24. okt., 2017 – Dødsraten pr. 100.000 mennesker i USA steg 1,2 fra 2014 til 2015, iflg. de seneste statistikker, der er udgivet af Society of Actuaries, der, blandt andet, servicerer forsikrings- og pensionssektorerne. Den sidste stigning fra ét år til det næste var i 2005; men den sidste stigning på over 1 % var i 1980.

Tendensen i dødsraten i forhold til alder (dødsfald pr. 100.000 om året), som spores af Society of Actuaries, viser generelt, at den forventede levealder for personer i en pensionsordning er faldet, siden deres sidste beregning, med 0,2 år. En 65-årig mand kan forvente af leve til 85,6 år; og kvinder, til 87,6 år. Den forventede udbetaling fra pensionsordningerne falder tilsvarende.

Mange andre rapporter forstærker billedet af at USA’s faldende sociale vilkår og helbredstilstand. En gennemgang fra Bloomberg i går (’Amerikanere går senere på pension, dør tidligere og er mere syge ind imellem’) bemærker, at, hvor én ud af fire amerikanere mellem 65 og 69 for 40 år siden stadig var i arbejde, så er næsten én ud af tre amerikanere i denne aldersgruppe i dag i arbejde.

Bladet Health Affairs rapporterer, at folk, der i dag nærmer sig 60, er måleligt mere syge end den samme aldersgruppe var for 10 til 15 år siden. De specifikke kriterier, som researchers ved Michigan Universitet anvendte, var aktiviteter i daglig livsførelse (ADL), som fastslår, om man selv kan vaske sig, gå på toilettet, klæde sig på, spise, gå osv. I dag har henved 12,5 % af mennesker ved den officielle pensionsalder på 66 år haft ADL-problemer, siden de var i slutningen af 50’erne; hvorimod, for 10-15 år siden, denne procent kun udgjorde 8,8 %, når mennesker nærmede sig 65-års grænsen.

På lignende måde viser målinger, at tilstedeværelsen af demens er stigende.

Alle disse målinger falder sammen med plagen med narkotiske midler (som indbefatter farmaceutiske medikamenter, f.eks. smertestillere), i et demobiliseret, demoraliseret samfund. Sundhedsfagligt personale rapporterer, at på trods af fremskridt inden for behandling af specifikke sygdomme, så er folk mere syge af tilstande, der er resultat af fedme og afhængighed, der alle er knyttet til depression og fortvivlelse.

16. okt., 2017 – Præsident Donald Trumps økonomiske chefrådgiver, Gary Cohn, kom, under en tale for Gruppen af 30 rådgivningsgruppen for bankaktivitet efter IMF/Verdensbankens årlige møder i Washington, D.C., med nogle advarsler om derivatmarkederne og for-store-finansinstitutioner, iflg. Financial Times. Cohn sagde, som også USA’s Finansministerium i en nylig rapport havde sagt, at clearinghusene, der skal forestille at reducere risici for modparter i de uregulerede derivatvæddemål til hundreder af billioner af dollar, i stedet selv var ved at blive koncentrationer af systemiske risici.

En af de ting, Cohn iflg. Financial Times understregede, var, at »Reguleringssystemet efter krisen skaber voksende kompleksitet og vækst af massive finansfirmaer og ignorerer lektien fra nedsmeltningen«. Han understregede, at de reguleringer, der blev vedtaget efter krakket 2008, inkl. Dodd/Frank-loven i USA, og som det var meningen, skulle fjerne »for-store-til-at-lade-gå-ned«-truslen, faktisk var i færd med at »føre til konsolideringen af mere aktivitet i en håndfuld enorme selskaber«. Han kaldte dette for »uhensigtsmæssige virkninger«, inklusive, at nye banker ikke kan komme ind i systemet.

Alt imens denne erklæring om problemet tydeligvis rejser den kendte løsning – at genindføre Glass/Steagall-loven for at bryde Wall Street-storbankerne op – så foreslog Cohn ikke dette, denne gang, men hævdede, at Finansministeriets fjernelse af visse reguleringer af Wall Street ville gøre det muligt for nyere, mindre banker at etablere sig.

Cohn advarede i særdeleshed om den voksende derivataktivitet, der finder sted gennem clearinghusene: »noget, der begynder at give genlyd som en betydelig, systemisk risiko«. Clearinghuse blev etableret som de store bankers partnerskaber efter krakket i 2008, for at sikre derivatspekulanter mod deres modparters bankerot i den anden ende af væddemålene, eller mod singulariteter i valutakurser, rentesatser osv., som der indgås væddemål om. Clearinghusene, der hovedsageligt opererer i London, hvor 40-50 % af alle derivatkontrakter kommer fra, har ikke en tilstrækkelig egenkapital, fordi de opfører formodninger om derivatvæddemålenes »nettoprofit« i en krise og herved reducerer det, der skal garanteres, men som højst sandsynligt ikke vil være muligt i netop denne sammenhæng.

Eftersom derivatmarkederne til anslået $600 billion er indlysende systemiske, er de omkring et dusin clearinghuse lige så systemiske, men underkapitaliserede, og i stedet for at fjerne risiko, så koncentrerer de den. Cohn bemærkede, at USA’s Finansministeriums rapport sagde, at UK’s »Brexit« gør dette til en hastesag.

Et andet talerør for City of London, The Economist, siger den 12. okt. i artiklen, »Brexit Will Give the Derivatives Markets a Nasty Headache« (Brexit vil give derivatmarkederne en grim hovedpine), at clearinghuse udgør et betydningsfuldt profitcenter for City of London-banker. »LCH, et clearinghus i London, clearer over 50 % af renteswaps [langt de mest almindelige derivater] i alle valutaer; Londonhuse clearer 75 % af swaps i euro og 97 % af dem i dollar.« Selv guvernør for Bank of England Mark Carney har erkendt, at disse clearinger kunne blive »juridisk ugyldige« under en kaotisk Brexit. At dette ville forårsage finansielt kaos, ville være årets underdrivelse.

