiles! Poison Gas, My Ass!  Stop World War
III! larouchepac.com“. Here you can see a similar banner which
was being deployed in the streets of Houston, Texas.  This one,
you can see, was accompanied by Kesha Rogers, who is an
independent candidate for US Congress there in Texas.  This one:
“Syrian Chemical Weapons Hoax!  British False-Flag for Nuclear
War!”  And then one more, here you can see Kesha Rogers herself,
“Poison Gas My Ass!  It’s All British Lies!”
This is being similarly alluded to by experts here in the
United States and abroad who are very clear that there have been
previous instances of false-flag types of attacks being staged in
Syria to try to provoke US involvement and to try to provoke
these US strikes against the Syrian government.  In fact,
spokesmen for the Russian Foreign Ministry are tracing this
directly back to the British, and are naming the British by name.
So, as we said on Monday, the mask is now falling away, and the
British have over-extended themselves and are now being
identified as the perfidious actors that they are.  Including in
an interview that Will Wertz of Executive Intelligence Review
conducted on behalf of LaRouche PAC on Wednesday of this week,
with Senator Richard Black.  Richard Black is a very vocal
Senator here in the Virginia State Senate.  This video has
already gained over 23,000 views as of just a few minutes ago,
last time I checked.  In that interview, what Senator Black does
is, he spares no words in warning that any strike on Syria with
Russian troops present on the ground, could lead directly to a
thermonuclear war which would threaten the existence of human
civilization itself.  Let me play you a clip from that video, and
I should just note that the full video is available.  The link is
available in the description below this video in YouTube
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTtAm0OHW24].
So, here’s a clip from this interview with Senator Richard
Black.

SEN. RICHARD BLACK

:  we have maneuvered ourselves to
a point, where the degree of risk I think is as high as it was
when the Archduke of Austria was assassinated, causing an
explosion into the First World War — enormous bloodshed,
suffering, destruction.  And the First World War, of course, was
sort of just a prelude and laid the groundwork for the Second
World War, and the vast destruction that took place.
Now: what makes this worse than the First World War
situation, is that while Russia — you know, we outspend Russia
11:1; our defense budget is so big, that it equals the combined
total of the next 14 largest nations in terms of defense
spending: Russia, China, Germany, Korea, France; it just goes on
and on.  We have a {gargantuan} defense budget, and so we are
more than a match for the Russians.  The Russians, while they
have a fine army, and fine military, it’s much smaller.  It just
can’t compare.
However, where we do have equality is with nuclear power.
Both sides apparently have roughly 1,500 nuclear weapons that are
set to go, like that. There are roughly 7,000 on either side,
which are capable of being used in short order.  That is enough
probably to destroys two-thirds of humanity. And certainly the
Western world as we know it, would be practically annihilated:
All of our major cities.  Right here in Virginia, Norfolk, the
biggest naval base on Earth, would simply be gone.  This Loudoun
County which has huge internet traffic would be gone.  The
Pentagon would be gone.  New York City totally gone!  It would
totally be erased from the Earth!
And we have people like John Bolton, who are sufficiently
reckless, to where, for their self-interest, they are willing to
risk the death of perhaps 2 billion people, to just simply
purging them from the face of the Earth. And it is incumbent on
the President to recognize the extraordinary danger that we face.
We have been building up to this, and many of us elected
Donald Trump on a promise that he was going to sort of normalize
our relations with Russia; he was going to stop trying to
overthrow President Assad, and work with the Syrians; he was
going to downgrade the importance of NATO, and he was going to
give up regime change.  Now, Trump has done a lot of the things
he promised to do, but he has not done one thing that he
promised to do in foreign affairs — well, you could take the
exception — he was always very hostile towards the Iranian deal
and so he was honest about that.  That’s probably the one thing
that he’s focused on most.  But you know, when Gen. Michael
Flynn was planned to be the National Security Advisor, Michael
Flynn would have been a godsend for this nation.  He knew where
the skeletons buried, he understood what was going on, and I
think he recognized the importance of drawing back from nuclear
war.
And so, we have come to a point, probably more dangerous
than any time in my lifetime — and I’m counting the time, when
as kids we used to have air raid drills, and we’d get under
desks, and they tell you, you cover your eyes, so you won’t be
blinded by the blast, and the back of your neck, so something
won’t hit you and break your neck.  And people understood nuclear
war, because we had dropped the atomic bombs on Japan, and they
understood what it could do.  Today, it’s sort of vague, it’s
very distant.
But the nuclear weapons that we have today, make the ones we
used on Japan look like firecrackers.  They’re nothing!  So we
are at a fantastically perilous juncture in our history, and
someone needs to take control of it, and say, let’s pull back
from the precipice.

OGDEN:  So, a very clear call.  Somebody needs to take
control of this situation and say, “We’re pulling back from the
precipice.”  And as Senator Richard Black said there, he sees
that we’re in a more perilous and more dangerous time than at any
point in his lifetime; including at the height of the Cold War
during the so-called “duck and cover” drills.  Now, Senator Black
immediately after delivering this interview to LaRouche PAC,
travelled to Richmond, to the State House in Virginia, and used
his privilege as a leading State Senator to stand up, claim the
floor, and deliver an extraordinary speech to the entire General
Assembly, which followed very heavily along the same lines as
what he went through in this interview that you just saw an
excerpt from.  This speech had such an impact that even the
Washington Post was compelled to give it thorough coverage.
Here’s some of the coverage that was included in the Washington
Post.  Let me just read you the beginning of their article.
They said:
“A state legislator who once flew to Damascus for a two-hour
sit-down with Bashar al-Assad took to the floor of the Virginia
Senate this week to say the Syrian president might have been
framed with a suspected chemical attack — if the attack happened
at all.
“|’It is not entirely clear that there was an attack,’ Sen.
Richard H. Black (R-Loudoun) said in a 20-minute speech on the
floor of Virginia Senate on Wednesday. ‘There was a doctor, from
the hospital â from the main hospital in Douma â who has said,
“We haven’t received any casualties. Nobody has been sent in.”|’
“The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
[the OCPW], a global watchdog, has sent inspectors to Syria to
try to confirm whether it was a chemical attack that killed
dozens in Damascus on Saturday.”
Then it went on to say, “As nearly two hours of strictly
perfunctory, procedural business wrapped up, Black asked to
address the body.
“He expressed concern that President Trump — whom Black
largely supports — will launch a military strike against Assad
‘regardless of whether there was an actual attack and without
regard to who may have staged it.’
“He went on to say the United States has been at war in the
Middle East for 17 years with no end in sight. That former Rep.
Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) had been right when he said that
without a military draft, Americans are more careless about
sending troops into battle. That national leaders who make the
call, such as former Vice President and Defense Secretary Richard
B. Cheney, never went to war themselves.”
Now, the article went on to report that, while there were
several Democrats who were quite flabbergasted that Senator Black
would have the gall and the guts to stand up and say what he said
there on the floor of the Virginia State Senate, there were
several of his colleagues who stood behind him 100%.  And knowing
his background as a military veteran with medals of valor that he
has received from going into combat, receiving wounds, and also
his history as a JAG [Judge Advocate General] and very high-level
prosecutor associated with the US Army, they know that these
words from Senator Richard Black are not words that he delivers
lightly.
Another elected official who, like Senator Black has
travelled to Syria in order to see what actually the conditions
are on the ground, and to get the truth of the matter and to get
the facts for herself, is US Representative Tulsi Gabbard,
Congresswoman from Hawaii — a Democrat.  This week, Tulsi
Gabbard, like many other members of the US Congress — Democrats
and Republicans included — went into an all-out mobilization.
Several of her colleagues have been calling on President Trump to
at least come to Congress and follow the US Constitution and the
War Powers Act.  But Tulsi Gabbard went much further, and she
issued a very strong series of tweets, which I would just like to
go through for you here.  She said:  “Our unfortunate and brutal
history of waging regime-change wars has failed.  Interventions
in Iraq and Libya caused death, destruction, and human suffering.
We have neglected our own communities.  Military action should be
the last resort, not our first.  The people of Syria want peace
more than anything in the world.  Dropping bombs on Syria will
not bring their war-torn country any closer to peace.  It will
escalate and prolong the war, resulting in more senseless death,
destruction, suffering, and refugees.”  She says, “By launching a
US military attack against Syria, terrorist groups like al-Qaeda,
ISIS, Jayish al-Islam, etc. will be reinvigorated and resurrected
in their quest to topple the government and establish a
caliphate.  This creates a greater threat to America and Hell for
the Syrian people.”  She says, “Bottom line: If our desire is for
peace and stability in Syria so that refugees can return home and
they can begin to rebuild their homes and lives, then we should
work for peace rather than expanding and escalating the war
through a US military attack against Syria. #peace for Syria.  As
a soldier, I know that the most basic requirement before taking
military action is that you must have a clear achievable
objective, and a strategy to achieve it.  You must analyze the
situation, know what the risks are, and what the cost and
consequences of your actions will be.  Our actions in Syria must
be based on strategy which is based on what our mission actually
is.  What are we trying to achieve?  The neo-cons and
neo-liberals calling on Trump to attack Syria either don’t know
what the mission is, or are pursuing a mission that is contrary
to US interests.  Actions that weaken or cripple the Syrian
military result in greater instability, more suffering of the
Syrian people, and strengthen terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and
ISIS, Army of Islam, etc. who are trying to topple the
government.  Is that our mission?  Does this help Syrian or
American people?”  Then, she concludes, “US military action in
Syria could escalate into a war with Russia and Iran.  Russia has
already stated that they will respond to any US military attack
against Syria.  Is this our mission?  How does going to war with
Russia over Syria serve the interests of the American people?”
That final tweet goes directly to the point.  Any attack on
Syria would risk wounding or killing a Russian service member or
Russian military assets which are deployed heavily in that
region.  Any attack on a Russian military asset or a Russian
soldier, would result in a direct response from Russia, which
means World War III.  So, those warnings are very clear.  Now,
Tulsi Gabbard also confronted US Defense Secretary James Mattis
during a hearing that was held in the US House of Representatives
just yesterday.  She begins by bringing up the War Powers Act and
the Constitutional right of Congress to declare war, not the
President; but then she pursued a similar line of questioning as
what she covered in that series of tweets.  You’ll hear Jim
Mattis say, “We haven’t yet actually decided whether there will
be a military strike against Syria,” although President Trump in
the beginning of the week has set himself a 24-48-hour time line
on that.  There are questions surrounding what is actually the
discussion and the push-back inside the White House, and what is
Jim Mattis’ role on this, and an acknowledgement that, at least
if a military attack were launched, what is the strategy to
follow up on that?  And then an acknowledgement that any military
attack would precipitate a much higher escalation in the
conflict, and could lead to a war with Russia.  So, you’ll see
Tulsi Gabbard say that explicitly.  So, here’s this video clip
from the Congressional hearing yesterday.

REP. TULSI GABBARD

:  Thank you, gentlemen, for your
service.  The President indicated recently his intention to
launch US military attacks against Syria.  Article I of the
Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war.
Congress has not done so against the Syrian government.  Syria
has not declared war against the US, or threatened the US.  The
launch of 59 missiles against Syria by Trump last year was
illegal and did not meet any of those criteria in the War Powers
Resolution.  The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018, which
was signed into law by President Trump, states that none of the
funds made available by this Act may be used with respect to
Syria in contravention of the War Powers Resolution; including
for the introduction of US armed military forces into hostilities
in Syria.
My question is:  Will the President uphold the Constitution,
the War Powers Resolution, and comply with the law that he
signed, by obtaining authorization from Congress before launching
US military attacks against Syria?

DEFENSE SECRETARY JAMES MATTIS:  Congresswoman, we have not
yet made any decision to launch military attacks into Syria.

GABBARD:  It is simple, however, what the Constitution
requires, so while you are correct in saying the President has
not yet made a decision, my question is:  Will he abide by the
Constitution and comply with the law?

MATTIS:  I believe that the President will carry out his
duties under the Constitution to protect the country.

GABBARD:  What would the objective of an attack on Syria be,
and how does that serve the interests of the American people?

MATTIS:  I don’t want to talk about a specific attack that
is not yet in the offing, knowing that this would be
pre-decisional.  Again, the President has not made that decision.
However, looking at the Chemical Warfare Convention, I think it’s
by far in the best interests of civilization, certainly the best
interests of America, that that Convention be obeyed by the
nations that have signed it.  What has happened in Salisbury,
England and now has happened in Syria again, shows that this is
not an idle concern.

GABBARD:  So, if the decision is made, as you have stated
publicly, you are laying out all the options on the table for the
President.  If the decision is made to launch a military attack
against Syria, Russia has already responded that they would
respond to our US strike.  As this action is considered, can you
justify for the American people how going to war with Russia over
Syria serves the interests of the American people?

MATTIS:  No, Congresswoman, I can’t answer that question.
I’m not ready to speculate that that would happen.

GABBARD:  Would you not say that it is a highly likely
occurrence, given what Russia has stated directly that they will
respond?

MATTIS:  No, Congresswoman, I would not.  There’s a lot of
ways to respond to the violation of the Chemical Weapons
Convention diplomatically, economically, militarily, that taken
in total would represent I think what we have to do in this world
if

in accordance with international norms and
international law.

OGDEN:  So, as I said, numerous members of Congress are
insisting that the War Powers Act and Article I of the
Constitution — the Constitutional privilege of the US Congress
to declare war and not the President; that this be observed.
Both Democrats and Republicans.  This is also being brought up in
the UK by Jeremy Corbyn, saying Theresa May cannot be allowed to
just launch a unilateral attack on Syria without coming to the
Parliament first.  So, there is huge push back; but I would
insist that this comes, this was catalyzed by the mobilization
that LaRouche PAC and the LaRouche organization internationally
launched at the beginning of this week.  The actions by activists
such as you who are viewing this webcast, and other people who
have been mobilizing in an all-out mobilization over the course
of this week, has had a very significant impact, and may be the
reason why we are not at war in Syria already, and have not
escalated this into some sort of an attack, a missile launch in
Syria at this point.  Now, we remain in the danger zone.  By no
means is anything decided.  We have to continue this mobilization
in a way which goes beyond even what has been done thus far this
week.
What I would like to do, just to conclude this broadcast, is
to bring you an excerpt of a webcast that Helga Zepp-LaRouche
delivered just yesterday.  Helga Zepp-LaRouche has been receiving
a lot of traction in what she’s been saying.  A webcast which was
delivered last week, which she delivered in German on a website
in Germany, has already received over 60,000 views.  This is
really catalyzing a major interest in the leadership that the
LaRouche movement is providing on this issue.  So, you’ll hear
Helga Zepp-LaRouche say here in this webcast is that we are in a
very dangerous situation that could get out of control in no
time.  This is, indeed, a British trap that President Trump is
walking right into, and we have to prevent him from walking into
this kind of British intelligence trap.  So, here’s what Helga
Zepp-LaRouche had to say:

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE

:  Yeah, we are indeed in a very
dangerous situation, which could get out of control in no time.
And just to underline that point, this tweet by President Trump
which made the headlines internationally everywhere, namely,
Russia, the missiles are coming.  That turns out to be a reaction
to a fake news! The background of this story is that about a week
ago, the Russian ambassador to Lebanon, gave an interview where
he supposedly said that any attack on Syria would be answered by
a full military reaction by Russia.
Now, it turns out that that interview which appeared on
Hezbollah TV [Al Manar] and was translated into Arabic was
mistranslated, and obviously referred to an earlier remark which
General Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of Staff of the Russian
military had made, where he said, that if there is an attack on a
Russian soldier in Syria, that Russia would react.  So, it was
not that any attack on Syria would be met with a Russian
retaliation, but if the lives of Russian soldiers would be
attacked, which is a huge difference.
But obviously, that was the trigger point for Trump to send
out this tweet.  But it also shows you that in this environment
of complete orchestration of fake news, false flag attacks,
secret service manipulation of all kinds, how easy it is to stage
an incident and how things can get out of control.
We are right now not off the war danger.  It’s still unclear
what will happen.  Yesterday at the White House briefing,
apparently it was said that “all options are on the table.”
Theresa May meets with her cabinet  — supposedly according to
media reports, which are not very reliable, but it’s the only
source we have on that  — to decide if the British would
participate in a US military attack.  Now, the US warship USS
Donald Cook is 100 km from Tartus, which is the Russian military
port in Syria, and another US warship has left Norfolk, and is on
the way already since several days.
Now, since Russia has full air control over Syria, and Syria
has also extremely effective missile defense systems, if there is
a US missile attack on Syria, it could be right in a
confrontation between the two nuclear powers, the United States
and Russia.  So I can only urge you, all of you who are watching
this program, you should join our mobilization.  In every
parliament in the world where you are, get your congressman, get
your deputy to intervene and make sure the respective governments
are completely distancing themselves, that there is a public
debate and investigation.  And we must really have a total
mobilization against this war danger.