Financial Times citerede Gary Cohn og skrev: »’Vi er uforstående over for størrelsesordenen af konstant at komme ting i clearinghuse uden de korrekte ’autoværn’ i clearingshusene’, fremførte hr. Cohn. ’I takt med, at vi får mindre gennemskuelighed, og mindre likvide aktiver i clearinghuset, begynder det for mig at give genlyd af at være et nyt, systemisk problem.’«

Foto: Trump sammen med sin økonomiske chefrådgiver, Gary Cohn.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 15. okt., 2017 – Kampen om USA’s præsidentskab er ved at blive den kamp, der vil afgøre skæbnen for civilisationen, som vi kender den. Vi oplever historiske forandringer i verden, med finansimperiet, centreret i London og New York, der vakler mod et katastrofalt kollaps. Finanssektorens herrer kan ikke længere holde deres egne aktører tilbage fra at komme med advarsler om, at kollapset er umiddelbart forestående, som tidligere tyske finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble sagde i sidste uge med en refleksion over den massive likviditet, der dækker over den voksende gældsboble – som han selv var med til at skabe. Den eneste udvej ligger i, at præsident Trump fuldt og helt implementerer de politikker, han har formuleret: En Glass/Steagall-reorganisering af finsanssystemet samtidig med, at man afskriver den kunstige gæld og skaber ny kredit til realøkonomien; fuldt ud at tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevejsproces med at dirigere statslig og international kredit til sand nationsopbygning, inklusive i USA; med at forny Amerikas helligelse til de fremskudte grænser af menneskets viden, gennem et genoplivet rumprogram, fuldskalaproduktion af kernekraft og optrapning af forskning i fusionskraft. Disse koncepter, som Lyndon LaRouche har promoveret gennem sine Fire Love, er begge inden for rækkevidde, og det haster.

Som modspil forsøger briterne og deres aktiver i USA hektisk at afsætte Trump fra embedet, hvilket de mener, er den eneste måde, momentum for et virkeligt paradigmeskifte kan stoppes. I løbet af den seneste uge har LaRouche Politiske Aktionskomite (LPAC) distribueret vores 32 sider lange dossier, »Robert Mueller er en umoralsk, juridisk morder – Han vil gøre sit job, hvis I giver ham lov«, der afslører særlige anklager Robert Muellers forbrydelser, til næsten alle medlemmer af Kongressen. Rygterne og sladderen begyndte omgående at svirre om forslag om at konfrontere Mueller direkte. I fredags sendte 19 kongresmedlemmer et åbent brev til lederne af Husets, hhv. Senatets Justitskomite og krævede omgående kongreshøringer om den »mulige interessekonflikt og beskyldninger om politisk partiskhed« vedr. hr. Mueller. Senator Chuck Grassley, der er leder af Senatets Efterretningskomite, og formand for Husets Efterretningskomite, Devin Nunes, fører begge en kamp mod efterretningssamfundet, fordi disse har blokeret for deres bestræbelser på at efterforske hele Russiagate-fupnummeret mod præsidenten. Det vil kræve maksimalt pres fra det amerikanske folk for at optrappe denne modstand mod forsøget, der kommer fra London, på at udføre et kup mod nationen.

De amerikanske massemedier støtter fuldt og helt dette britiskanstiftede kup og kolporterer påstande om, at præsidenten er uskikket til embedet, og med flere, der kræver, at man påkalder Forfatningens artikel 25 for at fjerne ham fra embedet pga. mental ustabilitet. Det må bemærkes, at selvsamme presse var tavse, da Obama begik forbrydelser mod menneskeheden med ødelæggelsen af Libyen og Syrien, i ledtog med al-Qaeda, eller da han overgav den nationale beslutningstagning til narkohandlende finansinstitutioner og legaliserede anvendelsen af narkotiske farmaceutiske lægemidler, der ødelægger menneskers hjerne.

I dag optrådte udenrigsminister Rex Tillerson på CNN og CBS søndags-talkshows, hvor han udtrykte sin totale afsky for det smålige, degraderende bras, der fylder 24-timers nyhedskværnen i USA, alt imens verdenshistoriske forandringer, der finder sted på globalt plan, og som fortjener og kræver fuld opmærksomhed, ignoreres. Da han blev presset til at angribe præsidenten, svarede han: »Præsidenten er en meget ukonventionel person, som vi alle ved, mht., hvordan han kommunikerer, hvordan han kan lide at skabe begivenheder, der fremtvinger handling. Præsidenten tager derfor ofte skridt til at fremtvinge handling, når han føler, at tingene simpelt hen ikke flytter sig.« Han udtrykte sin fulde støtte til Trump og hans politikker og tilbageviste løgnene om, at han skulle være undermineret af præsidenten.

Faren ligger i, at folk sidder fast i denne 24-timers nyhedskværn og ikke ser, at vi nu gennemlever en forandring i historiens lange bue. Sådanne øjeblikke med fundamental forandring, der fører til enten en ny, global renæssance, eller også til katastrofalt kaos og katastrofal krig, er farlige, men er også mulighedernes øjeblik, hvor folk er i stand til at overvinde fordomme og politisk dovenskab for at tænke over universelle ideer – det, som digteren Shelley identificerede som »intense og passionerede begreber om menneske og natur«. Og det er sådan, vi må adressere vore medmennesker i dette dyrebare øjeblik.

Foto: Tidligere præsident George W. Bush og FBI-direktør Robert Mueller applauderer klasseformanden torsdag, 30. okt., 2008, ved dimissionsfesten for FBI-specialagenter i Quantico, Va. (Whitehouse Photo)

Dette er en utrolig historie, og på nuværende tidspunkt står det ikke klart, hvilken af siderne, der vinder. Men det forholder sig altså modsat i forhold til den måde, det fremstilles på: Det er nemlig de personer, der går efter Trump, som er dem, der bør efterforskes, og, hvis de findes skyldige, stilles for en domstol. Det er, hvad der virkelig foregår, og formålet er at gøre med Trump, ligesom det billede fra Gullivers Rejser, husker I nok, hvor Gulliver bliver holdt nede af så mange små reb, at han ikke kan røre sig. Og hele ideen bag kampagnen imod Trump er selvfølgelig, at han har så travlt med at forsvare sig, at han ikke kan gennemføre sin faktiske dagsorden.

Dette er den kamp, som USA’s, og gennem implikation, hele resten af verdens, eksistens beror på, i betragtning af USA’s strategiske betydning.

Se webcast her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MslkvEHnOn0

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Se video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD7D3Xublyg

14. okt., 2017 – Den 13. okt. stilede 19 amerikanske kongresmedlemmer et åbent brev til senator Chuck Grassley og kongresmedlem Bob Goodlatte (hhv. formand for Senatets og Husets Justitskomite), i hvilket de kræver åbne kongreshøringer, der skal undersøge »mulige interessekonflikter og beskyldninger om politisk partiskhed« hos særlige anklager Robert Mueller og hans team af politiske lejemordere. Hovedunderskriveren af brevet er kongresmedlem Brian Babin (R-TX). Uddrag af brevet lyder:

»Dette team [Robert Mueller og hans advokater] har en gennemgribende myndighed og en åben mission, og alligevel får de i vid udstrækning lov at operere i hemmelighed, og de udvælges af og står sluttelig kun til ansvar for én person: Hr. Mueller selv. Med flere rapporter, der hver dag kommer om mulige interessekonflikter og beskyldninger om politisk partiskhed, ville det være både i den amerikanske offentligheds interesse og i det særlige anklagerteams interesse at tale til det amerikanske folk gennem dets valgte repræsentanter i Kongressen.