OGDEN:  So, that is a call to action from Helga
Zepp-LaRouche.  We remain in a red alert.  We need a total
mobilization against this war danger; not only here in the United
States, but across the entire planet.  The resistance to this
must be vocal, loud, clear, and it must be made clear that this
is exactly the kind of provocation which could directly lead to
World War III.  So, don’t let President Trump walk into a trap.
That’s the subject of the leaflet that we are circulating —
“Enough!  Call Congress and Your Senator and Tell Them To Shut
Down Robert Mueller and Stop the British Drive to War”.  So, we
implore you:  If you haven’t yet, do this; do it again.  Get all
of your friends and neighbors to inundate Congress with these
calls.  And to call the White House switchboard as well.  We must
continue in this all-out mobilization and respond to the call to
action that you just heard Helga Zepp-LaRouche deliver.
So, thank you very much for viewing this webcast here today.
Please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.

9. april, 2018 – Vi, De forenede Stater, står over for at lancere et angreb mod Syrien, med de russiske styrker, der er til stede dér, baseret på perfide, britiske løgne; baseret på det, der kunne vise sig at være historiens endegyldige og sorteste efterretningssvindel, den, der gjorde det af med den menneskelige race. Samtidig blev præsident Trumps personlige advokats kontor i dag, 9. april, 2018, udsat for et raid, baseret på en henvisning fra den særlige anklager Robert Mueller. Spørgsmålet skulle angiveligt dreje sig om beskyldninger i forbindelse med, at præs identen skulle have haft en årelang affære med den løgnagtige og afskyelige pornostjerne, Stormy Daniels. Dette anses af Mueller og vores korrupte FBI for at være så alvorligt, at det Sjette Tillæg til USA’s Forfatning også blot kan kastes til side. Disse to uhyrlige begivenheder er fuldstændig relateret. Med mindre I nu rejser jer sammen med os for at stoppe det, er dette land i alvorlig, alvorlig fare. Det kategoriske forsøg på at afpresse denne præsident ind i den krig, han blev valgt til at stoppe, er nu blevet optrappet ud over enhver forstand.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 11. april, 2018 – Ti tusinder af eksemplarer af LaRouchePAC’s hasteerklæring, »Nu er det nok; Ring til Kongressen og din senator og sig til dem, at de skal lukke Robert Mueller ned, STOP BRITERNES FREMSTØD FOR KRIG« er blevet uddelt og e-mailet i hele landet i de seneste 48 timer. Kredse omkring præsident Trump i særdeleshed bliver advaret om faren. Den totalt gennemskuelige fabrikering af en falsk historie om kemiske våben i Syrien fra de britiske aktiver inden for de jihadistiske netværk, de »Hvide Hjelme«, og som savner ethvert bevis eller endda motiv på vegne af Syrien og Rusland, er blevet brugt til at drive præsident Trump væk fra at udføre sine erklærede planer: at blive venner med Rusland og Kina og trække de amerikanske styrker ud af Syrien og afslutte de sindssyge og folkemorderiske krige for »regimeskifte«, én gang for alle.

Den indflydelse, som LaRouchePAC’s intervention har haft, bør ikke undervurderes. Erklæringen påpeger krigshysteriet og det åbenlyse FBI-raid mod Trumps personlige advokat, under direktion af Robert Mueller, og understreger: »Disse to uhyrlige begivenheder er totalt relateret. Med mindre I nu rejser jer sammen med os, er dette land i alvorlig, alvorlig fare. Det direkte forsøg på at afpresse denne præsident ind i den krig, han blev valgt til at stoppe, er blevet optrappet ud over enhver forstand.«

Præsident Trump har tilsyneladende forstået budskabet – at krigsprovokationerne styres af de samme britiske aktiver, der styrer Russiagate-kuppet imod ham. Selv om han skrev et krigerisk tweet her til morgen, der sagde, at missilerne snart ville flyve, og som fordømte Rusland og Assad for det angivelige angreb med kemiske våben, så fulgte han hurtigt derefter op med endnu to tweets, der sagde, at der »ikke er nogen grund til« den aktuelle alvorlige krise mellem USA og Rusland, og at de to nationer må arbejde sammen om både økonomiske og strategiske spørgsmål. Trump konkluderer: »Meget af det onde blod med Rusland skyldes den Falske & Korrupte Ruslands-efterforskning, under anførsel af de totalt Demokratiske loyalister, eller folk, der arbejdede for Obama. Mueller er den mest inhabile (undtagen Rosenstein, der underskrev FISA & Comey brevet). Intet ’aftalt spil’, så de går amok!«

Præsident Putin talte besindigt med nye udenlandske ambassadører, der ankom til Moskva i dag, og sagde: »Tilstanden i verden giver grund til bekymring. Situationen i verden bliver mere kaotisk, men vi håber ikke desto mindre, at sund fornuft sluttelig vil sejre, og at internationale relationer vil komme ind på en konstruktiv kurs, og at hele det globale system vil blive mere stabilt og forudsigeligt … Med hensyn til Rusland, så vil vi fortsætte med konsekvent at tale for en styrkelse af global og regional sikkerhed og stabilitet og fortsætte med strengt at overholde vore internationale forpligtelser og opbygge et samarbejde med vore partnere på en konstruktiv og respektfuld måde, vejledt af internationale juridiske standarder og FN’s charter. Vi vil fremme verdens positive, fremadskuende dagsorden og arbejde for at sikre menneskehedens vedvarende udvikling, fremgang og velfærd.«

Denne »fremadskuende dagsorden« er nu blevet vedtaget af flertallet af verdens nationer i form af deltagelse i den Nye Silkevej, der er initieret af Kina, og i forsvaret af suverænitet over udenlandsk sponsorerede terrorister – det være sig fra saudierne eller briterne eller de britiske aktiver i USA. At forene verden i den Nye Silkevejsånd, for at afslutte fattigdom og krig, er ikke længere en drøm – det nye paradigme er inden for rækkevidde, hvis Det britiske Imperiums døende uhyre, samt dets finansmagter, endelig kan stedes til hvile og således befri verdens befolkning til at arbejde i harmoni. Det britiske folk er selv i stigende grad klar over denne kendsgerning, med befolkningen, og endda MP’er fra både Labour og Tory’erne, der fordømmer Tony Blairs og Theresa Mays løgnagtige fremstød for krig, baseret på de samme løgne om masseødelæggelsesvåben, som Blair brugte til at lancere Irakkrigen, moder til den nuværende elendighed og det nuværende kaos i hele Sydvestasien.

Spred LaRouchePAC’s erklæring overalt, og mobilisér folk af god vilje i hele verden til at gå sammen med os i dette beslutningens øjeblik, for hele menneskehedens fremtid.

Jeg er Will Wertz fra LaRouche Political Action Committee, og vi interviewer i dag senator fra Virginia Richard Black, der er pensioneret oberst i den amerikanske hær; han var ligeledes chef for JAG (Judge Advocate General’s Corps, United States Army) afdeling for kriminalitet i Pentagon. Han har ekstraordinær stor erfaring især med Syrien, som han har besøgt flere gange. Formålet med interviewet er at få senator Blacks synspunkter om den aktuelle krise omkring beskyldningerne om et angreb med kemiske våben i det østlige Ghouta i byen Douma, Syrien.

Video, engelsk.

newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com

I skrivende stund, hvor denne meddelelse går ud ved middagstid på USA’s østkyst den 10. april, er der »rød alarm« over muligheden for, at en generel krig i de kommende dage bryder ud pga. en række provokationer, der kommer fra Det britiske Imperiums højeste niveauer. Med forsøget på at give Rusland skylden for den angivelige forgiftning af den britiske dobbeltagent Skripal og hans datter, og som kollapsede, da eksperter fra UK’s laboratorium for kemiske våben i Porton Down ikke kunne bekræfte, at stoffet, der blev brugt mod Skripal og datter, kom fra Rusland, blev de Londonbaserede »Hvide Hjelme« udkommanderet og hævdede – uden beviser – at syriske regeringsstyrker brugte kemiske våben i Ghouta. Dette udløste krav i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd om aktion mod Syrien, men også mod Iran og Rusland – et krav, der kom fra briterne, franskmændene og USA’s neokonservative.

Tredje provokation var raidet mod præsident Trumps personlige advokat Michael Cohens kontor, baseret på en henvisning fra den særlige anklager Robert Mueller, relateret til anklagerne imod Trump fra pornostjernen Stormy Daniels. Selv om Muellers efterforskning af Cohen intet har at gøre med beskyldninger om, at Trump indgik et ’aftalt spil’ med Putin for at vinde valget i 2016, så er kilden til alle tre provokationer den samme – de er alle en del af kampagnen fra City of Londons imperiekræfter og deres neokonservative allierede på Wall Street, for at forhindre Trump i at lykkes med sit kampagneløfte om at afslutte krige for regimeskifte og skabe en positiv samarbejdsrelation med Ruslands præsident Putin.

En publikation fra LaRouche Politiske Aktionskomite kaldte raidet mod Cohens kontor for »et direkte forsøg på at afpresse denne præsident [Trump] ind i den krig, han blev valgt til at stoppe«. Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde om denne situation, at vi »sidder på en krudttønde«.

Hør med denne torsdag, hvor Helga fremlægger inside-historien bag det desperate, britiske krigsfremstød og de nødvendige skridt, der må tages for at stoppe det.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 10. april, 2018 – Det betyder ingenting, om så 10 Rod Rosenstein’er i Justitsministeriet »godkendte« de ekstensive FBI-raids mod præsident Trumps personlige advokat; beskyttelsen fra det fjerde og femte tillæg til USA’s Forfatning bliver fjernet fra den amerikanske præsident. Målet er at fjerne præsidenten fra embedet; og det umiddelbare mål, og den umiddelbare fare, er krig med Syrien og Rusland.

USA’s Forfatning bliver tilsidesat med det formål at tage magten over udenrigspolitikken, og selve det Ovale Kontor, fra præsident Trump og føre USA tilbage til Bush’ og Obamas status for »evindelig krig« og »krig for regimeskifte«. De amerikanske vælgere overlades til hjælpeløst at se til – med mindre de handler nu, i stort antal.

Hele optrapningen af dette »juridiske mord« på præsident Trump er den særlige anklager, og korrupte, tidligere FBI-direktør, Robert Muellers værk. Mueller har nu langt, langt overskredet sit mandat til at efterforske valget i 2016, fordi denne »Russiagate-efterforskning« er mislykkedes. Hans mål er nu at anklage præsidenten for hvad som helst for at bringe ham til fald. Mueller overgav ganske enkelt opgaven med at udføre disse raids mod Trumps advokat Michael Cohen til New Yorks distriktsanklager. Denne distriktsanklager, udnævnt af Trump, er allerede blevet tvunget til at redde sig selv – retsforfølgelsen af Cohen er returneret til Mueller, der vil forsøge at tvinge præsidentens personlige anklager gennem 25 år til at vende sig mod Trump.

Hvis Donald Trump var en saudisk prins, ville Robert Mueller nu beskytte ham. Hvis han var administrerende direktør for banken Wells Fargo, ville Mueller nu forhandle en aftale om ikke at retsforfølge igennem med ham. Men Donald Trump er præsident for USA og er imod de britiske geopolitikeres politikker for konstant krig.

Dette nye angreb på præsidenten og Forfatningen fulgte efter Trumps forsøg på, for 10 dage siden, at beordre det Nationale Sikkerhedsråd og Generalstabscheferne til at trække USA’s militær tilbage fra Syrien. Muellers angreb er direkte knyttet til svindelnummeret med angrebet med kemiske våben i Syrien, et svindelnummer udført af den britiskdirigerede, såkaldte organisation for først responderende redningsfolk, de »Hvide Hjelme«, der samarbejder med jihadi-terroristerne i Syrien.

Da præsident Trump, i marts 2017, sagde, at »regimeskifte i Syrien er ikke vores mission«, fandt det iscenesatte angreb med kemiske våben mod børn i byen Khan Sheikoun sted, for at få ham til at skifte mening, og den britiske forsvarsminister overbeviste USA’s forsvarsminister James Mattis om at angribe Syrien med krydsermissiler. Mattis har for nylig indrømmet, at der ikke fandtes nogen beviser. Nu, da præsident Trump siger, »Vi forlader snart Syrien«, iscenesætter de Hvide Hjelme endnu et angreb med kemiske våben, og Storbritannien og Frankrig kræver krig mod Syrien.

Enhver kan se, at dette – fuldstændig grundløst – kunne føre til en ny verdenskrig, som ingen kan overleve.

Denne krigspolitik er det mål, til hvilket den »juridiske lejemorder« Mueller er blevet hvervet, imod præsidenten og Forfatningen. Ledere i Kongressen, såsom senatorerne Chuck Schumer og Mitch McConnell, har reageret ved at forsvare Muellers handlinger. Ethvert medlem at Kongressen, der gør dette, bør smides ud.

LaRouche Political Action Committee mobiliserer for at stoppe Mueller, og stoppe krigsfremstødet, med en presserende national bredside, »NU ER DET NOK! Ring til Kongressen og din senator og sig til dem, at de skal lukke Robert Mueller ned og stoppe briternes krigsfremstød«. Den siger, »I 2013, da Obama truede med krig med Rusland over Syrien, intervenerede det amerikanske folk og løftede taget på Kongressen, og stoppede det. Det er, hvad vi nu har brug for … Stop fremstødet for krig, og luk Robert Mueller ned, NU!«

En af disse amerikanere, der intervenerede højlydt i 2013 for at stoppe krig med Rusland over Syrien, var Donald J. Trump.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump og regeringslederne fra de Baltiske Stater. 3. april, 2018. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian)

10. april, 2018 – En resolution i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, der er sponsoreret af USA, og som ville have skabt en »ny mekanisme for efterforskning, der kan placere skyld«, blev tirsdag vetoet af Rusland, med Bolivia, der opponerede og Kina, der afholdt sig fra at stemme, men verbalt kritiserede resolutionsforslaget. De øvrige 12 medlemmer af FN’s Sikkerhedsråd stemte for resolutionen. Dette fandt sted samtidig med, at et efterforskningshold fra Organisationen for Forbud mod Kemiske Våben, OPCW, var på vej til Douma, Syrien, på invitation fra den syriske regering og med støtte fra Rusland.

Washington Examiner rapporterede, at Kinas FN-ambassadør Wu Haitao understregede, »Der bør ikke være nogen domsfældelse på forhånd af udfaldet«, med skabelsen af en ny Fælles Efterforskningsmekanisme. Men alle de store, vestlige nationer erklærede samstemmende, at Rusland og Syrien havde skylden for det angivelige angreb i Douma, før hændelsen efterforskes. Den britiske FN-ambassadør Karen Pierce sagde, »Ruslands troværdighed som medlem af rådet er nu tvivlsom«.