I henhold hertil anmoder vi respektfuldt, at én eller begge Justitskomiteerne omgående indkalder til en offentlig og åben høring, eller en række høringer, for at bringe hr. Mueller og hans team frem fra skyggerne og frem i det offentlige rum.«

Ifølge en rapport i Daily Caller begyndte Babin at organisere underskrifter til brevet tilbage i august og besluttede og offentliggøre det nu.

Foto: Særlige anklager Robert Mueller.

Vært Matthew Ogden: Som titlen på vores webcast, »Nedtælling til Trumps besøg i Kina: Ny Silkevej, ikke geopolitik«, antyder, så befinder vi os i en nedtælling til en begivenhed, der kunne vise sig at blive et vendepunkt i verdenshistorien; hvis vi gør vores job rigtigt. Om 21 dage, nøjagtig 3 uger fra i dag, vil præsident Trump tage af sted på sit første statsbesøg til Kina; som finder sted i forbindelse med en rundrejse til andre asiatiske lande og Trumps deltagelse i ASEAN-topmødet. Alt imens en stor del af mediefokus har været på Nordkorea, så er de virkelige nyheder, at der foreligger en meget klar mulighed for, at præsident Trump under sit besøg med Xi Jinping kunne bruge denne mulighed til at signalere, at USA er villig til at tilslutte sig Kinas store projekt for Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Selv om præsident Trump tydeligvis fremstillede et billede af sig selv under valgkampen som værende anti-Kina, sandsynligvis under indflydelse af pseudo-højrefløjs-populistiske Kina-angribere som Steve Bannon og andre, så peger præsident Trumps handlinger under sin embedstid på et helt andet billede. Under præsident Xi Jinpings statsbesøg i USA – det såkaldte Mar-a-Lago-topmøde – udviklede han og præsident Trump en meget varm, særlig, personlig relation. Og det var ud af denne konstruktive relation med præsident Trump, at denne gav sit samtykke til præsident Xi Jinpings anmodning om, at der blev sendt officiel amerikansk repræsentation til Bælte & Vej Forum; det storslåede, internationale Silkevejstopmøde, der fandt sted i maj i år (i Beijing). Dette fulgte præsident Trump op på og sendte en særlig repræsentant fra Udenrigsministeriet, Matt Pottinger, som blev særligt bemærket af Kina. Og, som vi har berettet, har præsident Trump, under flere private møder med højtplacerede repræsentanter fra den kinesiske regering – inklusive med statsrådgiveren (Yang Jiechi), som er den tredjehøjest rangerende embedsmand i den kinesiske regering – indikeret sin beredvillighed til USA’s tilslutning til den Nye Silkevej.

Vi ved, det haster med, at disse planer bliver til virkelighed. Det haster mht. den internationale, strategiske situation; det haster mht. USA’s nationale, økonomiske situation; og det haster med endelig at afviste fortidens mislykkede geopolitik og erstatte den med hr. LaRouches økonomiske metode – som vi gennemgår hver onsdag på denne hjemmeside.[1] Vi vil fortsætte med at udvikle disse temaer. Men dette kræver et totalt skifte i tankegang, hvor vi afviser de forfejlede aksiomer med begrænsede resurser og affolkning, som er blevet tvunget ned over os; og at vi erstatter dem med en helt ny idé om økonomi, ja, faktisk hele menneskets forhold til omgivelserne og Universet, som er baseret på en idé om en til stadighed ekspanderende produktivitet i overensstemmelse med menneskets unikke, skabende natur. Dette er faktisk kernen i LaRouches økonomiske metode; og i løbet af disse kommende uger, hvor du, forhåbentlig, deltager i denne undervisningsserie i økonomi, vil du lære, at det er den sande kerne i en aksiomatisk forståelse af, hvad sande »win-win«-relationer må være baseret på.

Det er i denne sammenhæng, at det haster med, at USA tilslutter sig den Nye Silkevej. I løbet af de kommende 21 dage, hvor vi tæller ned til Trumps statsbesøg, kan jeg forsikre jer for, at dette bliver spørgsmålet; det bliver de parametre, der er i færd med at udforme verdenspolitik og verdenshistorie. Spørgsmålet om denne rejse og dens resultat inkarnerer på en meget virkelig måde alt, som er det centrale spørgsmål i denne aktuelle krig, som nu finder sted, over selve det amerikanske præsidentskabs sjæl. Det har mange aspekter. Det omfatter ikke alene det institutionelle kup, som køres mod præsidenten indefra, men vi kan også se virkningerne fra krigsførelsen mht. informations- og mediekrigsførelse, der kommer, ikke alene fra mainstream-medierne, men fra den skændige rolle, der spilles af personer som Steve Bannon og andre, i forsøg på at tvinge Trump ind i en anti-kinesisk dagsorden. Det er vores ansvar at modgå dette og informere det amerikanske folk om, at vejen frem for USA udelukkende ligger i, at USA tilslutter sig den Nye Silkevej.

Dette spørgsmål om, hvorvidt USA afviser fortidens mislykkede, britiske geopolitik og tilslutter sig den Nye Silkevej og vedtager den nye, internationale, økonomiske orden og dette nye »win-win«-system for internationale relationer, som Kina på det seneste har været fortaler for; dette spørgsmål er faktisk på en meget virkelig måde kerneprincippet i alt det, som Lyndon og Helga LaRouche har kæmpet for i de seneste 40 år. Dette spørgsmål er selve roden i det kup, man forsøger at gennemføre imod vores siddende, lovmæssigt, behørigt valgte præsident. Lad dig ikke narre; det har intet at gøre med Trump personligt. Det har alt at gøre med det potentielle resultat af et skifte i politikken i dette land i løbet af de forestående dage, uger og måneder; med vores beslutning om, hvad vores fremtid vil være i relation til dette Nye Paradigme, dette nye, fremvoksende »win-win«-system for internationale relationer, som Kina er i færd med at opbygge omkring Bælte & Vej Initiativet.

I går beskrev Helga Zepp-LaRouche det under sit webcast; det er som med billedet af Gulliver fra Jonathan Swifts berømte Gullivers Rejser, hvor han bliver bundet til jorden af hundreder eller tusinder af små bitte reb af Lilliputterne, som han møder. Dette er det billede, man må have, når man forestiller sig situationen i Det Hvide Hus; med præsident Trump, der bliver forhindret i at gennemføre nogen af de positive programinitiativer, som fik ham valgt. Infrastruktur; genopbygning af ’Rustbæltet’; genopbygning af amerikansk industri; begrænsning af Wall Street; genindførelse af Glass-Steagall. Som vi har set af dækningen af valgstrategien, så var det dette, som amerikanerne responderede til; dette er grunden til, at folk, der både var konservative og Demokrater, skiftede over og valgte denne præsident. Det var pga. disse spørgsmål, der stadig plager det amerikanske folks hverdag, men vi mangler stadig at se beslutsom handling finde sted mht. disse presserende spørgsmål for det amerikanske folk. I mellemtiden har vi den overhængende trussel om et transatlantisk finanssammenbrud, som, med hensyn til proportionerne, langt kunne overstige det, der fandt sted i 2008.

Som en erklæring, der gik ud til LaRouche PAC’s mail-liste i går, korrekt sagde, så vil udfaldet af denne kamp – det, jeg netop har forklaret – med disse 21-dages nedtælling til Trumps besøg i Kina, og om vi vil lykkes med at guide dette land i retning af at tilslutte sig dette fremvoksende Nye Paradigme; udfaldet af denne kamp vil afgøre, hvad der vil ske med dette land i de næste 50, for ikke at sige 100 år. Det er en sådan historisk skillelinje, vi står ved.

Her følger resten af udskriftet på engelsk:

That statement, which I just referred to, went on to read as
follows:  “The British have a plan.  It is the same one which
they have always used: control political entities, whether it be
the anti-fa on the left, or the alt-right on the right; split the
country in two on issues of identity.  The actual ideas and
philosophical roots of this country, the great republican ideas
of our founders, who built upon the revolution of the
Renaissance, those actual ideas are lost in the heated wars of
fake populism.
“Look at what is missing.  Puerto Rico is a disaster, as its
entire infrastructure was destroyed, not by a hurricane, but by
Wall Street predators.  California is in flames.  Texas and
Florida have not recovered from the manmade disasters which
destroyed whole cities and the livelihoods of thousands.  Day by
day, hundreds of our citizens, particularly in the economically
devastated formerly industrial heartland, are dying of drug
overdoses.  This epidemic is killing more people daily than AIDS
at the height of its devastation.  Wall Street stands on the
verge of another financial collapse.
“President Trump began to move on answers to all of this —
overthrowing the British thinking which had come to govern us.
That is at the center of the whole furor against Trump.  Lyndon
LaRouche has provided a comprehensive solution in his Four
Hamiltonian Economic Laws.  Implementation of these ideas will
actually overthrow the swamp which is in the process of
destroying this country; but only if we go all out right now.”
So that’s the kind of call to action for the next 21 days.
That spells out exactly the parameters within which this fight is
being waged.
Those of you who might now know this yet, there is a new
feature from Helga Zepp-LaRouche which is being featured on the
Schiller Institute New Paradigm website every week on Thursdays,
which is an international webcast on the New Silk Road.  That’s
accessible via the Schiller Institute New Paradigm YouTube
channel, but we’ve also been posting a link to that on the
larouchepac.com website.  This is a very important initiative
from Helga Zepp-LaRouche; and it’s coming from somebody who is
not merely a commentator watching events unfold as if from the
outside, but somebody who is directly at the center of making
history unfold around this direction of the New Silk Road.  As
those of you who have watched this broadcast know, Helga
Zepp-LaRouche herself was personally one of the featured guests
at the Belt and Road Forum back in May in Beijing, China;
speaking at several of the roundtable discussions and sideline
meetings, and attending in person the main event, where she heard
President Xi Jinping’s keynote along with the addresses of all of
the other heads of state who attended that conference.  Helga
Zepp-LaRouche was also featured in a major one-page full spread
article in China Daily just about one month ago, for her
history in terms of her lifetime dedication to fighting for the
emergence of the new international economic order, which is now
taking its form in this New Silk Road — the Belt and Road
Initiative in China.
So, what I would like to do to promote this weekly webcast
that Helga Zepp-LaRouche is doing, and also to highlight some of
the very important strategic insights that she had in her webcast
that she broadcast yesterday, I would like to play just two short
clips for you from that broadcast yesterday.  Here’s the first
one, and I’d like you to listen to her strategic overview, and
also the call to action that she has at the very end of the
remarks that you’re about to hear now.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  As a matter of fact, this
coming trip of President Trump to Asia will be extremely
important, because this trip occurs in the context of a very
dramatic strategic situation.  We have all signs that a new
financial crash is in the workings, and we can talk about that in
a little while.  There is an alternative already in existence,
which is the incredibly dynamic Belt and Road Initiative which
has been initiated by China four years ago.  As we already made
the point before the first summit between President Xi and
President Trump in April, that the best way to solve the
strategic situation is if you could get the United States and
China to work together in the Belt and Road Initiative.  That
would mean Chinese investments in infrastructure in the United
States, which is starting slowly.  There is very good news that
there is a new taskforce which has been formed in California in
San Francisco, which is supposed to make it easier for Chinese
investors to invest in infrastructure in the United States.
There is bidding going on where Chinese railway companies are
trying to win the bid to build fast train systems in California.
So there are promising signs.
But given the enormous destruction of the infrastructure,
both through attrition — because all of this infrastructure in
the United States, much of it is more than 100 years old — so
it’s decrepit already all by itself.  But then you had the
hurricanes in Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico; and now you have the
wildfires in California.  So, there is a gigantic requirement.
We want China to invest in infrastructure in the United States as
part of the Belt and Road Initiative.  On the other side, we want
American firms to be involved in the many, many projects of the
Belt and Road Initiative in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
That must somehow be more on top of the agenda.  We are
right now mobilizing, mostly in the United States, but also
elsewhere, that when President Trump makes this long-awaited and
extremely important strategic trip of a state visit to China in
the context of his Asia tour, we wish very much that the Belt and
Road Initiative is formalized.  I think that there are absolute
potentials that this could occur.  If it occurs, we really are
over the hump of the danger of war; that is my deepest belief.
Because the “win-win” cooperation of the New Silk Road offers a
new model not only of relations among nations in general, but
especially one big component has been the proposal by China to
set up a new model of major power relations.  If there would be
such a transformation, I think the world would really enter a new
era of cooperation in the mutual benefit to end geopolitical
games, to end for sure the policies of the Bush and Obama
administrations of interventionist wars for regime change, of
color revolution.  You would replace that with a system of
sovereign nations working together for their mutual benefit.
So, if we can all work together to accomplish that, and I
appeal to all listeners and viewers of this program to help us;
because the mainstream media are still not reporting the
extraordinary importance of this new dynamic.  Therefore, it is
not generally known enough, but I think this must be changed in
the next three weeks.  So, I’m really asking all of you to help
to spread the message.

OGDEN:  So, as you just heard, that was a direct appeal from
Helga LaRouche to all of the viewers, asking you directly to help
spread the message.  She said, I appeal to all listeners and
viewers to realize the extraordinary importance of the next three
weeks.  This, in fact, could be the beginning of an entirely new
era in terms of international politics and policy; that’s this
kind of watershed moment.
Now, the question of what has prevented these positive
inclinations from coming to fruition up to this point, and what
must be defeated if we are to allow these positive inclinations
of the Trump Presidency to take precedence; that’s the issue
which Helga LaRouche took up next.  I’d like to just play this
clip for you here.