En resolution, som Rusland foreslog på tirsdagens møde, ville have støttet en efterforskning af OPCW for at afgøre, hvad der skete, men ville ikke have skabt en mekanisme, ved hvilken skyldsspørgsmålet for det angivelige angreb kunne placeres. Denne resolution fik seks stemmer i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, inkl. Rusland og Kina, med 2, der ikke stemte. Den blev vetoet af USA, Storbritannien og Frankrig, og fire andre medlemmer af rådet opponerede mod den.

I det tidligere møde om mandagen havde FN’s særlige udsending til Syrien, Staffan de Mistura, sagt, »FN er ikke i stand til uafhængigt at verificere eller placere ansvar for dette angreb; men vi har bedt alle parter om at udvise den største tilbageholdenhed og undgå alle yderligere optrapninger eller konfrontationer«. Han havde advaret om, at »Nylige udviklinger bærer mere end nogensinde før risici for … brudlinjer i Mellemøsten, der kunne få absolut katastrofale konsekvenser, som man næppe kan forestille sig«.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 9. april, 2018 – Vi befinder os i en situation med rød alarm, i betragtning af mønstret for provokationer fra den britiske, geopolitiske floks side, for at optrappe konfrontationen til et punkt, hvor det udløser generel krig. Mandagens tre timer lange møde i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd reflekterer faren. Det var et frontalt sammenstød mellem UK, USA og Frankrig på den ene side, og hvis talspersoner udspyede løgne, fornærmelser og spydigheder, og Rusland og Kina på den anden. Kina talte for en diplomatisk og politisk løsning. Rusland havde anmodet om mødet, der havde titlen, »Trusler mod international fred og sikkerhed«, og truslerne lå i de vilde anklager fra ambassadørerne Karen Pierce (UK), Nikki Haley (USA) og François DeLattre (Frankrig).

Det umiddelbart foreliggende spørgsmål er den falske påstand om den syriske regerings brug af kemiske våben i Douma, 7. april. Der eksisterer ingen beviser; iscenesatte videoer, udsendt af de berygtede aktører for britisk efterretning De Hvide Hjelme, kører konstant på de store medier. På mødet i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd fordømte Haley Syrien som et »monster« for at udføre dette (fantom)-angreb med kemiske våben; hun fordømte Rusland som et »regime, der ikke kan føle skam«.

Præsident Donald Trump, der er mål for alt dette, talte til sit kabinet her til morgen og sagde, at angrebet i Douma var »grusomt«, og »hvis de [Syrien, Rusland] er uskyldige«, hvorfor vil de så ikke give folk lov til at gå ind og bevise det«. Faktisk sagde både den russiske og den syriske ambassadør til Sikkerhedsrådet: send efterforskningsteams ind omgående. Lige med det samme. Kom i morgen.

Men, som i Skripal-sagen, og som med tidligere, ubegrundede anklager imod den syriske regering om kemisk krigsførelse, så er sandheden irrelevant for dem, der anklager.

Det er pointen. Dette aktuelle svindelnummer er ikke nogen separat begivenhed, men er en begivenhed i et mønster af provokationer i en sindssyg, igangværende strategi for konfrontation, der sætter hele planeten i fare. Er tankegangen den, at det ville være bedre at føre krig nu, snarere end senere, fordi det ville være mindre »kostbart«? Der har for ikke længe siden været en RAND-undersøgelse, som præcist hævdede dette vanvid. Der er galninge, der er tilbøjelige til at tænke på denne måde, især efter den russiske præsident Putins annoncering den 1. marts af nye våbentyper, og som, i stedet for at blive set som begrundelse for nødvendigheden af ægte forhandlinger om international sikkerhed, ses som en slutspilsmanøvre.

Den russiske ambassadør Vasilij Nebenzia talte strengt til sine modparter i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, »Jeg vil stille det retoriske spørgsmål: Forstår I den farlige tærskel, I bringer verden til?«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche opsummerede det mandag: vi sidder på en krudttønde. Hvis Trump går i fælden og går med i dette her, og, f.eks., en russisk soldat i Syrien bliver dræbt på en eller anden måde, befinder verden sig i akut fare for en generel krig.

Tidlig mandag morgen affyrede to israelske kampfly otte missiler mod et mål i Syrien, en flyvebase i Homs, som indtil for nylig blev brugt af russiske styrker. Det syriske luftforsvar skød fem missiler ned, men tre ramte målet og dræbte 14 mennesker, inkl. tre iranere. Ingen russere blev ramt. Israel gav ikke Rusland noget forhåndsvarsel; Israel informerede imidlertid Det Hvide Hus. Hvad sker der nu?

Præsident Trump, der mandag nat skulle mødes med militærrådgivere, gentog om morgenen, at han er 24 til 48 timer fra at beslutte, hvad han vil gøre mht. anklagerne om syrisk giftgas. Han og den franske præsident Emmanuel Macron talte i telefon søndag og sagde, de ville koordinere deres respons, sammenholdt med det, der sker i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd mandag, og udstede deres handleplaner dagen efter, eller kort tid derefter.

Samtidig med, at alt dette finder sted, rykkede FBI mandag ud med endnu et træk mod Trump, på vegne af den britiske Trumpgate-operation, med et raid om morgenen mod Michael Cohens kontor i New York City; Michael Cohen, der er mangeårig personlig advokat for præsident Trump.

I USA kommer der nu nogle responser, inkl. et åbent brev i dag til forsvarsminister James Mattis fra pensionerede oberst i hæren, Pat Lang, der kræver en kompetent efterforskning af, hvad det var, der skete i Douma, med det formål, ikke at blive offer for »et omhyggelig konstrueret propaganda-svindelnummer«. Blandt kongresmedlemmer advarede Thomas Massie (R-KY) om, at kun Kongressen har retten til at beslutte en militæraktion, såsom i Syrien. Han angreb hårdt ideen om »evindelig krig«.

Vær i højeste alarmberedskab; rød alarm. Dette er meget alvorligt. Kontakt alle med sandheden.

Se den nye Erklæring fra LaRouchePAC: »Nu er det Nok!«  

9. april, 2018 – Vi, De forenede Stater, står over for at lancere et angreb mod Syrien, med de russiske styrker, der er til stede dér, baseret på perfide, britiske løgne; baseret på det, der kunne vise sig at være historiens endegyldige og sorteste efterretningssvindel, den, der gjorde det af med den menneskelige race. Samtidig blev præsident Trumps personlige advokats kontor i dag, 9. april, 2018, udsat for et raid, baseret på en henvisning fra den særlige anklager Robert Mueller. Spørgsmålet skulle angiveligt dreje sig om beskyldninger i forbindelse med, at præsidenten skulle have haft en årelang affære med den løgnagtige og afskyelige pornostjerne, Stormy Daniels. Dette anses af Mueller og vores korrupte FBI for at være så alvorligt, at det Sjette Tillæg til USA’s Forfatning også blot kan kastes til side. Disse to uhyrlige begivenheder er fuldstændig relateret. Med mindre I nu rejser jer sammen med os for at stoppe det, er dette land i alvorlig, alvorlig fare. Det kategoriske forsøg på at afpresse denne præsident ind i den krig, han blev valgt til at stoppe, er nu blevet optrappet ud over enhver forstand.

I 2016 stemte millioner af amerikanere for Donald Trump, fordi han sagde, han ville afslutte unyttige, evindelige krige på vegne af et intellektuelt dødt og finansielt bankerot, angloamerikansk system, dette imperium, der går tilbage til tiden umiddelbart efter Anden Verdenskrig. Dette system, centreret omkring Wall Street og City of London, har snydt of bedraget sig til verdens værdier og ødelagt den engang storslåede amerikanske nationaløkonomi, en kendsgerning, der blev fuldstændig indlysende for tænkende mennesker, da systemet krakkede i 2008. Donald Trump søgte bedre relationer med Kina, der nu vokser frem som verdens mægtigste økonomi, samt med Putins Rusland. Trump faste beslutning om at etablere anstændige relationer med Rusland og Kina, og udelukkende kun denne faste beslutning, igangsatte det djævelske kup mod præsidenten, under anførelse af briterne og de mange nyttige idioter blandt vores elite, der er i trældom for briterne.

Dette kup, hvis manifestationer var det falske »beskidte dossier« om Donald Trump, forfattet af MI6’s Christopher Steele og betalt af Hillary Clinton, sang på sidste vers, da Storbritannien indledte sin nuværende offensiv. Senatorerne Charles Grassley og Lindsay Graham havde henvist Christopher Steele til USA’s Justitsministerium, til retsforfølgelse for kriminelle handlinger, og patrioter i Kongressen forfulgte en reel bestræbelse på at identificere og retsforfølge dem, der er ansvarlige for kuppet mod vores præsident. Så, den 4. marts, 2018, blev en russisk spion, der spionerede for Storbritannien, Sergei Skripal, samt hans datter, angiveligt forgiftet i Salisbury, England. Skripal færdes i de samme britiske spionkredse, som Christopher Steele er knyttet til. Premierminister Theresa May proklamerede omgående for hele verden, at Rusland stod bag angrebet, men har aldrig nogensinde fremlagt noget som helst bevis for nogen af sine krigsgale erklæringer. Præsident Trump blev af sine forræderiske rådgivere, inklusive H.R. McMaster, der i hele sin militære karriere var en fange af Storbritanniens Internationale Institut for Strategiske Affærer, hastigt puffet til at støtte Storbritanniens totalt ubegrundede påstande. Budskabet til præsidenten fra vore forrædere er klart: gå med i vores march mod krig og måske; måske, vil vi slække på kuppet.

Sluttelig nægtede Storbritanniens egne eksperter i kemiske våben i Porton Down at sige, at det kemiske stof, der blev brugt mod Skripal og hans datter, var fremstillet i Rusland, på trods af Theresa Mays og hendes vanvittige udenrigsminister Boris Johnsons påstande, uden beviser. Åbenlys tvivl var allerede blevet udtalt af flere europæiske lande, som afholdt sig fra at gå med i dette Storbritanniens opråb til krig. Blandt de kendsgerninger, der står til overvejelse: Den dødbringende nervegift, som Theresa May beskriver, ville omgående have dræbt Skripal og hans datter. Alligevel er de begge i live og ikke længere i kritisk tilstand. Redegørelser for, hvor giften blev givet, har varieret; den seneste lyder, at det blev smurt ud på hoveddøren til Skripals hjem. Alligevel lykkedes det på en eller anden måde for Skripal at forlade huset et par timer og spadsere rundt i landsbyen, spise og drikke på restauranter, indtil han pludselig blev syg. Formlen for den angiveligt anvendte gift var blevet offentliggjort vidt og bredt af dens russiske opfinder, en dissident, der nu bor i USA. Med dette svindelnummer, der nu er i færd med at falde fra hinanden, får vi at vide, at Skripal og hans datter, samt alle tilgængelige beviser, er i færd med at ’blive forsvundet’. Ifølge britisk presse vil Skripal og hans datter komme ind i et vidnebeskyttelsesprogram fra CIA. Deres hus, og alle påståede lokaliteter, der er involveret i dette svindelnummer, bliver nu bulldozet ned og ødelagt. Ingen mulighed for en reel efterforskning af dette svindelnummer må lades åben.

På trods af, at Donald Trump udtalte støtte til Theresa May, søgte han stadig at honorere sit løfte til det amerikanske folk. Han lykønskede Putin med valgsejren og inviterede ham til et snarligt møde i Det Hvide Hus til forhandlinger og nævnte det eskalerende og farlige våbenkapløb mellem USA og Rusland. Briterne og deres amerikanske venner gik, som respons hertil, amok. Man måtte lade en hammer falde på denne præsident, der nu oven i købet talte om at trække amerikanske styrker ud af Syrien og genopbygge USA.

Ind på scenen kommer så endnu et af briterne opfundet forgiftnings-svindelnummer, nu i Syrien, hvor russere, iranere og syrere ikke alene assisterede i besejringen af Isis, men nu var i færd med at feje de sidste tilbageværende jihadister bort, såsom Jaish al-Islam, en omdøbt, salafistisk jihadistisk gruppering, der kontrolleres af saudierne, samt al-Nusra-front, eller al-Qaeda. De endegyldige militære operationer, som konsoliderede sejren, er i løbet af de seneste dage blev afsluttet i Gouta, en forstad til Damaskus. Og efter således at have opnået sejr, lancerede Assad – sådan lyder den narrativ, som vore krigsmagere til medier vil have os til at tro på – et angreb med kemiske våben for at fejre denne sejr, vel vidende, at han således ville udløse helvede over sig selv fra Vesten.

Fotos af døende børn, som præsident Trump reagerede så følelsesmæssigt på for et år siden, da han lancerede missilangreb mod Syrien, er atter blevet præsenteret for ham. Der er al mulig grund til at tro, de er falske. Rusland og Syrien havde netop advaret om et sådant angreb under falsk flag, og som ville involvere kloringas, i over en måned, hvor de kom nærmere til den endelige sejr i Gouta. Den eneste information, der hævder, at et sådant angreb fandt sted, kommer fra De Hvide Hjelme, en nødhjælpsorganisation grundlagt af briterne, og som er involveret i at være involveret militært med al-Qaeda og er dybt involveret i tidligere svindelnumre omkring Assads angivelige anvendelse af kemiske våben. Sy Hersh dokumenterede denne historie fuldt og helt i London Review of Books, med hensyn til de falske nyheder om, at Assad brugte saringas i august, 2013. https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

MIT’s Ted Postal og andre har vist, at det angivelige angreb med saringas, som præsident Trump responderede på med militære midler for et år siden, ligeledes var et britisk svindelnummer. Se Robert Parry, https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/07/a-new-hole-in-syria-sarin-certainty/

og James Carden, https://www.thenation.com/article/the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria-is-there-a-place-for-skepticism/.

De Hvide Hjelme finansieres i fællesskab af britiske og amerikanske efterretningselementer, der er dedikeret til regimeskifte i Syrien. De har modtaget millioner og atter millioner af dollar til dette formål. De udgør afgørende komponenter i den interventionistiske udenrigspolitik for regimeskifte, som Donald Trump blev valgt til at udrydde.

I 2013, da Obama truede med krig mod Rusland over Syrien, intervenerede det amerikanske folk, løftede taget på Kongressen og stoppede det. Det er, hvad vi nu igen har brug for. Rusland ser, at der fra briterne og deres naive tåber i USA kommer en ubønhørlig offensiv for informationskrig. De ser dette, korrekt, som de første skridt mod krig. Vi må vende dette, med omgående start nu. Ring til din repræsentant i Kongressen eller din senator og sig til dem, at de skal stoppe dette fremstød for krig og lukke Robert Mueller ned, nu. Omstillingsbordet på Capitol Hill har nummer 202-224-3121.

Foto: Den amerikanske præsident Donald J. Trump, vicepræsident Michael R. Pence og deres hustruer byder tidligere præsident Barack Obama farvel under afskedsceremonien efter den 58. præsidentielle indsættelse i Washington, D.C., 20. jan., 2017.  (DoD photo)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 8. april, 2018 – Londonmedierne og de britiskskabte »Hvide Hjelme« har i løbet af de seneste 24 timer lanceret et nyt, groft svindelnummer, et »angreb med kemiske våben mod et hospital i Douma«, Syrien, som krigspropaganda rettet mod den amerikanske præsident Donald Trump. Selv om militære efterretningseksperter gennemskuede svindelen, og russiske regeringsfolk havde forudsagt det nøjagtigt, var dagens overskrift i Sunday Telegraph typisk for den britiske fest, »Donald Trump fordømmer Vladimir Putin, efter syriske kemiske angreb dræber dusinvis«. Samtidig indrømmede Reuters og BBC, som var kilden til den opflammende historie, at de ikke havde nogen beviser på, at et kemisk angreb havde fundet sted, bortset fra rapporter og (særdeles tvivlsomme) videoer, der var sendt af den jihadisktiske gruppe, Jaish al-Islam, og de pro-terroristiske »Hvide Hjelme«.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde her til morgen, at dette nye svindelnummer, der følger umiddelbart efter den svigtende, britiske krigspropaganda over sagen med Skripal-forgiftningen, er ekstremt farlig for verden – men kan slås tilbage.