ZEPP-LAROUCHE:  I actually would like to talk about
the battle inside the United States first, because there is right
now, as you say, an attempt to prevent Trump from having a
positive relationship with China and with Russia.  Now the famous
Russia-gate is about to be put where it should have been from the
beginning — in the trash can.  Namely, there is no evidence.
There was a statement by Senator Burr and one other Senator, who
said they investigated all the accusations about collusion
between the Trump administration and Russia and they could find
nothing.  But there is still reason, they say, to assume that
there is Russian collusion because the intelligence agencies are
saying so.  Now this is an incredible story, and we have produced
a dossier about who is the apparatus behind the effort to impeach
Trump or have a coup against Trump; namely, it is all centered
around Special Counsel Robert Mueller.  This dossier is an
absolute bombshell, because it establishes without any doubt that
the same people and the same apparatus which went after my
husband Lyndon LaRouche in the ’80s and after that, is the same
apparatus which covered up the Saudi role in 9/11, and which is
now organizing with the British Intelligence to set up a fake
story against President Trump.  This is a huge battle.  There is
some fight, for example, Senator Grassley and Congressman Nunes
both in their respective committees, pointed to the fact that
there is collusion, yes; but not with the Russians, but with
British Intelligence.  Senator Grassley made a big point that the
so-called “evidence” of Comey and Mueller about Russian
cooperation is actually centered around this firm GPS Fusion,
which hired the former MI-6 agent Christopher Steele who produced
this infamous so-called dodgy dossier about Trump.
Now, Senator Grassley made the point that the FBI was not
investigating this on its own, but they took material from
British Intelligence as evidence.  So, this is an unbelievable
story, and it is at this point very unclear which side will come
out on top.  But it is the opposite of the way it is being
portrayed; namely, it’s those people who are going after Trump
who are the ones who are the ones who should be investigated, and
in the case they’re found guilty, put on trial.  So that is
really what is going on, and the aim is to make with Trump — you
remember this picture in {Gulliver’s Travels}, where Gulliver was
tied with so many little ropes and so forth that he couldn’t
move.  Obviously the whole idea of the campaign against Trump is,
that he is so busy defending himself, that he doesn’t get to his
actual agenda.  So this is the battle on which the existence of
the United States depends, and by implication the rest of the
world, given the strategic importance of the United States.

OGDEN:  So that video is available in full; there’s a link
to it on the LaRouche PAC website, so you can watch Helga
LaRouche’s full strategic webcast from yesterday.  As I said,
this is a new regular feature that she will be engaged in.  What
you just heard Helga LaRouche talk about was this bombshell
dossier which has been issued by LaRouche PAC, and is already
being circulated quite widely in the United States; although we
have the responsibility to circulate far, far more widely over
the coming days.  But it’s been circulated in the US Congress,
among very relevant Congressional committees; it’s being
circulated in various cities across the United States.  We’re
encouraging you to access the digital version of this pamphlet
online.  I’m going to put an image here on the screen for you of
the cover of that pamphlet [Fig. 1]; you’ll see it right here.
This is “Robert Mueller Is an Amoral Illegal Assassin: He Will Do
His Job if You Let Him”.  As it says on the back cover [Fig. 2],
“Robert Mueller has played a central role in three of the most
shameful chapters of our nation’s recent history:  the frame-up
of Lyndon LaRouche; the cover-up of September 11th; the set-up of
President Trump. This dossier exposes the story of deceit that
has been perpetrated against the American people for far too
long.  Read the contents of this report, and help us to stop the
attempted coup now being run against the US Presidency.”  So,
again, that’s available on the LaRouche PAC website —
http:lpac.co/ytdos — the link is available on the screen there.
Now, I’m going to show you one snapshot from the inside of
this pamphlet, this is the next image [Fig. 3].  And this
actually gives you a sense of not just the mechanisms of this
kind of apparatus and how it is utilized to try to suppress
certain tendencies in US policy, as was just documented by Helga
LaRouche; but it actually gives you the sense of what the true
issue at the root of this is, and what links these episodes
together going back to Lyndon LaRouche’s fight for a new
international economic order and going forward to today around
the question of what Trump’s relationship will be to this new
international economic order which has emerged.  What you’ll see
there on the screen, is a snapshot of 1982.  This is another
crucial watershed moment in history, comparable in a very real
way to where we find ourselves now, although things have advanced
much more since then.  But at that period, 1982, which is taken
up in detail by the contents of the dossier, this was a moment in
history where this new international economic order was on the
table in very high-level circles, and was central to many of the
historic events of that period.  So, you’ll see there on this
page, a few pictures of Lyndon LaRouche.  On the top left corner,
this is a picture of Lyndon LaRouche meeting with several leading
policymakers in India, during a trip that he made to India in
1982.  The purpose of this trip was for Lyndon LaRouche to meet
with the prime minister of India, Indira Gandhi, which he did in
1982; he did again the following year in 1983.  They were
discussing exactly the role that India could play in helping this
new international economic order to emerge.  In fact, Indira
Gandhi, when she hosted the Non-Aligned Movement summit in India
in 1983, put this on the table as the central principle of the
Non-Aligned Movement; the emergence of a new international
economic order.  Now tragically, Indira Gandhi was assassinated
less than one year later.
Now the other aspect of that 1982 period was Lyndon
LaRouche’s involvement with another head of state.  This was
Mexican President Jose Lopez-Portillo.  There’s a picture there
also on that page of Lyndon LaRouche and his wife Helga
Zepp-LaRouche at a press conference in Mexico City in 1982;
directly following a personal meeting that they had with
President Jose Lopez-Portillo.  What were they discussing?
Lyndon LaRouche’s policy for a new international economic order.
That was spelled out in detail in a document called “Operation
Juarez”, and this was a proposal for the debtor countries of
Central and South America to use their collective status as
debtor countries as a strategic leverage, and to declare a
unilateral simultaneous debt moratorium which would cause the
reigning IMF and World Bank system to be forced into a new
international economic order.  That was spelled out in detail in
LaRouche’s document “Operation Juarez”, and in fact, Jose
Lopez-Portillo adopted this as his personal policy.  In an
appearance at the United Nations General Assembly in the autumn
of that year — 1982 — Jose Lopez-Portillo called for exactly
this: a new international economic order.  He warned that were
this new economic order not to be adopted, the world would be
facing a new medieval dark age.
So, you can see just in that snapshot of 1982, that Lyndon
LaRouche was central to the policies that were shaping world
history, and this was something which really was a battle for the
very soul of economic policy, both in the United States and
abroad.  Now, at that time, this was the moment in which the
legal prosecution against Lyndon LaRouche was ramped up to a
level that was unprecedented in our republic’s history.  This was
something that former Attorney General Ramsey Clark personally
said, that he had not ever witnessed this kind of government
campaign against a private US individual in his entire career or
elsewhere.  So, it was this question, however, this fight for a
new international economic order.

Now, we are 35 years later, and we’ve fast-forwarded from
1982 to 2017.  Look at how the world has changed; look at the
fact that the world’s leading most-populous country on the
planet, China, has adopted the New Silk Road policy, the new
international economic order which Lyndon and Helga LaRouche have
fought for, for so long.  This is the defining question of
history:  What will our relationship, as the United States, be to
this emerging new dynamic as it’s taken its form?  This is the
question for President Donald Trump.  As we approach this
historic visit, this historic summit between Trump and President
Xi Jinping, this state visit to China, we have 21 days as we
count down between now and three weeks from now when President
Trump departs for this trip.  In a very real way, it will be the
activities of the intellectual leadership of this country, among
those of you who are watching this broadcast, to educate our
fellow Americans and to ensure that the positive proclivities of
this administration are allowed to be fulfilled and are allowed
to take their culmination in President Trump having a very
positive and constructive meeting with President Xi Jinping; and
announcing for the world to hear, that the United States is done
with the failed British geopolitics of the past.  It has only led
to failed states, regime change, and perpetual war.  The era of
the future is “win-win” relations, great projects in the image of
the New Silk Road, and a great power relationship between the
United States, China, and Russia; and as Lyndon LaRouche has
called for, India as well.  These four great powers can revisit
what President Franklin Roosevelt intended to shape the world
into following World War II; as he was intending to take the New
Deal of the United States, the American System, and bring it to
the countries of the world — including the former colonial
countries — to develop them and to bring an end to British
imperial geopolitics once and for all.
So that job has come down to us, and we must shoulder the
responsibility to make the fullest out of this next 21 days as we
count down to what could be a watershed historic moment for the
history of the world.  So, thank you very much for joining us
here today.  Please stay tuned over the next 21 days, as we
proceed through this very important period in history.  Thank you
and good night.

[1] Se tag: LaRouche Economic Class series 

Også danske læsere kan tilmelde sig undervisningsrækken: Meld dig til her: lpac.co/econ2017

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 12. okt., 2017 – Fra og med i dag uddeles vores bombe af en rapport, »Robert Mueller er en umoralsk, juridisk morder: Han vil gøre sit job, hvis I giver ham lov«, med stor slagkraft i New York City og Washington, D.C., til 180 internationale missioner til FN (hen over et par dage) og til udvalgte kontorer blandt 535 senatorer og kongresmedlemmer på Capitol Hill. Disse særlige cirkuleringer kommer netop, som et nyt initiativ i Kongressen forårsagede frustrerede skrig over, at Russiagate/Trumpgate måske vil mislykkes.

Husets Efterretningskomite har indstævnet firmaet Fusion GPS, der har hjemsted i Washington, D.C., og dets ansatte om at overholde Kongressens krav om information om, hvordan Fusion kommissionerede skandaledossieret fra 2016 om Donald Trump fra en MI6-ex-agent, Christopher Steele. Kongresmedlem Adam Schiff (D-Californien) udtrykte stærk modstand mod dem, der har udstedt indstævningen, da han sagde, »Jeg tror, at der er håb om, at, hvis de kan stille Christopher Steele for en rigsret, og hvis de kan stille FBI og Justitsministeriet for en rigsret, så kan de måske stille hele den russiske efterforskning for en rigsret.«

Ja! Der er en udbredt og voksende støtte blandt den amerikanske offentlighed til netop dette resultat. Det er desuden, for mange mennesker i og omkring byen New York, og i Washington, D.C., som direkte oplevede angrebene den 11. september, en stærk og personlig sag, at Bob Mueller er en løgnagtig lejemorder, der mørklagde saudiernes rolle i dette angreb.

At opbygge et momentum for at stoppe angrebet på det amerikanske præsidentskab og på nationen er samtidig at opbygge et momentum for, at det Nye Silkevejsparadigme kan blive til virkelighed i den transatlantiske sfære, og kan udvides i den eurasiske sfære, som det så spektakulært netop gør. I USA og Europa er der et presserende behov for en Glass/Steagall-reorganisering af bankpraksis, udstedelse af rigelig, målrettet kredit og igangsættelse af forskning og udvikling ind i de nye områder for fusion, plasmavidenskab og rumforskning. Hvordan det skal ske, har Lyndon LaRouche fremlagt i sine »Fire Love«.

Desuden er det ikke muligt at genopbygge efter katastroferne, undtagen ved hjælp af disse »Fire Love«. Alene skalaen af den udbredte ødelæggelse i Nordamerika som et resultat af sårbarheden over for »naturkatastrofer«, forårsaget af Wall Streets sabotage af vedligeholdelse og udvikling af infrastruktur, viser behovet for et paradigmeskifte i politikken. Til orkanzonerne i den Mexicanske Golf og Caribien, og jordskælvet i Mexico, skal yderligere føjes de hærgende brande i Californien. Mens dette skrives, har 21 mennesker mistet livet, og over 25.000 er fordrevet af brandene, der stadig brænder kraftigt. Andre stater i det vestlige USA er ligeledes blevet ramt i år. Den 12. okt. vil Repræsentanterne Hus sandsynligvis stemme om den næste lov om finansiering af katastrofehjælp på $36,5 mia. – som i går korrekt blev sat op, på anmodning fra Det Hvide Hus, med $5 mia. til Puerto Rico, men som stadig kun lige rækker til at dække udgifterne til den tidlige responsfase. Hvad med genopbygningsfaserne?

Selv før de nylige katastrofer indtraf, er den forfaldne, amerikanske basisinfrastruktur brudt sammen – som det ses i transportkrisen i New Yorks Metro – pga. manglende modernisering. Den 1. oktober, lige midt i høsttiden, opstod der et hydraulisk svigt af en port i sluse og dæmning 53 på Ohiofloden, med en 46 mil lang række af flodpramme på floden til følge. Faciliteten blev bygget i 1928, og dens erstatning i nærheden har været under konstruktion i 30 år og er stadig ikke færdig.

Om 23 dage rejser præsident Trump af sted til Asien, hvor hans møde med præsident Xi Jinping kan blive anledning til, at et nyt stadium for håb og fordel for menneskeheden bryder ud. Vi kæmper for en sådan ny begyndelse.