Hun bemærkede ligeledes, at denne propaganda ligger nøjagtig på linje med den åbenlyse opstand, der nu anstiftes mod præsident Trumps offentlige ordre til en snarlig afslutning af amerikanske militæroperationer i Syrien, som det står at læse i Washington Posts lederartikel for søndag, forsiden.

»Storbritannien gennemfører ikke den ene førkrigs-propagandaoperation [Skripal forgiftningsanklagerne], for dernæst at stoppe, når dette svigter og ikke frembringer fuld og hel konfrontation«, sagde Zepp-LaRouche. »Nej, det optrapper den selv samme mobilisering for førkrigs-propaganda. Hvis dette ikke stoppes omgående, kan det få meget alvorlige konsekvenser, inklusive en sluttelig verdenskrig.«

Hun påpegede advarslen fra det Russiske Udenrigsministerium: »Militær intervention [dvs., et nyt missilangreb fra NATO] i Syrien under falske og fabrikerede påskud, hvor russiske militærfolk er stationeret efter anmodning fra den legitime regering, er absolut uacceptabelt og kan udløse meget alvorlige konsekvenser« – og hun påpegede ligeledes udtalelsen fra gen. Evgeny Buzhinsky (pensioneret), nu i Russisk Center for Politiske Studier (PIR-center), der på BBC anklagede Storbritannien for at lyve, som kunne føre til »virkelig krig – den sidste krig i menneskehedens historie«.

Hun pegede også på den amerikanske veteran fra amerikansk forsvarsefterretning, oberst Pat Lang (pensioneret), der kaldte disse kemiske angreb for svindelagtige »nyheder fra rebellernes propagandaapparat, af hvilket meget støttes finansielt af den britiske regerings udenrigsministerium og leveres via MI6. Hvad i alverden motiverer UK til denne djævelskhed?«

Helga Zepp-LaRouche har netop, den 7. april, talt for en Schiller Institut-konference og for udenlandsk presse i New York, hvor hun direkte placerede truslen om et nyt krak i det Londoncentrerede finanssystem som baggrunden for Londons eskalerende krigspropaganda. »Hvorfor«, spurgte hun, »er der denne dæmonisering af præsident Putin, som kommer fra samme hold som også dæmoniserer præsident Trump og præsident Xi Jinping? Dette er den samme form for tåbelighed, der førte til Anden Verdenskrig, og som meget let kunne udløse en Tredje Verdenskrig … Det, der ligger bag, er … desperation, fordi finansmagterne i City of London og hos deres kollaboratører på Wall Street klart ser, at deres system er ved at gå ned …«

»Forestil jer«, sagde hun, »hvis vi kunne mobilisere det amerikanske folk til at udøve pres på præsident Trump … og han accepterede Xi Jinpings tilbud om at samarbejde med den Nye Silkevej … og de europæiske lande ligeledes sluttelig ville indse – de fleste af dem gør det allerede – men selv de tilbageværende lande ville indse, at samarbejde med Rusland, med Kina og de andre nationer, der allerede er gået med i Bælte & Vej Initiativet – at dette ville være langt mere i deres interesse end den aktuelle kurs med britisk konfrontation med Rusland og med Kina.«

Foto:  De syriske ‘Hvide Hjelme’ under arbejdet i Arbin City. 6. feb., 2018. (Qasioun News Agency / Screen Grab)

8. april, 2018 – De store amerikanske medier og Londonmedierne er her søndag morgen fulde af den hidtil mest utrolige påstand om et massivt kemisk angreb i Syrien, som påskud for britiske, franske og/eller amerikanske angreb på Syrien, som det er Theresa Mays britiske regerings ønske, og som således truer med verdenskrig.

Da den manipulerede video med ofre og overlevende fra dette falske angreb først vistes på BBC lørdag aften, kunne man undre på, om Saddam Hussein var stået op af graven med sine masseødelæggelsesvåben, eller endda undre på, om »polske styrker har overskredet den tyske grænse« igen. Militære efterretningseksperter, ikke kun i Rusland og Syrien, men også i USA, proklamerede omgående, at det »kemiske angreb« var et svindelnummer. Ruslands Forsvarsministerium havde, så langt tilbage som 17. marts, mindst, nøjagtigt forudsagt, at en sådan operation under falsk flag ville finde sted.

Den første »rapport« om denne angivelige grusomhed – og skam ikke kun mod byen Douma, men på et hospital, selvfølgelig – kom fra den jihadistiske gruppe Jaish al-Islam, som bekæmper den Syriske Arabiske Hærs styrker og har haft kontrol over det relevante område (og hospitalet) i nogen tid. Rapporten blev udbredt af den britiskkørte, pro-terroristiske redningsorganisation »Hvide Hjelme«, der nu er blevet omdøbt til Syrisk Civilforsvar, og det besynderligt navngivne Syrisk-Amerikanske Lægeselskab i Washington, D.C. Den påstod, at et konstant stigende antal mennesker var blevet dræbt og 500 såret af et bombeangreb med kemiske våben.

Én video på BBC viste »redningsmandskab«, de fleste uden masker, der bevægede sig rundt i en korridor og videregav børn til hinanden, spulede andre med vand, osv. En anden video viste folk i alle aldre i en bunke, nogle med fråde om munden. Reuters og det Londonbaserede Syriske Observatorium tog historien op samtidig med, at de rapporterede, at de ikke kunne bekræfte noget kemisk angreb.

Rusland, som er det egentlige mål for denne teaterforestilling, havde i ugevis advaret om, at desperate jihadistiske grupper var i besiddelse af kemiske stoffer, både i et østlige Ghouta og i det nordlige Syrien, og var i færd med at planlægge hændelser med kemiske våben under falsk flag, med det formål at fremtvinge NATO-angreb mod Syrien, og mod russiske militære lokaliteter.

Præsident Donald Trump er det næste mål for briterne pga. sit ønske om at samarbejde mod terrorisme med Vladimir Putins Rusland. Søndag morgen tweetede Trump: »Mange døde, inkl. kvinder og børn, i sanseløst KEMISK angreb i Syrien. Området for grusomhederne er lukket ned og omringet af den Syriske Hær, hvilket gør det fuldstændig utilgængeligt for omverden. Præsident Putin, Rusland og Iran er ansvarlige for at støtte Dyret Assad. Stor pris at betale. Åbn omgående området op for lægehjælp og bekræftelse. Endnu en humanitær katastrofe uden nogen som helst grund. SYGT! Donald J. Trump«.

Mays britiske regering er den virkeligt mest partiske over for rapporten. Dens krav om total konfrontation med Rusland fik langt mindre end total støtte fra europæiske allierede og præsident Trump, da den anklagede Rusland for mordforsøg via nervegas på britisk jord. Storbritanniens eget laboratorium for kemiske forsvarsvåben (!) bakkede ikke op om fr. Mayhem (‘fr. Kaos’) og udenrigsminister Boris Johnson.

Det Russiske Forsvarsministerium responderede til det britiske Festspil for Mageløse Ting på følgende vis: »Svindelnumre med angreb, hvor den syriske regering angiveligt skulle anvende kloringas eller andre giftige substanser, fortsætter med at komme frem. Endnu et sådant svindelnummer, der angiveligt skulle have fundet sted, er det påståede kemiske angreb i Douma i går. Samtidig har man refereret til de berygtede NGO’er, de ’Hvide Hjelme’, der gentagne gange er taget i at handle sammen med terrorister, såvel som også andre såkaldte humanitære organisationer, baseret i Det forenede Kongerige og USA«, iflg. Sputnik i dag. Forsvarsministeriet understregede, at det gentagne gange havde advaret om mulige provokationer, der ville omfatte brugen af kemiske våben i Syrien. Disse provokationers hovedformål er at anklage de syriske regeringsstyrker for at bruge kemiske våben og retfærdiggøre en mulig militær intervention i Syrien fra udlandet, iflg. ministeriets erklæring, skrev Sputnik her til morgen under overskriften, »Moskva advarer mod udenlandsk angreb i syriske områder, hvor russiske tropper befinder sig«.

Foto: Røgskyer stiger op over Douma efter det angivelige luftangreb med kemisk gift fra den Syriske Arabiske Hær 7. april.

Tom Gillesberg: Velkommen til endnu et dramatisk kapitel i kampen om verden; kampen om, hvem der skal regere planeten Jorden og dermed også kan få mulighed for at få en betydende indflydelse på det univers, vi befinder os i, på den lange bane. Det er bare så ufattelig spændende, hvad der foregår netop nu, for på den ene side har vi jo de her absurde tosserier, den seneste af hvilke har været denne her kampagne, man har kørt de seneste par uger med den såkaldte Skripal-sag, hvor ud af det blå pludselig fra London tonede Theresa May frem på Tv-skærmene og sagde, ’Der har været et angreb med biologiske våben her på efterretningsagenter, og vi er sikre på, at det kun kan være Rusland, der har gjort det, og derfor kræver vi af resten af verden, at de nu går sammen med os om at straffe Rusland for denne uhørte, ubehagelig dåd, som de har begået’. Det har jo bl.a. ført til, at USA udviste 60 diplomater, Danmark udviste 2 osv., og vi ligesom er i et kraftigt momentum frem til, at nu skal vi have en konfrontation med Rusland.

Igen, det kommer ikke ud af det blå; det kommer efter man har haft et NATO, som har stået på og drevet på og sagt, nu skal vi mobilisere mod den russiske fare; vi skal have en brigade ovre i Baltikum for at kunne beskytte de baltiske lande mod den store russiske bjørn. Igen og igen har Stoltenberg fra NATO’s talerstol sagt, og vi ved jo godt, at vi er under angreb, og frem for alt cyberangreb; men I skal vide derude, frem for alt jer i Rusland, at vi betragter et cyberangreb på et af vore lande som et angreb, der kan udløse Artikel 5 og derfor være et angreb på hele NATO, så hele NATO må svare igen med alt, hvad de har. Og dermed har man i princippet sagt, at, hvis der er et såkaldt cyberangreb på et NATO-land, så kan det være, at vi svarer igen med atomvåben over for Rusland. Det er ligesom det, man har sagt, og det er vildt, og det er farligt! Og det er helt vanvittigt.

Men, når det så er sagt, så er det også et vanvid, der står mere og mere afsløret for hver dag, der går. Dette sidste vanvid kommer jo efter, at vi nu i over et år har haft en ny amerikansk præsident, Donald Trump, som har haft svært ved at regere, fordi der har været skandale på skandale, der har kørt i medierne mod ham; ’Trump-gate’, ’Russia-gate’ osv., med det fokus at få Trump afsat, så man kunne fortsætte den politik for konfrontation og krig, man havde før, og som Hillary havde svoret, at hun ville fortsætte. Men alle disse skandaler har det til fælles, at deres udspring er London. …

Hør hele Toms analyse:

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/britisk-pastand-imod-rusland-er-ved-at-smuldre-lnu-kan-vi-besejre-den-britiske-imperium

Jason Ross: Ingen forstår briterne bedre end Lyndon LaRouche. Alt imens Storbritannien ikke længere hersker over havene eller verden med skibe, fly og imperiehære, så inficerer deres måde at tænke på kulturer i hele verden og former den måde, hvorpå folk analyserer og opfatter virkeligheden. Storbritannien udøver også magtfuld kontrol over verdens finanssystem gennem City of London og deres indflydelse over Wall Street. De har haft utrolig succes med at bondefange vore eliter til at være overbevist om, at amerikansk råstyrke med britisk hjerne bør kontrollere verden.

Men, hvor mange flere amerikanske liv skal ofres, og hvor mange flere ofre for unødvendige, geopolitiske krige skal dø og lide i hele verden på vegne af britiske, geopolitiske strategier, før vi udrydder dette barbariske system?

Lad os lytte til LaRouche:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 27. marts, 2018 – For enhver, der ikke er en sinke, er den modbydelige natur af premierminister Theresa Mays og kohorters Skripal-forgiftnings- og anti-Ruslandsmobilisering en åbenlys »Great Game«-manøvre for at forhindre den potentielle realisering af en amerikansk-russisk hældning over mod »Nye Silkevejsrelationer«, for fred og for udvikling. Hele Mays anti-russiske, internationale mobilisering er blot en ny fase af det igangværende Trump-gate kupforsøg, med det formål at bringe det amerikanske præsidentskab til fald. Briterne er ligeledes i centrum for gennemførelsen af denne fase: MI6, Christopher Steele, Richard Dearlove, Sir Andrew Wood, Robert Mueller og andre håndlangere.

Der er ingen legale belæg for Theresa Mays kampagne for at anklage Rusland for forgiftningen i Salisbury den 4. marts – ingen beviser, ingen analyse, ingen juridiske standarder. May selv var politisk på vej ned og ud, inden for ganske få dage, indtil denne beskidte operation blev lanceret; og nu forventes verden at hylde hende som en »anti-Ruslands-heltinde«.

»Det er modbydeligt; det er usikkert«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag og bemærkede, at dette tydeligvis er briterne, der anstifter konfrontation. »Vi kan få det til at give bagslag«, sagde hun. Hold fast i sandheden og brug ethvert middel til at afsløre den onde hensigt og dens gerningsmænd.

Det er rent strategisk meget vigtigt, at den russiske viceudenrigsminister Sergei Ryabkov i dag gentog, at den forpligtelse stadig er aktiv, som fornylig blev indgået af den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin og præsident Donald Trump, til en dialog om stabilitet og sikkerhed. Det forholder sig således, på trods af gårsdagens amerikanske, pro-britiske ordre til udvisning af 60 russiske diplomater og lukning af det russiske konsulat i Seattle. Ryabkov sagde i dag, rapportret i Sputnik, »Vi har brug for denne dialog, præsidenterne for vore lande talte om det i en telefonsamtale for et par dage siden. Vi opgiver ikke denne dialog, vi vil bevare den.« Herudover fordømte Ryabkov USA’s udvisninger.

I løbet af de seneste 24 timer har ledere i andre lande udtalt sig imod denne briternes ’udsmidning af bumser’. Den østrigske kansler Sebastian Kurz sagde i dag, at hans nation ikke ville udvise russiske diplomater. Han sagde, at Østrig traditionelt er et neutralt land; det er en bro mellem Øst og Vest. Diplomater er velkomne og nødvendige i Østrig.

Der høres også udtalelser imod det britiske/EU-fremstød for konfrontation med Rusland internt i selv Tyskland, og ligeledes i Italien. Det rapporteres, at på EU-topmødet for statsoverhoveder i Bruxelles den 22.-23. marts, fremlagde May og den tyske kansler Angela Merkel krav om nye, skrappe sanktioner mod Rusland, men at dette blev blokeret som værende forkert af den italienske premierminister Paolo Gentiloni. Dernæst rejste han hjem, og på trods af, at han er afgående leder, udviste han to russiske diplomater og demonstrerede således det intense pres, der lægges på de europæiske ledere af briterne og deres kohorter internt i USA. Denne handling blev prompte fordømt af andre i Italien som værende forkert og som en »præmatur« dom.