Torsdag, den 12. oktober, er Columbus Dag, som regnes for at være den dato, hvor Columbus gjorde landgang i de amerikanske lande i 1492. Præsident Franklin Roosevelt udstedte, midt i en krigstid, en mindeerklæring i 1940, der sluttede med disse ord:

»I år, hvor vi betænker den tilstand, som verden er blevet bragt til af destruktive kræfter, med lovløshed og tøjlesløs magt, der hærger en ældre civilisation, og med vor egen republik, der ruster sig til forsvar for sine institutioner, kan vi puste nyt liv i vor tiltro og forny vort mod ved at mindes Columbus’ triumf efter en periode med hjerteskærende prøvelser.

Det løfte, som Columbus’ opdagelse skænkede verden, om en ny begyndelse i menneskets march mod fremskridt, har været undervejs mod sin opfyldelse i fire århundreder. Det er nu vor opgave at være fast besluttet på, at denne fremmarch, på trods af tilbageslag, vil fortsætte mod opfyldelsen.«

12. okt., 2017 – For firs år siden besluttede præsident Franklin Delano Roosevelt, at Christoffer Columbus skulle mindes med en national helligdag i oktober måned. Tre år senere udstedte han følgende erklæring for 12. okt., 1940.

Christoffer Columbus’ og hans diminutive flådes sørejse mod det ukendte vest var ikke alene optakten til en ny, historisk æra. For den modige sømand var det kulminationen af års dristige beregninger, omhyggelige forberedelser og kamp mod modstandere, der havde nedgjort hans store plan og modarbejdet dens gennemførelse.

Med en udlægning af den sære doktrin, at der hinsides oceanet fandtes solidt, beboeligt landområde, måtte Columbus først gøre sine tanker troværdige for sine tvivlende velgørere og dernæst overvinde den tilsyneladende endeløse række af forhindringer, med hvilke snæversynede mennesker spærrede vejen for at udstyre en flåde. Selv, da de tre, små skibe var startet ud på deres epokeskabende rejse, begik mandskabet mytteri og krævede, at han vendte om. Columbus holdt sig imidlertid på kursen, og om morgenen, den 12. oktober, 1492, var det velkomne land i sigte.

Denne søfarer fra Genovas mod og tiltro og vision forherliger og beriger det drama, der var europæernes begyndende udvandring til Amerika. Columbus og hans rejsefæller var forvarslet om senere store bevægelser af folk fra Spanien, fra Columbus’ hjemland Italien og fra alle lande i Europa. Og ud af sammensmeltningen af alle disse nationale grene skabtes det Amerika, til hvilket den Gamle Verden på så storslået vis har bidraget.

I år, hvor vi betænker den tilstand, som verden er blevet bragt til af destruktive kræfter, med lovløshed og tøjlesløs magt, der hærger en ældre civilisation, og med vor egen republik, der ruster sig til forsvar for sine institutioner, kan vi puste nyt liv i vor tiltro og forny vort mod ved at mindes Columbus’ triumf efter en periode med hjerteskærende prøvelser.

Det løfte, som Columbus’ opdagelse skænkede verden, om en ny begyndelse i menneskets march mod fremskridt, har været undervejs mod sin opfyldelse i fire århundreder. Det er nu vor opgave at være fast besluttet på, at denne fremmarch, på trods af tilbageslag, vil fortsætte mod opfyldelsen.

Foto: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, USA’s 32. præsident, i en bil på sin ejendom i Hyde Park, N.Y.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 10. okt., 2017 – Med præsident Trumps planlagte, lange række af topmøder i Asien om kun tre uger, er det ikke et spørgsmål om gradvis modstand for at besejre forsøget på at tvinge ham ud af embedet: Det er en yderst presserende kamp. Hvis heksejagten, der ledes af »særlige anklager« Robert Mueller, stoppes, kan præsidenten bruge denne rejse til at fremme den dagsorden, der bragte ham til magten, og som er spørgsmålet om afgørende samarbejde for fred med stormagterne Kina og Rusland, og om det transformerende byggeri af infrastruktur, der kan »gøre Amerika stort igen«. Disse to spørgsmål er forbundet i form af, at USA tilslutter sig Bælte & Vej Initiativet eller den »Nye Silkevej« med store, globale projekter.

Potentialet for en sådan Trump-dagsorden har, fra begyndelsen i 2016, været motiveringen for britisk efterretning og deres medskyldige, europæiske eliter og amerikanske efterretningstjenester og medier, til at konspirere om at holde Trump ude, eller tvinge ham ud.

Præsidenten er under konstant angreb fra alle disse, om alle spørgsmål. Selv den største og mest vedvarende præsidentielle nødrespons i de seneste 80 år til tre successive, store orkaners ødelæggelser er blevet angrebet med bitter partiskhed, udløst af Obama-demokrater og medierne.

Men det, der står på spil for Muellers sponsorer og Trumps fjender på højeste angloamerikanske niveau, er ikke nogen af disse »spørgsmål«. Det er derimod muligheden for, at Trump kunne bryde alle love i britisk geopolitik og indgå en alliance mellem store magter for fred og gensidig økonomisk profit, baseret på deres fælles interesse.

Det betyder, at Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, og dermed den politik for Verdenslandbroen, som Lyndon og Helga LaRouche i 40 år har forfulgt i hele verden, er det faktiske potentiale, der står på spil.

Alternativet, hvis Trump bliver stoppet og ikke gennemfører det, er ikke alene en forhøjet trussel om krig, men også endnu et finanssammenbrud; selv de, der har været mest med til at forårsage det, som Tysklands finansminister Wolfgang Schäuble, advarer nu om dette sammenbrud.

I intervallet frem til præsident Trumps afrejse til Asien holder Helga Zepp-LaRouche tre internationale webcasts om den fulde betydning af, at Amerika – og Europa – tilslutter sig Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Indholdet af disse webcasts er som følger:

Bælte & Vej Initiativet – ideen om udvikling gennem Verdenslandbroen sådan, som LaRouche-parret har udbredt det i årtier – involverer store, nationale kreditinstitutioner, der på basis af fælles aftaler iværksætter storstilede projekter for højteknologisk infrastruktur og en storstilet udvidelse af rumforskning og samarbejde om rumforskning, sammen med forcerede programmer for udvikling af nukleare fusionsplasmateknologier. Det involverer en stigende produktivitet og produktiv beskæftigelse – præcis, hvad præsident Trump tilsigtede. Og Wall Street og City of London må sættes under kontrol gennem Glass/Steagall-forholdsregler.