Torsdag vil Trump besøge det nordøstlige Ohio for at tale om infrastruktur. Dette er i hjertet af Rustbæltet, som ville blive transformeret til et kraftcenter under betingelser, der afgøres af USA’s samarbejde med USA og Rusland og Kina under Bælte & Vej Initiativet, og med LaRouches Fire Love.

Foto: Premierminister Theresa May mødtes med præsident Trump på Davos Økonomiske Verdensforum, 25. jan., 2018.

Leder fra LaRouchePAC, 26. marts, 2018 – Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har hen over de seneste 35 år spillet en hovedrolle i udformningen af relationer mellem nationer til det bedre: gennem LaRouches idé til præsident Reagans Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ (SDI) fra 1983, og gennem »LaRouche-doktrinen« for stormagtsrelationer, som ledsagede denne idé; og gennem deres kampagne fra 1989 for den »Eurasiske Landbro«, som sluttelig bidrog til Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, der nu udvikler mange nationer i hele verden. Hele vejen igennem var fjenderne af disse tiltag hen mod et nyt paradigme for udvikling, City of Londons finansimperium og britisk geopolitik.[1]

Denne tidligere, hyppigt skjulte virkelighed er pludselig, på dramatisk vis, blevet åbenlys. Den britiske premierminister Theresa May og udenrigsminister Boris »bondske« Johnson har tyranniseret USA og 14 europæiske nationer ind i en eskalerende konfrontation med Rusland, der tilsigter at ødelægge stormagtssamarbejde for fremskridt gennem projekterne i Bælte & Vej, og som meget hurtigt kan føre til verdenskrig.

I går understregede Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at London har gjort dette som en reaktion på miskrediteringen af det af britisk efterretning styrede Russiagate-kupforsøg mod præsident Donald Trump. Hun sprængte den udokumenterede sag om »russisk nervegift« som værende intet andet end Russiagate fortsat, genopfundet og genoplivet. Denne sags foreløbige succes, efter at Russiagate mod Trump var slået fejl, er ekstremt farlig, sagde hun. Både Kina og Rusland vil reagere på denne ændrede, transatlantiske dagsorden.

Kina har, gennem sin præsident Xi Jinping og sine partiorganer som Global Times, indset, at Kinas fredelige opkomst, konfronteret med et sandt stormløb af britisk geopolitisk og økonomisk krigsførelse, måske ikke vil få lov at blive let eller fredelig.

Men Kina har udløst en udviklingsdynamik og hæver produktivitet og levestandarder i mange nationer, såvel som i sin egen, og bruger et nyt koncept, som Lyndon LaRouche for 30 år siden kaldte »Verdenslandbro-udviklingen«. Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ tiltrækker nu også nationer fra selv Vesteuropa. Dets lederskab vil ikke lade sig standse af toldkrig eller investeringsembargo; i stedet anvender det dette nye paradigme for at stoppe dem.

Som Helga LaRouche udtrykte det, så er Kina omsider i færd med at feje Londons århundredelange Malthus-politik og nulsums-geopolitik til side; og Kina erstatter det med et Nyt Paradigme for gensidig fordel for nationer, for udryddelse af fattigdom, videnskabeligt fremskridt og for »et fællesskab for en fælles skæbne«. Lyndon LaRouche har i 50 år insisteret på nødvendigheden af denne udskiftning. Hans LaRouche-bevægelse har fremlagt ammunitionen til overvindelse af angrebene mod præsident Trump, som kommer fra britisk efterretning, og for de tiltag for en økonomisk politik, der kan virkeliggøre Amerikas fremtid på den »Nye Silkevej«.

[1] Se Harley Schlangers præsentation af geopolitikken historie, fra serien, ’Hvad er det Nye Paradigme’ (video; dansk pdf.)

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump i samtale med britiske PM Theresa May under et bilateralt møde i det ovale kontor, 27. januar, 2017. Premierminister May var det første statsoverhoved, der aflagde statsbesøg i Det Hvide Hus. (Official White House Photo)

Vært Matthew Ogden: Det er i dag den 23. marts, 2018, en meget gunstig dato: Det er nemlig 35 års dagen for en meget vigtig dato, som var 23. marts, 1983, hvor præsident Ronald Reagan annoncerede vedtagelsen af det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ  (SDI; Strategic Defense Initiative). I dag er det et meget passende tidspunkt for at bedømme den stadigt mere presserene nødvendige vedtagelse af en ny sikkerhedsarkitektur for planeten, og den samtidige nye økonomiske arkitektur, som må ledsage den.

Vi befinder os i et meget dramatisk øjeblik i verdenshistorien, og jeg mener, at, hvis vi træder et skridt tilbage og ser på det store billede, så står det klart, at verdensordenen, som vi har kendt den i de seneste 70 år, er i færd med at undergå en total transformation. Og udfaldet af de strategiske kampe, der raser netop nu, både på den nationale scene her i USA, men især på den globale scene; udfaldet af disse strategiske kampe vil afgøre menneskehedes historie i mange generationer fremover.

Med de begivenheder, der har fundet sted i løbet af de seneste tre uger, siden den russiske præsident Vladimir Putin den 1. marts annoncerede, at Rusland havde udviklet en helt ny generation af strategiske våben, baseret på avancerede fysiske [principper], og som er i stand til at gennemtrænge alle kendte forsvarssystemer, har vi set, hvor dramatisk nødvendigt det er, med det presserende i en sådan ny sikkerhedsarkitektur. Ikke én, der bygger på Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD; garanteret gensidig ødelæggelse), men derimod én, der bygger på win-win-overlevelse og økonomisk fremskridt for alle nationer på denne planet; nødvendigheden heraf bliver i stigende grad mere presserende. Jeg vil gerne fremhæve, hvad præsident Putin selv sagde i denne tale 1. marts til den føderale forsamling:

Han sagde:

» … lad os sætte os ved forhandlingsbordet og sammen udtænke et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation. … Dette er et vendepunkt for hele verden og for dem, der er villige til, og i stand til, at forandre sig; de, der handler og går fremad, vil tage føringen.«

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56957

Men, snarere end klart og nøgternt at vurdere denne ændrede, strategiske virkelighed, med denne game-changing tale af Ruslands præsident, og besvare dette tilbud for at forhandle, med hans ord, »et nyt og relevant system for international sikkerhed og bæredygtig udvikling for menneskelig civilisation«, for endelig at bringe denne nihilistiske dødsspiral med stadigt mere dødbringende masseudslettelsesvåben til en afslutning; snarere end at gøre dette, har briterne og deres såkaldte »partnere« i Europa forsøgt at oppiske en generel støtte til en krigskonfrontation mod Rusland ved anvendelse af det, Labour-partiets leder, Jeremy Corbyn, meget korrekt karakteriserede som det, han kaldte »fejlbehæftet efterretning« og »uvederhæftige dossiers« af den type, som blev brugt til at retfærdiggøre invasionen af Irak. Og som Jeremy Corbyn advarede om, så bør vi ikke »affinde os med en ny Kold Krig … og en intolerance over for dissens som under McCarthy-perioden«.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i går understregede i sin internationale webcast, så har briterne og Theresa May, i deres forsøg på at gennemtvinge en sådan krigsprovokation, overspillet deres hånd. Deres metoder og deres mål står nu afsløret for hele verden at se. På trods af Theresa Mays bestræbelser på at presse præsident Trump over i et hjørne, hvor han ikke ville vove at forsøge at tage skridt, der ville gøre det muligt for ham at honorere sin forpligtelse til at forbedre relationerne med Rusland; snarere end at lade sig blive bakket ind i et hjørne, som Helga Zepp-LaRouche sagde, så udmanøvrerede præsident Trump imidlertid hele operationen ved at tage telefonen og ringe til præsident Putin og lykønske ham med genvalget og hans næste periode som Ruslands præsident, og fortsatte med en meget sober diskussion mellem de to statsoverhoveder om nogle af de meget vigtige, fælles bestræbelser og fælles udfordringer, som disse to nationer, USA og Rusland, sammen konfronteres med; og som, hvis vi fik lov at gøre det, vi kunne arbejde sammen om at løse, såsom krisen i Syrien; såsom muligheden for et totalt gennembrud for fred på Koreahalvøen; såsom den igangværende situation i Ukraine; og meget signifikant, såsom at forhindre et nyt våbenkapløb.

Umiddelbart efter denne telefonsamtale, blev pressen, som I kan tænke jer, hysterisk, og Det Hvide Hus’ pressesekretær Sarah Sanders holdt en pressekonference i briefing-værelset i Det Hvide Hus, hvor hun ikke mindre end et halvt dusin gange understregede den absolutte betydning af at opretholde en dialog mellem USA og Rusland på lederskabsniveau, omkring fælles interesser og fælles udfordringer.

Jeg vil afspille nogle eksempler på nogle at disse gentagne udtalelser fra Sarah Sanders på denne pressebriefing i Det Hvide Hus.

Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet:

SARAH SANDERS:  We want to continue to have a dialogue with
Russia, and continue to talk about some of the shared interests
we have, whether it’s North Korea, Iran, and particularly as the
President noted today, slowing the tensions when it comes to an
arms race, something that is clearly important to both
leaders….
We want to continue to have dialogue so that we can work on
some of the issues that concern both countries, and we’re going
to continue to do that, while also continuing to be tough on a
number of things….
The President once again has maintained that it’s important
for us to have a dialogue with Russia so that we can focus on
some areas of shared interests…
These are conversations that sometimes take place, and
certainly the President finds there to be an importance in having
that dialogue with Russia so that we can talk about some of the
big problems that face the world….
We disagree with the fact that we shouldn’t have
conversations with Russia.  There are important topics that we
should be able to discuss, and that is why the President’s going
to continue to have that dialogue.
Again the focus was to talk about areas of shared interests.
We know that we need to continue a dialogue.  It’s important for
a lot of the safety and security of people across the globe.  We
would like to be able to work with them on things like North
Korea, on Iran, and also both countries shared interest in
lowering the tensions when it comes to an arms race, recognizing
that that’s not the best thing for either country, and so we want
to be able to have those conversations and that was the point of
today’s call…. [end video]

OGDEN:  So, that’s a very clear message, obviously.  Now, on
the same day, President Trump himself reiterated exactly the same
points in a couple of tweets that he posted, and I would like to
just read you those tweets.  He said:
“I called President Putin of Russia to congratulate him on
his election victory (in past, Obama called him also).  The Fake
News Media is crazed because they wanted me to excoriate him.
They are wrong!  Getting along with Russia (and others) is a good
thing, not a bad thing.”
“They can help solve problems with North Korea, Syria,
Ukraine, ISIS, Iran, and even the coming Arms Race.  Bush tried
to get along, but didn’t have the ‘smarts.’  Obama and Clinton
tried, but didn’t have the energy or chemistry (remember RESET).
PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH!” he concludes.
Now of course that final phrase is a quotation directly from
President Ronald Reagan.   And this direct reference is a very
timely one, and perhaps is not merely a coincidental one:  As I
said, today, March 23rd, is the 35th anniversary of one of the
groundbreaking moments in modern history, and it’s one which
completely reshaped the global, strategic geometry at that time,
and which remains immediately relevant all the way up to the
present day.
That moment, March 23rd, 1983 was representative of a
complete shock, a shock wave which was felt around the world.
This was the surprise announcement by President Ronald Reagan at
the conclusion of a live, national television broadcast which was
an address to the nation, nominally on national security.  But
what President Reagan did at the conclusion of that broadcast, to
the surprise of almost all of his leading advisors in the White
House even, was to announce what came to be known as the
Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI, what President Reagan
called a “vision of the future, which offers hope.”
In the speech, what President Reagan did was that he
committed the United States to a crash program, a crash
scientific program for the development of advanced technologies
which would be based on new physical principles to
(quote/unquote) “free the world from the threat of nuclear war.”
And so, in so doing, President Reagan completely overthrew the
ideology of retaliatory nuclear deterrence through the threat of
instantaneous, total nuclear response in the event of the
detection of a nuclear attack against the territory of the United
States.  This was what was so-called Mutually Assured Destruction
(MAD).
President Reagan completely rejected the very premise of
Mutually Assured Destruction and in so doing, Reagan shocked the
world, and truly did change the course of world history.  So,
right now, why don’t we wind the clock back 35 years, and listen
to what the world heard on that night, March 23rd, 1983:

My fellow Americans, thank you for sharing your time with me
tonight.
The subject I want to discuss with you, peace and national
security, is both timely and important. Timely, because I’ve
reached a decision which offers a new hope for our children in
the 21st century…
The defense policy of the United States is based on a simple
premise: The United States does not start fights. We will never
be an aggressor. We maintain our strength in order to deter and
defend against aggression — to preserve freedom and peace.
Since the dawn of the atomic age, we’ve sought to reduce the
risk of war by maintaining a strong deterrent and by seeking
genuine arms control. “Deterrence” means simply this: making
sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United States,
or our allies, or our vital interests, concludes that the risks
to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he understands that, he
won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our strength;
weakness only invites aggression.
This strategy of deterrence has not changed. It still works.
But what it takes to maintain deterrence has changed. It took one
kind of military force to deter an attack when we had far more
nuclear weapons than any other power; it takes another kind now
that the Soviets, for example, have enough accurate and powerful
nuclear weapons to destroy virtually all of our missiles on the
ground. Now, this is not to say that the Soviet Union is planning
to make war on us. Nor do I believe a war is inevitable — quite
the contrary. But what must be recognized is that our security is
based on being prepared to meet all threats.
There was a time when we depended on coastal forts and
artillery batteries, because, with the weaponry of that day, any
attack would have had to come by sea. Well, this is a different
world, and our defenses must be based on recognition and
awareness of the weaponry possessed by other nations in the
nuclear age….
Now, thus far tonight I’ve shared with you my thoughts on
the problems of national security we must face together. My
predecessors in the Oval Office have appeared before you on other
occasions to describe the threat posed by Soviet power and have
proposed steps to address that threat. But since the advent of
nuclear weapons, those steps have been increasingly directed
toward deterrence of aggression through the promise of
retaliation.
This approach to stability through offensive threat has
worked. We and our allies have succeeded in preventing nuclear
war for more than three decades. In recent months, however, my
advisors, including in particular the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have
underscored the necessity to break out of a future that relies
solely on offensive retaliation for our security.
Over the course of these discussions, I’ve become more and
more deeply convinced that the human spirit must be capable of
rising above dealing with other nations and human beings by
threatening their existence. Feeling this way, I believe we must
thoroughly examine every opportunity for reducing tensions and
for introducing greater stability into the strategic calculus on
both sides….
Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge them? Are
we not capable of demonstrating our peaceful intentions by
applying all our abilities and our ingenuity to achieving a truly
lasting stability? I think we are. Indeed, we must.
After careful consultation with my advisors, including the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, I believe there is a way. Let me share
with you a vision of the future which offers hope. It is that we
embark on a program to counter the awesome Soviet missile threat
with measures that are defensive. Let us turn to the very
strengths in technology that spawned our great industrial base
and that have given us the quality of life we enjoy today.
What if free people could live secure in the knowledge that
their security did not rest upon the threat of instant U.S.
retaliation to deter a Soviet attack, that we could intercept and
destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reached our own
soil or that of our allies?
I know this is a formidable, technical task, one that may
not be accomplished before the end of this century. Yet, current
technology has attained a level of sophistication where it’s
reasonable for us to begin this effort….
I clearly recognize that defensive systems have limitations
and raise certain problems and ambiguities. If paired with
offensive systems, they can be viewed as fostering an aggressive
policy, and no one wants that. But with these considerations
firmly in mind, I call upon the scientific community in our
country, those who gave us nuclear weapons, to turn their great
talents now to the cause of mankind and world peace, to give us
the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and
obsolete.
Tonight, consistent with our obligations of the ABM treaty
and recognizing the need for closer consultation with our allies,
I’m taking an important first step. I am directing a
comprehensive and intensive effort to define a long-term research
and development program to begin to achieve our ultimate goal of
eliminating the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles. This
could pave the way for arms control measures to eliminate the
weapons themselves. We seek neither military superiority nor
political advantage. Our only purpose — one all people share —
is to search for ways to reduce the danger of nuclear war.
My fellow Americans, tonight we’re launching an effort which
holds the promise of changing the course of human history. There
will be risks, and results take time. But I believe we can do it.
As we cross this threshold, I ask for your prayers and your
support.
Thank you, good night, and God bless you. [end video]

OGDEN:  That was 35 years ago today.
Now, just as a side note, incidentally, President Trump is
not ignorant of this history.  In 1999, far before he ever was a
candidate for President, in a an interview with none other than
Wolf Blitzer on CNN, President Trump actually addressed what he
thought of as the necessity for the Strategic Defense Initiative,
but also the necessity for sitting down and having talks to work
out the tensions between the United States and Russia.  Here’s
just a quick quote from President Trump.  He said:
“As far as nuclear is concerned, this country, us, we need a
shield….”
Wolf Blitzer said, “A Strategic Defense Initiative?”
And Trump affirmed that, saying, “Because Russia is
unstable. We need a missile defense shield.  People used to
criticize Reagan, but now it’s very developable.  We need a
shield…. We need a change.  The ABM Treaty was 1972.  Who knew
what technology would develop?  We have to sit down with the
Russians and many others.”
So, that was just a side note.  That was Nov. 28, 1999.  But
as I think you can see, now-President Trump remains committed to
that inclination to sit down with the Russians and many others —
North Korea, for example; and to resolve these nuclear threats.
If you just go back again to that date in 1983, this was 35
years ago.  In President Reagan’s own words, he said that what he
announced that night would, indeed, change the course of world
history; and it did.  And, it took most of the world completely
by surprise.  But, it didn’t come out of nowhere, and this
history is very important for viewers to understand.
Let me just read you a portion of what Lyndon LaRouche had
to say at that time.  This is a statement that he issued the
morning following that historic speech, so this is from March 24,
1983.  What Mr. LaRouche had to say was the following:
“Only high-level officials of government, or a private
citizen as intimately knowledgeable of details of the
international political and strategic situation as I am
privileged to be, can even begin to foresee the Earth-shaking
impact the President’s television address last night will have
throughout the world…. [T]he words the President spoke last
night can never be put back into the bottle. Most of the world
will soon know, and will never forget that policy announcement.
With those words, the President has changed the course of modern
history.
“Today I am prouder to be an American than I have been since
the first manned landing on the Moon. For the first time in 20
years, a President of the United States has contributed a public
action of great leadership, to give a new basis for hope for
humanity’s future to an agonized and demoralized world. True
greatness in an American President touched President Ronald
Reagan last night; it is a moment of greatness never to be
forgotten.”
So that was Lyndon LaRouche, March 24, 1983.  Now, as
LaRouche alluded to in that statement, he was no bystander or
casual observer of the events of that night President Reagan
announced the SDI.  In fact, the grand idea behind what Reagan
announced that night, came directly from none other than Lyndon
LaRouche himself.  I would like to play for you a brief excerpt
of Mr. LaRouche, in his own words, speaking about the background
to what had shocked the world that night — March 23, 1983.  This
is taken from a video that LaRouche PAC published about ten years
ago, back in 2008, on the 25th anniversary of the SDI speech.
The video was titled “A Brief History of Lyndon LaRouche’s SDI.”
So, let’s listen to what Mr. LaRouche had to say in that video.

LYNDON LAROUCHE

:  I had been organizing the SDI
operation, including initially from 1977, long before it was
called an SDI.  I was the one who said, “We’re going to make a
project of this thing.”  So, I adopted this and stated this as my
program in 1979, when I was running as a Presidential candidate.
Then, I had this conservation with Reagan, and then as a
follow-up after he was President, we had a follow-up with various
people in the Reagan circle; including his National Security
Council.  I was working with the head of the National Security
Council on this operation, and with people from the CIA and this
and that.  I was sworn to this and sworn to that, so I was doing
the whole thing.  The SDI was my work, which they liked.  And
there was a faction, including the President, who liked it.  He
liked it because he was against, he always hated Henry Kissinger;
and he hated Henry Kissinger particularly because of the
so-called “revenge weapons.”  The idea that you build super
weapons, and if somebody throws a bomb at you, you obliterate the
planet.  That is not considered a good defense, and he was
against that.  When he saw from experts that what I was saying
was accepted experts — military and others — and this was
French intelligence, the leadership of the Gaullist faction in
France; this was the leadership of the German military; this was
the leadership of the Italian military, and all over the world.
So, I was the creator of the SDI.  Reagan liked it, he adopted
it.  I was creating the thing in direct cooperation during the
entire period, with the cooperation of the National Security
Council and the heads of the CIA.  People recognized that I was
right; I had the scientific capability and knowledge to do it,
and we were doing it.

OGDEN:  So, that’s the story in Lyndon LaRouche’s own words.
That is merely the tip of a very fascinating iceberg.  We
encourage you to watch that full video that I cited that that
excerpt was taken from.  But also, to visit the page on the
LaRouche PAC website which gives you the full background of this
story.  As you can see there, the link is larouchepac.com/sdi.
That gives you this full, historic background.  But as you heard
Mr. LaRouche say there in that video clip, this effort on his
part to craft the idea of what then became adopted by the
President of the United States in the form of the SDI, this
effort went all the way back to the mid-1970s.  Here’s an image
of a campaign pamphlet which was commissioned by Lyndon LaRouche,
titled “Sputnik of the ’70s: The Science behind the Soviets’ Beam
Weapon.”  In this pamphlet, Lyndon LaRouche called for an
international crash program to develop a space-based missile
defense system based on new physical principles.  A Manhattan
project-style mission which would provide the economic driver to
fuel global development.  The pamphlet proposed .”.. Long-range
economic and scientific collaboration with the Soviet Union,
among other nations, which would eliminate the danger of world
obliteration,” and it emphasized .”.. Tremendous revolutionary
industrial implications available to this nation and the world if
the political will of the United States forces a recommitment to
technological progress in the form of an International
Development Bank and its national concomitant Third National
Bank.”
So, as you can see, Lyndon LaRouche’s idea of this missile
defense system, was always framed around the idea of not
unilateral defense systems, but rather, a joint missile defense
and joint scientific and economic collaboration between the
United States and the Soviet Union.  To do so, would be to
unleash the revolutionary industrial and economic implications of
such technological breakthroughs as the basis for a new
international, economic order; something which he had been
involved in all the way back to at least 1971 when he first
issued the proposal for a new International Development Bank —
the so-called IDB.  So you can see in LaRouche’s idea, the kernel
of what became the SDI, always had with it a new international
security architecture, overthrowing this entire reign of terror
of Mutually Assured Destruction and revenge weapons.  But
concomitantly, a new international economic order, which would be
driven by the revolutionary, unprecedented economic boom that
would come out of the progress associated with such technological
breakthroughs around these new physical principles in the
collaboration of US and Soviet scientists to develop this joint
missile defense to make International Ballistic Missile and
nuclear war impotent and obsolete.
The history is as fascinating as it is extensive.  Here is
not the time or the place to go through every single aspect of
this history; but the full background, again as I said is
available on that webpage — larouchepac.com/sdi.  But if you
fast forward from that pamphlet “Sputnik of the ’70s” all the way
to the lead-up into the 1980 Presidential campaign in which
Lyndon LaRouche himself was a candidate for President of the
United States.  Let’s take a look at a picture here of Lyndon
LaRouche meeting face-to-face with then-candidate Ronald Reagan
at a candidates’ forum that took place in Concord, New Hampshire.
During this face-to-face meeting and in several other
opportunities to interface with the Reagan campaign team, Lyndon
LaRouche presented this idea, in principle and in detail.
Following Reagan’s victory and his election, Lyndon LaRouche and
representatives of his organization, were brought in for meetings
with first the Reagan Presidential transition team, and then with
leading members of the National Security Council and Reagan’s
intelligence community.  They discussed LaRouche’s idea for this
new strategic doctrine, and the related scientific and energy
policies that would go along with it.  So, Lyndon LaRouche
commissioned numerous reports and campaign pamphlets promoting
this idea.  As you can see here, this is from {Fusion}; this is a
special report titled “Directed Energy Beams; A Weapon for
Peace.”  Here’s the next one; this is an edition of the
{Executive Intelligence Review} magazine from November 30, 1982.
Again, before the March 23, 1983 announcement of the SDI.  This
was titled “Beam Weapons: The Science to Prevent Nuclear War.”
Here’s another one; this is a pamphlet.  “How Beam Weapon
Technologies Can Reverse the Depression.”  So, all along, this
was always an economic idea from Lyndon LaRouche’s standpoint.
As you can see, being an American at this point, in the years
preceding the 1980 Presidential election and then coming out of
Reagan’s victory, 1980, ’81, ’82, the idea of this Beam Defense
system which would be based on new physical principles, was
associated — including in the popular mind — it was associated
with Lyndon LaRouche.  And it had been associated with Lyndon
LaRouche for at least half a decade prior to Reagan’s historic,
groundbreaking speech.
The morning after Reagan’s March 23rd address, the media was
scrambling to try to find experts to interview to explain what it
was that Reagan had presented the night before.  Naturally, they
had to turn to representatives of the LaRouche organization.
Here’s a photograph of Paul Gallagher, who was at that time
Executive Director of the Fusion Energy Foundation, appearing on
CBS’ Evening News program on March 24, 1983 — the day following
Reagan’s address — to explain the science behind Reagan’s policy
that had been announced the evening before.
Immediately following Reagan’s address to the nation, Lyndon
LaRouche launched a mass educational campaign to educate the
American people as to what their President had just presented.
He published and commissioned the publication of numerous mass
circulation reports to inform the American people and also
policymakers on the details of how such a program would work.
This image here is an array of different publications that were
issued by the LaRouche movement, supporting Reagan’s announcement
of the Strategic Defense Initiative and detailing the scientific,
the economic, and the military-strategic implications of the
policy.  There you can see one pamphlet — “Support the
President’s Strategic Defense Initiative; Kill Missiles, Not
People.”
As should be very clear, Lyndon LaRouche was in a leading
position of authority following this groundbreaking announcement,
and the influence that his ideas had come to wield put him in a
position of real power inside the political structure of the
Presidency of the United States.  He used that influence to
launch and to escalate on his campaign to completely reorganize
the entire international economic and strategic architecture of
the planet.  Let’s take a look at a document that Lyndon LaRouche
released exactly one year following Reagan’s March 23, 1983
announcement of the SDI program.  This was called “The LaRouche
Doctrine:  Draft Memorandum of Agreement between the United
States and the USSR.”  This was published March 30, 1984.  Let me
read you some excerpts from what Lyndon LaRouche published under
this title “The LaRouche Doctrine.”  He begins by saying:
“The political foundation for durable peace must be: a) The
unconditional sovereignty of each and all nation-states, and b)
Cooperation among sovereign nation-states to the effect of
promoting unlimited opportunities to participate in the benefits
of technological progress, to the mutual benefit of each and all.
“The most crucial feature of present implementation of such
a policy of durable peace is a profound change in the monetary,
economic, and political relations between the dominant powers and
those relatively subordinated nations often classed as
‘developing nations.’ Unless the inequities lingering in the
aftermath of modern colonialism are progressively remedied, there
can be no durable peace on this planet.
“Insofar as the United States and Soviet Union acknowledge
the progress of the productive powers of labor throughout the
planet to be in the vital strategic interests of each and both,
the two powers are bound to that degree and in that way by a
common interest. This is the kernel of the political and economic
policies of practice indispensable to the fostering of durable
peace between those two powers.
.”.. [T]he general advancement of the productive powers of
labor in all sovereign states, most emphatically so-called
developing nations, requires global emphasis on: a) increasing
globally the percentiles of the labor force employed in
scientific research and related functions of research and
development … b) increasing the absolute and relative scales of
capital-goods production and also
the rate of turnover in capital-goods production; and c)
combining these two factors to accelerate technological progress
in capital-goods outputs.
“Therefore, high rates of export of such capital-goods
output to meet the needs of developing nations are indispensable
for the general development of so-called developing nations: Our
common goal, and our common interest, is promoting both the
general welfare and promoting preconditions of durable peace
between our two powers….
“By supplying increased amounts of high-technology capital
goods to developing nations, the exporting economies foster
increased rates of turnover in their own most advanced
capital-goods sectors of production….
“The importer of such advanced capital goods increases the
productive powers of labor in the economy of the importing
nation. This enables the importing nation to produce its goods at
a lower average social cost, and enables it to provide
better-quality and cheaper goods as goods of payment to the
nations exporting capital goods.
“Not only are the causes of simple humanity and general
peace served by such policies of practice; the arrangement is
equally beneficial to exporting and importing nations….
.”.. [T]he general rate of advancement of the productive
powers of labor is most efficiently promoted by no other policy
of practice.”
Then a little later in the report, he reviews the situation
of strategic tensions between the USSR and the United States.  He
says:
“Since the rupture of the wartime alliance between the two
powers, U.S. military policy toward the Soviet Union has passed
through two phases. The first, from the close of the war until a
point beyond the death of Joseph Stalin, was preparation for the
contingency of what was sometimes named ‘preventive nuclear war.’
The second, emerging over the period from the death of Stalin
into the early period of the administration of President John F.
Kennedy, was based on the doctrines of Nuclear Deterrence and
Flexible Response …
“From approximately 1963 until approximately 1977, it might
have appeared, as it appeared to many, that the doctrines of
Nuclear Deterrence and Flexible Response had succeeded in
preserving a state of restive peace, something called ‘détente,’
between the two powers. This appearance was deceptive; during the
period 1977-83, there was an accelerating deterioration in the
military relationships between the two powers….
“Beginning shortly after the inauguration of President Jimmy
Carter, the deterioration of the military situation
accelerated….
“In response to this direction of developments, the U.S.
public figure Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. proposed that both powers
develop, deploy, and agree to develop and deploy ‘strategic’
defensive, anti-ballistic-missile defense based on ‘new physical
principles.’ This proposal was issued publicly by LaRouche
beginning February 1982; he proposed to U.S.A., Western European,
and Soviet representatives that the development and deployment of
such strategic defensive systems be adopted policy, as a means
for escaping from the ‘logic’ of Nuclear Deterrence….
.”.. The true solution must be found in the domain of
politics and economics, and the further shaping of military
relations between the powers must produce military policies by
each coherent with the direction of development of the needed
political and economic solutions….
“On the part of the United States of America, the government
is committed to avoiding all colonial, imperial, or kindred
endeavors in foreign policy, and to establish, instead, a growing
community of principle among fully sovereign nation-states of
this planet. This shall become a community of principle coherent
with the policies of the articles of this draft memorandum. If
any force should endeavor to destroy that community of principle,
or any member of that community of sovereign nations, the United
States will be prepared to defend that community and its members
by means of warfare, should other means prove insufficient. With
respect to the Soviet Union, the government of the United States
offers the Soviet Union cooperation with itself in service of
these principles, and desires that the Soviet Union might enter
fully into participation within that community of principle….
“Under these conditions, provided that all nations share in
development of the frontiers of scientific research, in
laboratories, and in educational institutions, all nations will
be made capable of assimilating efficiently the technological
by-product benefits of the military expenditures on systems
derived from application of ‘new physical principles.’
“To lend force to this policy, the powers agree to establish
new institutions of cooperation between themselves and other
nations in development of these new areas of scientific
breakthrough for application to exploration of space.
“To this purpose, the powers agree to establish at the
earliest possible time institutions for cooperation in scientific
exploration of space, and to also co-sponsor treaty-agreements
protecting national and multinational programs for colonization
of the Moon and Mars.
“At some early time, the powers shall enter into
deliberations, selecting dates for initial manned colonization of
the Moon and Mars, and the establishment of international space
stations on the Moon and in the orbits of Moon and Mars, stations
to be maintained by and in the common interest and use of space
parties of all nations.
“The powers jointly agree upon the adoption of two tasks as
the common interest of mankind, as well as the specific interest
of each of the two powers: 1) The establishment of full economic
equity respecting the conditions of individual life in all
nations of this planet during a period of not more than 50 years;
2) Man’s exploration and colonization of nearby space as the
continuing common objective and interest of mankind during and
beyond the completion of the first task. The adoption of these
two working-goals as the common task and respective interest in
common of the two powers and other cooperating nations,
constitutes the central point of reference for erosion of the
potential political and economic causes of warfare between the
powers.”
That was known as the “LaRouche Doctrine,” published March
30, 1984.  As you can see, what Lyndon LaRouche outlined in that
document was the basis for exactly what we’re calling now a new
international economic and strategic architecture.  In fact, the
one requires the other.  You cannot have a new strategic
architecture without resolving what Lyndon LaRouche characterized
as the root causes behind the conflict between these nations; the
persisting inequalities between nations.  And you cannot have the
kind of cooperation needed for the common, mutual economic
development and the application of these groundbreaking new
physical principles and the technologies that are derived from
those, without the establishment of a new international economic
order.  Elsewhere in that document, Mr. LaRouche described
exactly how such an economic order must take place; with fixed
exchange rates between currencies, massive credits — both
domestically within countries for the upgrading of the
technological and infrastructure platforms within those nations
— but also, international credit treaty agreements in the form
of what he originally described in 1971 as the International
Development Bank, or the IDB.
As you can see, and I think any astute reader of that
document now, almost 35 years later, that document laid the basis
for what we now see as the so-called “win-win” new economic
paradigm.  This idea of the common benefit of all; mutual
cooperation for joint development; the upgrading of the so-called
“developing” nations, which were still suffering under the
effects of colonialism and post-colonial policy.  So, when
President Xi Jinping of China speaks about “win-win” economic
development and a new community of nations with a shared destiny,
I think that the echoes couldn’t be more clear of what Lyndon
LaRouche himself was describing at that time in the middle of the
1980s, almost 35 years ago today.  When Xi Jinping offers the
United States to join this new “win-win” system, the Belt and
Road Initiative, which is already resolving these persisting
inequalities that the world has been suffering, such as in Africa
or Central and South America.  Or, when President Putin offers to
“sit down at the negotiating table and devise together a new and
relevant system of international security and sustainable
development for human civilization,” we should reflect on what
was laid in that document.  That LaRouche Doctrine now almost 35
years ago today, in the wake of that history-changing
announcement by President Ronald Reagan, at which he called a
spade a spade.  The world could no longer survive under the
dictatorship of Mutually Assured Destruction; that reign of
terror that President Kennedy characterized as the Sword of
Damocles hanging by the slenderest of threads over every man,
woman, and child on this planet, threatening nuclear
annihilation.  What Lyndon LaRouche characterized at that moment
as the “LaRouche Doctrine” is the principle behind the new
economic and new security architecture which must be adopted on
this planet today.  Not as a recipe, not taking everything
exactly as it was said, because clearly of course, the world has
changed; and we must apply the principles that lay at the root of
exactly what Lyndon LaRouche had in mind when he proposed the
Strategic Defense Initiative and when he proposed the subsequent
LaRouche Doctrine, and apply those to evolve necessarily to fit
the specific conditions of today.
One thing that Lyndon LaRouche alluded to explicitly in that
document, was the need for joint cooperation in the colonization
and exploration of space.  In fact, that is the form that the
idea of a revived SDI has actually been taken.  The proposal for
not an SDI, but what’s now called an SDE — the Strategic Defense
of Earth — to literally re-tool the strategic nuclear weapons
with these massive payloads that have been accumulated by the
United States, Russia, also other nations — China and India and
other nations.  To re-tool those nuclear weapons and also the
delivery systems, these high-power intercontinental ballistic
missiles, and also the new technologies that Russia has just
announced.  To re-tool these technologies and have what were
offensive weapons become defensive tools against asteroids and
other threats to planet Earth which we may encounter from outer
space.  While this was proposed under that name, the SDE, by
certain individuals inside Russia about five years ago,
coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the original SDI speech.
What this originally actually came out of, had its origins in the
late 1980s and the early 1990s with the scientist Dr. Edward
Teller.  Teller was actually one of the leading scientific
advisors of President Reagan in the 1980s around the SDI
initiative, but following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Dr.
Edward Teller travelled to Russia and visited some of the leading
science cities that had been involved in developing nuclear
weapons and their delivery systems.  He met with some of the
leading former Soviet scientists, the Russian scientists, and
proposed exactly this.  He proposed the idea of the United States
and Russia saying the Cold War is over; let’s now cease this
policy of aiming our nuclear missiles one against the other, and
let’s now aim them against the common threats that mankind as a
whole faces.  Especially with the latest news of an asteroid
which poses a credible threat — what’s called a “non-zero
threat” — to the Earth in the foreseeable future, which was
just discussed in the  media over the past week, this proposal is
all the more timely and all the more relevant today.
So, what I’d like is to just play an excerpt from Helga
Zepp-LaRouche’s international webcast that she delivered
yesterday.  She takes up exactly this idea, so here’s an excerpt
from Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE

:  I think that the SDI proposal,
which was absolutely not what the media made out of it, calling
it “Star Wars,” and things like that, the SDI proposal of my
husband, Lyndon LaRouche was an absolutely farsighted vision of a
New Paradigm!  And if you read the relevant papers about it,
especially the proposed draft for a dialogue among the
superpowers, which was published one year later, which you can
find in the archives or in the newer {EIR}s. This was a vision
where both superpowers would develop together, new physical
principles which would make nuclear weapons obsolete.  And I
think what Putin announced on March 1st in terms of new physical
principles applied for new weapons systems, is absolutely is in
this tradition. And Putin also asked, now they have to sit down
and we have to negotiate and put together a new security
architecture, including Russia, the United States, China, and the
Europeans.
This was all envisioned by my husband in this famous SDI
proposal, and it was a very far-reaching to dissolve the blocs,
NATO and the Warsaw Pact,  to cooperate instead among sovereign
republics, which is exactly what the New Silk Road dynamic today
represents. And it was also the idea to use a science-driver in
the economy to use the increased productivity of the real economy
for a gigantic technology transfer to the developing sector, in
order to overcome their underdevelopment and poverty.
And this is what we’re seeing today, also, in the
collaboration between China, Russia, and the countries that are
participating in the Belt and Road Initiative.
So I think, in a certain sense, part of this danger of peace
breaking out, that there is right now the very vivid tradition
and actualization of that tradition of the SDI, and I think we
should circulate this proposal by my husband again.  I think we
should enlarge it to become the SDE, the Strategic Defense of the
Earth, because it was just discovered that very soon, another big
asteroid is already taking course on the planet Earth. So we need
to move quickly to the common aims of mankind, and all countries
should cooperate and be a shared community for the one future of
humanity.
This is the New Paradigm which I think is so obvious.  I
mean, if you look at the long arc of history, we {have} to
overcome geopolitics and we have to move to a kind of cooperation
where we put all our forces together to solve those questions
which are a challenge to all of humanity — nuclear weapons,
poverty, asteroids — there are so many areas where we could
fruitfully cooperate — space exploration is one of them.  And I
think we are in a very fascinating moment in history, but we need
more active citizens.  So please contact us, work with us, and
let’s together make a better world.

OGDEN:  So, that was Helga LaRouche’s call to action, and I
think that’s a perfect concluding point for our webcast today, as
we observe this very auspicious date — March 23rd — the 35th
anniversary of President Reagan’s groundbreaking speech
announcing the Strategic Defense Initiative.  Let’s take that
kind of sense of victory and the optimism that indeed, ideas can
change the course of history, and consolidate this New Paradigm;
this new security architecture and new economic architecture for
the planet.  The opportunity is greater than it ever has been
before; but the need is ever more dire.
Thank you for joining me, and please stay tuned to larouchepac.com.

23. marts, 2018 – USA vil fortsat støtte saudiernes folkemordskrig i Yemen, er resultatet af den saudiske kronprins Mohammed bin Salmans besøg i Washington i denne uge. I går sagde forsvarsminister Mattis i Pentagon under sine åbningsbemærkninger, at USA og Saudi-Arabien »fortsat vil arbejde sammen for at bringe enhed, stabilitet og sikkerhed til området, for at bekæmpe terrororganisationer og afskrække Irans ondskabsfulde aktiviteter«. En del af dette »samarbejde« består i en pakke militært udstyr til mellem $670 mio. og $1 mia., der sælges til Kongedømmet.

Mattis sagde, at han så udnævnelsen af en ny FN-udsending til Yemen, den britiske diplomat Martin Griffiths, som en mulighed for at fremskynde en politisk løsning på denne konflikt, »fordi det kan yde den regionale stabilitet, der er nødvendig for at beskytte jeres nation og nægte terrorister det sikre opholdssted, de søger, gennem stabile betingelser for alle yemenitiske borgeres menneskerettigheder«.

»Vi mener, at Saudi-Arabien er en del af denne løsning«, sagde Mattis. »De har været loyale mod den af FN anerkendte regering, og vi vil afslutte denne krig. Det er bundlinjen, og vi vil afslutte det på en positiv måde for Yemens befolkning, men som også yder sikkerhed for nationerne på halvøen.«

Saudierne har endnu en amerikansk handelsvare, de er interesseret i at købe – kernekraftværker. Selv om dette fremstilles som et køb til strengt civil anvendelse, har de insisteret på, at de får lov til – imod amerikansk lov – at udvikle uranberigelse og oparbejdning af brugt brændsel, som en garanti mod et muligt fremtidigt, iransk program for en bombe. Deres trussel er, at, hvis USA ikke giver adgang til dette krav, vil saudierne købe kraftværkerne fra Rusland eller Kina. USA’s Kongres hælder imidlertid ikke mod at ændre loven under en sådan trussel.

Foto: De nådesløse luftangreb mod Yemen, udført af den saudiskledede koalition, fortsætter, her, februar, 2018.

Der er mange spørgsmål, vi bør diskutere, og mange ting, vi bør gøre, for det image, folk har af Vesten, er virkelig noget, folk bør tænke over. Hvordan kan det være, at det kommunistiske Kina, som er et socialistisk land, baseret på socialisme med kinesiske karaktertræk, som de siger – hvorfor klarer dette land sig så meget bedre end Vesten? Det bør give stof til eftertanke. Hvad er der i vejen med den neoliberale metode, et system, der forårsager svælget mellem rig og fattig at blive større hele tiden? I alle europæiske lande, og dette reflekteredes også i valget af Trump, væmmes mange mennesker fuldstændig ved den politiske klasse, med klassen af direktører, med bankfolk, med akademikere, og føler sig ikke længere repræsenteret af disse institutioner, hvilket er meget farligt, for i Europas tilfælde giver det grund til, at der vokser nogle virkelig meget farlige, eller i det mindste problematiske, partier og organisationer frem.

Så, manglen på fornuft afføder monstre, som Goya så klart påpegede i sine tegninger.

Folk bør begynde at blive aktive, for man kan ikke sidde passivt i et paradigmeskifte som det, vi oplever på dette tidspunkt.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 11. marts, 2018 – Vesten har »gået i søvne i deres arrogance«, sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche i denne weekend; først kom de for sent til båden med Kinas Nye Silkevej, og nu er de blevet overlistet af Vladimir Putins dramatiske annoncering den 1. marts om, at Rusland med held har udviklet våbensystemer, baseret på nye fysiske principper, der gør missilforsvarssystemet, der er deployeret omkring Rusland og Kina, ubrugelige og forældede. Det ynkelige forsøg på at miskreditere Putins annoncering som værende et svindelnummer, baseret på den kendsgerning, at de brugte animationer snarere end videoer til at demonstrere det nye, hypersoniske missil, faldt i dag til jorden med det Russiske Forsvarsministerium, der udlagde videoer af den succesfulde testning af Kinzhal aero-ballistiske, hypersoniske missil (se nedenstående rapport).

Responsen fra den kriminelle bande, der udgjorde Obama-administrationen – og som i stigende grad nu afsløres af modige medlemmer af Kongressen som medskyldige i det britiske MI6’s bestræbelse på at bringe Donald Trumps amerikanske regering til fald – har nu åbenlyst bekendt kulør og etableret en ny organisation ved navn, »National Security Action«. Organisationen, en bogstavelig talt ’blå bog’ over persongalleriet i Obama-administrationen, har udtrykkeligt til formål at fjerne Trump fra præsidentskabet og vende tilbage til Obamas forberedelse til krig med Rusland og Kina. Sammensat af 68 af de ledende medlemmer af Obama-administrationen (de bør kaldes »68-erne« til ære for udløsningen af modkulturen i 1960’erne, som drev landet ud i økonomisk og social disintegration), så erklærer deres politiske programmer, at Trump er »uegnet til at lede«, at han har vist »ansvarsløshed« for at have afsløret og udrenset korruptionen i FBI og andetsteds og, det mest åbenlyse, at, »i stedet for at konfrontere Vladimir Putin for dennes skamløse og fortsatte angreb på vort demokrati, så bukker Trump for Moskvas luner« og nægter at »forsvare sig over for Kina«. Mens sandheden er, at Trumps besøg til Beijing sidste november hjembragte $283 mia. i kinesiske investeringer i amerikansk infrastruktur, industri og landbrug som en del af Trumps forpligtelse over for en genrejsning af amerikansk økonomi, så bliver dette ignoreret af de ynkelige »68’ere«, der i stedet klager (uretmæssigt) over, at »Trumps familieforetagender fik særlige aftaler, efter Trump mødtes med den kinesiske præsident«.

Ironisk nok, så går en af deres klager ud på, at »Trumps uberegnelige opførsel har hævet risikoen for en katastrofal konflikt med Nordkorea«. Dette dokument blev udgivet den 27. februar, blot få dage før det historiske gennembrud 8. marts for en løsning af Koreakrisen, da Trump aftalte at mødes med Kim Jong-un til atomnedrustningsforhandlinger. Det var Obama-administrationen, der nægtede at forhandle med Nordkorea – ja, de hilste faktisk Nordkoreas atomvåbenbyggeri velkommen, eftersom det udgjorde et påskud for den massive oprustning af atomvåben og missilsystemer omkring Kina, kendt som Obamas doktrin, »omdrejningspunkt Asien«. Trump har erklæret dette »omdrejningspunkt« for forbi og har opnået gennembruddet i Korea ved at arbejde tæt sammen med Kina og Rusland. Så hvem er det, der »hævede risikoen for en katastrofal konflikt«, og som stadig gør det i dag?

Kendsgerningen er, at Silkevejsånden er i færd med at vinde, og de nationer, der bliver ladt tilbage, har kun sig selv at takke for at holde fast ved City of London og Wall Street snarere end at lytte til Lyndon LaRouches vise ord om at genindføre det Amerikanske System for fysisk økonomi og tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej.

Foto: Vladimir Putin besvarede spørgsmål fra NBC-ankermand, Megyn Kelly. Interviewet blev optaget i Kreml den 1. marts, 2018, og i Kaliningrad den 2. marts. (en.kremlin.ru)

Der var de fortsatte provokationer i Mellemøsten, provokationer i Asien, Koreakrigen, Vietnamkrigen – dette var geopolitik med det formål at bevare Det britiske Imperium. Og desværre, med mordet på Kennedy, blev USA en partner i det, man kunne kalde et »anglo-amerikansk geopolitisk imperium«.

Og hvad gik politikkerne ud på? Frihandel, neoliberal økonomi, nedskæringspolitik. Svækkelse af regeringer, svækkelse af ideen om national suverænitet og etablering af institutioner som den Europæiske Union, der ønsker ikkevalgte bureaukrater til at bestemme politikker for det, der plejede at være nationalstater.

Det så ud, som om alt dette kunne ændre sig i 1989, med den kommunistiske verdens fald, med det østtyske regimes kollaps og Berlinmurens fald. På dette tidspunkt intervenerede LaRouche-organisationen meget direkte, for et alternativ til geopolitik. Lyndon LaRouche var blevet fængslet af George Bush, med assistance fra den daværende vicestatsanklager i Boston, Robert Mueller. Men Helga Zepp-LaRouche anførte kampen for det, vi dengang kaldte den Produktive Trekant Paris-Berlin-Wien, og dernæst, så tidligt som i slutningen af 1990, det, der blev kaldt den »Nye Silkevej« eller den Eurasiske Landbro, som et middel til at bringe nationer sammen og overvinde disse kunstige opdelinger, skabt af Det britiske Imperium.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

København, 26. feb., 2018 – Fredag deltog medlemmer af det danske Schiller Institut i en debat med den danske forsvarsminister, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, med Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier (DIIS) som vært og med deltagelse af omkring 200 gæster. Debatmødet blev streamet online. Anledningen var aftalen i Folketinget om det nye forsvarsbudget, som har givet ministeren muligheder for at skræmme befolkningen i medierne med et budskab, der kan koges ned til »Russerne kommer! Russerne kommer!«

Forsvarsministeren fremlagde Danmarks politik for det, en DIIS-analytiker kaldte »at optrappe for at trappe ned«, som en militær strategi til at tackle Rusland. Hjort Frederiksen sagde, at der ikke var noget forståeligt rationale bag russiske militære aktioner (som f.eks. i Krim) og sagde, at cyberangreb var lige så farlige som konventionel krig, og at NATO’s paragraf 5, der kræver fælles respons, også burde gælde for cyberangreb. Han anklagede Rusland for at have interveneret i de amerikanske valg (og muligvis også i valg i Frankrig og Holland) og for at være skyldig i hacking af det danske handelskonglomerat, Maersk.

Alt imens mødets ordstyrer forsøgte at undgå at invitere de tre Schiller Institut-medlemmer, der var til stede, til at stille spørgsmål, så viste det sig imidlertid, at to af de personer, han inviterede til at tale, var ældre tilhængere af Schiller Instituttet, og så inviterede han endelig Lissie (Brobjerg). Den første af disse to tilhængere sagde, at den danske ambassade i Rusland, samt de danske bevæbnede styrker, begge havde den laveste vurdering af en trussel fra Rusland, og at de befandt sig i den bedste position til at bedømme dette. Den anden tilhænger refererede til en rapport fra det Danske Forsvarsakademi, som sagde, at russerne ikke var aggressorer, men har været reaktive. Under ministerens svar, hvor han listede rundt som katten om den varme grød, afbrød tilhængeren, der sandsynligvis var den ældste person til stede, med at råbe, »har du læst rapporten?«, til hvilket ministeren måtte svare nej.

Lissie bad ministeren om at kommentere Nunes-rapporten, der viste, at angrebene mod Rusland for angivelig indblanding i de amerikanske valg var baseret på svindelagtig dokumentation og en del af en operation fra kredse i Storbritannien og USA, der går ud på at forhindre et samarbejde mellem USA og Rusland, og opfordrede forsvarsministeren til ikke at gå med i dette spil, men i stedet få Danmark til at indgå i et nyt samarbejde med Rusland og tjene som et forbillede på en ny, Westfalsk Fred og dermed bidrage til at undgå atomkrig. Hertil svarede han: Du nævnte Nunes-rapporten. Det er typiske diskussioner, der altid stiller spørgsmålstegn ved grundlaget og spørger, »hvad er kilderne?« og dit og dat i det håb at få det hele til at fremstå som svindel og plat alt sammen; men jeg går slet ikke ind i den der diskussion. Kendsgerningen er, at dem, vi samarbejder med, er demokratiske lande, der skal stå til ansvar over for deres befolkninger gennem demokratiske valg, og det er dem, vi samarbejder med og stoler på, og det er udgangspunktet for det, og ikke alle mulige mærkelige, andre konstruktioner.«

Bagefter gik Lissie op til Hjort Frederiksen og kommenterede, at hans tidligere bemærkninger om, at russerne var aggressorer, og ikke reagerede til Vestens provokationer, ikke var sande, og hun refererede til Victoria Nuland og kuppet i Ukraine; hertil svarede han, at han ikke ville have noget med den slags at gøre.

Hele mødet kan ses på video her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk2K1eliwEw

Lissies spørgsmål kommer 1:38:14, og Claus Hjort Frederiksens svar starter 1:41:50.

Foto: Claus Hjort Frederiksen (stående) svarer på Lissies spørgsmål.

Så man skal forstå dette som førkrigs-propaganda, og folk falder let for ting, som er i de gængse medier, hvor de hellere skulle tænke sig om to gange. Det, som Rusland og Kina gør, er, at de er i færd med at opbygge en helt anden model for internationale relationer, der er specifikt modelleret efter ikkeindblanding og respekt for det andets lands anderledes samfundssystem. Derfor er denne propaganda simpelt hen et forfærdelig farligt scenarie med løgne, der faktisk tjener som en forberedelse til krig, og det er, hvad folk virkelig må forstå.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 6. feb., 2018 – Mandag intervenerede det britiske Udenrigsministerium i en høring i Højesteret i London i sagen om tidligere MI6-medarbejder, Christopher Steele. Steeles advokat forsøger at omstøde en tidligere retskendelse om, at Steele skal fremstille sig til afhøring i forbindelse med en af de mange løgne i det nu berømte dossier, han udarbejdede med det formål at bringe USA’s præsident til fald. Sagen er blevet anlagt af en russisk borger, Aleksej Gubarev, hvem Steele løgnagtigt har anklaget for at have hacket ind i det amerikanske Demokratiske Partis computere (hvilket, som tidligere tekniske ekspert i NSA, Bill Binney, har vist, aldrig fandt sted). Detaljerne kan læses nedenstående – men det afgørende er, at Udenrigsministeriet, der fører tilsyn med MI6, sendte en advokat til retten »for det tilfældes skyld, at regeringen fandt det nødvendigt at kræve, at Steeles vidneforklaring blev begrænset, for at beskytte statshemmeligheder«, som det rapporteredes af BBC.

Hvorfor er briterne så interesseret i at forhindre sandheden om Steeles rolle, og briternes rolle generelt, i kupforsøget mod præsident Trump, i at komme frem? Kendsgerningen er, at hele »Russiagate«-sagen mod Trump er ved at nedsmelte, alt imens senator Chuck Grassley og kongresmedlem David Nunes har fokuseret på den primære rolle, som den britiske efterretningsagent Steele har spillet som den kriminelle hovedmedsammensvorne. Briternes desperate bestræbelse for at genvinde kontrollen over deres tidligere koloni, er i alvorlig fare.

Og dette er ikke en isoleret udvikling. Verden er gået ind i en kombineret krise, som ikke kan opretholdes i ret mange måneder, eller endda dage. Finanssystemet er oppustet og står ikke til at redde, med udstedelse af fiktiv gæld for at dække over spekulationsboblen med endnu flere spekulative ’værdi’-papirer. De krav, der kommer fra Wall Streets og City of Londons herrer, om, at verdens nationer skal acceptere nedskæringspolitikker og følge IMF’s diktater, finder nu kun døve øren, med næsten hele verdens udviklingssektor, der nu tilslutter sig det nye paradigme, som Kina tilbyder dem gennem den Nye Silkevej, og som bringer jernbaner, vandprojekter, industri og – håb – til verdens tidligere koloninationer.

Og i USA har præsident Trump forsvaret sig mod de korrupte efterretningschefer fra Obamatiden, fordømt denne heksejagt og endda inviteret de russiske efterretningschefer til Washington (til regimeskifte-slængets absolutte rædsel), med det formål at samarbejde om at løse de vigtige spørgsmål i reelle, globale problemer.

Dette er et gunstigt øjeblik for præsidenten. I løbet af de seneste to uger har han ikke alene arrangeret de russiske efterretningschefers besøg, på trods af de sanktioner, som Kongressen har påtvunget dem, men han har også afvist Kongressens krav om nye sanktioner mod Rusland. Han godkendte offentliggørelsen af »Nunes-memoet«, der afslører de forbrydelser, der er begået af Steele og oversidderne fra Obama-tiden i FBI og Justitsministeriet. Han holdt en State of the Union-tale, der fik 70 % eller mere støtte fra det amerikanske folk, netop, fordi han har inspireret til håb om en genrejsning af den forfaldne, amerikanske økonomi, en afslutning af epidemien med opiater og andre narkotiske stoffer, samt en genrejsning af Amerikas tidligere storhed.

Præsident Trump befinder sig således i en relativ favorabel situation til at konfrontere det overhængende kollaps af finansboblen i aktie- og lånemarkederne. Der findes kun én måde, hvorpå de vestlige økonomier kan reddes fra dette uundgåelige sammenbrud – en proces, der har sit fortilfælde i de politikker, som Franklin D. Roosevelt gennemførte i 1930’erne, og som reddede USA fra depressionen og verden fra fascisme. De fiktive kapitaler må fjernes gennem en Glass/Steagall-reform af banksystemet således, at regeringen kan bruge den magt, den er givet af USA’s Forfatning, til at etablere en nationalbank, som kan udstede kredit, der dirigeres ind i realøkonomien og igangsætte en proces for massiv videnskabelig forskning og udvikling, for at udforme en optimistisk fremtid for menneskeheden.

Det er dette, LaRouche har kaldt de Fire Love. Resolutioner til støtte for de Fire Love bliver nu introduceret i de lovgivende grene (delstatskongresser) over hele landet. Præsident Trump, der tidligere officielt har krævet en tilbagevenden til en politik for dette »Amerikanske Økonomiske System« i Hamitons tradition, befinder sig nu i en position, hvor han kan gennemføre det, til trods for den kendsgerning, at han er omgivet af agenter for Wall Street, som er modstandere af det, og som kræver nationens underkastelse under den værdiløse spekulationsgæld selv, hvis det betyder økonomisk kaos og global krig. Den aktuelle ustabilitet på aktiemarkedet er blot en antydning af, at et krak i denne boble er overhængende.

Men, hvis gode mennesker i USA og Europa mobiliserer sig selv, og andre, til at gå sammen med LaRouche for at gennemføre de Fire Love og gå med i den Nye Silkevej, som LaRouche har været fortaler for og har promoveret i de seneste halvtreds år, så er et Nyt Paradigme for Menneskeheden inden for rækkevidde.

Foto: SIS-bygningen, eller MI6-bygningen, eller ’Legoland’, eller ’Babylon-ved-Themsen’; den britiske hemmelige efterretningstjenestes hovedkvarter ved Vauxhall Cross på Themsens sydlige bred. Designet af Terry Farrell og færdigbygget i 1994. (Photo flickr.com/photos/duncanh1/)

6. feb., 2018 – Det britiske Udenrigsministerium sendte mandag en advokat af sted til Londons Højesteret, hvor den »tidligere« MI6-efterretningsgent Christopher Steeles advokat, Gavin Miller, procederede for en omstødelse af rettens afgørelse fra november om, at Steele skal fremstille sig til afhøring i de sager, der er anlagt imod ham og BuzzFeed af russeren Aleksej Gubarev. I Steeles dossier er Gubarev blevet anklaget for at hacke Demokraterne, angiveligt på vegne af Kreml.

Advokat Miller har fremført, at afhøringen potentielt set kunne »kræve en afsløring af følsom efterretningsinformation, som ville udgøre en fare for Det forenede Kongeriges sikkerhedsinteresser og personel«.

Men det er ikke alene Steeles advokat. Det Britiske Udenrigsministerium tager tydeligvis ingen chancer med hensyn til, at hele det britiske kupforsøg – for at genvinde magten over deres tabte koloni hinsides Atlanten – ville blive ødelagt af en sådan afsløring af Steeles rolle. Reuters rapporterer i dag: »Miller sagde, at en advokat fra det Britiske Udenrigsministerium, der fører tilsyn med Storbritanniens udenrigs-efterretningstjeneste, hvor Steele arbejdede frem til 2009, var til stede under mandagens afhøring, for det tilfældes skyld, at regeringen skulle finde det påkrævet at beskytte statshemmeligheder. Regeringens advokat sagde imidlertid, at han ikke ville rejse nogen specifikke indvendinger på det nuværende trin af afhøringen.«

Sidste november kendte en britisk domstol, at Steele skulle underkaste sig en afhøring. Miller sagde mandag til Højesteret, at »sagen vær næsten unik« på grund af den enorme indvirkning, som Steeles dossier havde haft på amerikansk politik, rapporterer Reuters. Han sagde, at påbuddet om afhøring ville blive en »officiel mini-efterforskning« og en »opportunistisk fiskeudflugt«, som kunne udgøre en forhøjet fare for Steeles kilder. »Det er ekstremt bekymrende for en person i hr. Steeles position.«

Indsigelserne på vegne af Steele fremfører, at »kendelsen sandsynligvis vil kræve, at hr. Steele besvarer spørgsmål, hvor hans svar ville … kræve afsløring af følsom efterretningsinformation, som ville udgøre en fare for Det forenede Kongeriges sikkerhedsinteresser og personel«.

Gubarevs advokater har allerede indgået aftale om at begrænse spørgsmål om Steeles baggrund og de 3 linjer i dossieret, der relaterer til deres klient, »tre meget diskrete emner«.

Det står ikke klart, hvornår en afgørelse vil falde, men det er sikkert, at Dronningen og hendes undersåtter følger nøje med og er parat til at angribe.

Foto: To centrale personer i »Russiagate«-kupforsøget mod præsident Trump; den britiske ’tidligere’ MI6-agent, Christopher Steele (venstre), der udarbejdede det uvederhæftige dossier om Donald Trump, og den amerikanske, særlige anklager, Robert Mueller, der står i spidsen for den korrupte sammensværgelse mod præsident Trump på vegne af Det britiske Imperium og dets neokonservative allierede i USA, med det formål at gennemføre et regimeskifte i USA og gennemføre den farlige linje for konfrontation med især Rusland, men også Kina, og som bringer hele verden på randen af en ny, denne gang atomar, verdenskrig.

31. jan., 2018 – Federal Communications Commission (FCC) meddelte 30. jan., at det falske varsel om et atommissilangreb, der i 38 minutter spredte rædsel i borgere og turister på Hawai’i den 13. jan., blev udstedt med overlæg af den operatør, der trykkede på knappen, og ikke ved et uheld, som det tidligere er blevet rapporteret. Operatøren, der er blevet fyret, lyttede til en øvelse, det begyndte og sluttede med »øvelse« tre gange, men, for første gang, sagde det indeholdte budskab om de indkommende, ballistiske missiler også, »Dette er ikke en øvelse«. Operatøren var overbevist om, at det var virkeligt, og udløste varslet.

Topfolkene i Hawai’is Nødberedskabstjeneste er fratrådt, og operatøren er fyret.

Denne hændelse er en yderligere bekræftelse af mange ekspertudtalelser, inklusive fra tidligere forsvarsminister William Perry, om, at den »affyr på varsel«-holdning, som er officiel amerikansk politik, er uansvarlig og må stoppes, eller også kunne en atomkrig ved et uheld blive en realitet.