Indholdet og resultatet af denne Asienrejse og dens potentiale afgøres netop nu, gennem en mobilisering for at knuse Mueller-kuppet. Dette er det aktuelle øjebliks virkelige spørgsmål.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump modtager en briefing om nødhjælps- og redningsindsatsen efter orkanen Maria. 26. sept. 2017. (Whitehouse Photo)

9. okt., 2017 – Med en påmindelse om Lyndon LaRouches erkendelse af, at vindere af Nobelprisen i økonomi er de eneste mennesker i verden, der sandfærdigt kan hævde, de er certificerede idioter, modtog Richard Thaler, en adfærdsøkonom, i dag dette certifikat af Nobelkomiteen. Thaler er sammen med Cass Sunstein medforfatter til bogen fra 2008, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness (dansk Nudge), der bl.a. udkom som føljeton i Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, avisen med hjemsted i Tyskland og Europas finanscentrum, Frankfurt.

Sunstein var selvfølgelig Barack Obamas informationsadministrator og er gift med den gale kvinde, Samantha Power, Obamas FN-ambassadør.

Lyndon LaRouche afviste at anerkende, at Thaler var en økonom – adfærdsmæssig eller på anden vis – eftersom hans vanvittige bog om at »nudge« (’puffe’) folk til at følge Big Brothers ønsker i heldigste fald var meget dårlig adfærdspsykologi, ikke økonomi.

I 2010 etablerede Storbritannien et Behavioral Insight Team (med kælenavnet Nudge-enheden) i regeringen, med Thaler som rådgiver. I 2015 udstedte Obama en eksekutiv ordre med titlen, »Brugen af adfærdsvidenskabens indsigt til bedre at tjene det amerikanske folk«. Den tilskyndede eksekutive afdelinger og statslige kontorer til at »identificere politikker, programmer og operationer, hvor anvendelsen af adfærdsvidenskabens indsigter kan afkaste betydelige forbedringer i offentlig velfærd, programresultater og programmers omkostningseffektivitet«.

LaRouche responderede til Obamas vedtagelse af disse håndlangere for Bertrand Russell i sit berømte webcast den 11. april, 2009, om ’Nerobama’, og ved at tildele Obama den ikoniske Hitler-moustache. Et komplet udskrift kan læses i EIR, 17. april, 2009. 

 

 

Foto: Richard Thaler.

»Verden er i den grad præget af et helt utroligt potentiale for menneskehedens videre færd, her på Jorden og ude i det store univers, der omgiver os. Samtidig, så er vi også – på grund af, at der er en gammel magtstruktur [kan ikke høres] – jamen, så er vi også i en farlig tid, hvor det kan gå helt galt. Hvor vi lever med en aktiv trussel om, at disse galninge i den gamle garde kan finde på at udrydde menneskeheden i en atomkrig. Det er noget, man må forholde sig til og ikke lade sig terrorisere af det, så man bliver paralyseret – man skal måske synge lidt mere; ha’ lidt input for sjælen, så man ikke går helt i baglås – og så skal man ellers holde fokus på, hvad der er muligt, og hvordan vi intervenerer til gavn for de kommende generationer i at sikre, at vi i USA og i Europa får et skifte fra det gamle, defekte paradigme, som vi stadigvæk er præget af, og som etablissementet i den grad forsøger at fastholde; og så en overgang til et nyt og langt bedre paradigme, som indebærer en bedre fremtid for hele menneskehedens befolkning.« …

2. del:

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/finansverdenen-frygter-trump-hvad-sker-der-nar-han-besoger-kina-om-en-maned

 

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 4. okt., 2017 – Præsident Donald Trump udtalte den 3. okt., mod slutningen af sit besøg i Puerto Rico, det, der forekommer at være den indlysende sandhed om situationen: Ødelæggelse har udslettet Puerto Ricos statsgæld på anslået $72 mia., sammen med hele øens infrastrukturfundament; øens økonomi må genopbygges for folket. Wall Street er gået amok; Præsidentens fremlæggelse af virkeligheden har stillet spørgsmålstegn ved Wall Street-systemet. LaRouche-handleplanen, der blev udgivet den 31. aug. efter orkanen Harvey først gik i land, omfattende Glass-Steagall, kreditskabelse og økonomisk genopbygning, må vedtages.

Trump talte i et interview med Geraldo Rivera, der blev vist på Fox News’ Hannity-show i går aftes, hvor han sagde:

»Vi må se på hele deres gældsstruktur. De skylder jo en masse penge til jeres venner på Wall Street. Og vi må udslette denne gæld … sige farvel til den. Jeg ved ikke, om det er Goldman Sachs, men hvem så siden, det er, så kan I vinke farvel til det. Vi må gøre noget ved det. Gælden på øen var massiv … Vi vil hjælpe dette folk.«

Dernæst tilføjede præsidenten:

»Vi vil få gang i elektriciteten igen. Det blev jo fuldstændigt udslettet. Det var ikke bare et par elmaster, der røg. Det var elværker. Det var en masse kostbart udstyr, men det var udstyr i en dårlig tilstand. Men vi vil sætte det i god stand.«

Wall Street begyndte omgående at skræppe op. Til en start begyndte Mick Mulvaney, kontoret for management og budget, at udtale sig og forsøge at neddæmpe, hvad Trump havde sagt. Mulvaney sagde til CNN: »Jeg ville ikke tage det helt bogstaveligt …« New York Times var de første til at udgive det store spørgsmål i sin overskrift her til morgen, »Trump lover at udslette Puerto Ricos gæld, kan han gøre det?« Dernæst udgav Times version nummer to, »Det Hvide Hus nedgearer Trumps løfte om at rydde Puerto Ricos gæld«.

Men, sandheden er sandheden. Det er ikke alene hele Puerto Ricos økonomi, der er blevet ødelagt, men der er også henved 90 millioner mennesker, der – i en større eller mindre grad – lider under katastrofer i hele det mellemste breddegradsbælte tværs over de amerikanske lande, fra jordskælv i Mexico ved Stillehavet og til orkanbæltet, der strækker sig til de caribiske Leeward Islands (del af de Små Antiller), og med Golfstaterne ind imellem. I Puerto Rico er den første rednings- og nødhjælpsfase stadig i gang. Militære og civile teams arbejder maksimalt og blev i går lykønsket af Trump. Ting, der aldrig ført er udført, udføres nu for at overvinde krisen, som f.eks. den øverstbefalende for Hærens Ingeniørkorps, der rapporterede, at de forsøger sig med nedkastning fra luften for at stabilisere den skadede overløbskant på Guajataca-dæmningen – en 100 år gammel jordstruktur, der er i fare.

Den sluttelige genopbygningsfase for Puerto Rico, samt den sluttelige stabiliseringsfase af responsen til katastrofen, kan ikke blot være en ekstrapolering af disse redningsoperationer. Man kan ikke køre en økonomi på dieselgeneratorer og flaskevand. Øen har brug for et jernbanenet, det første nogensinde. (Øen har hidtil kun haft en 10,7 mil (ca. 17 km) lang bybane). Kernekraftværker, de første nogensinde. Og opfyldelsen af den sydlige kystby Ponces plan om at blive »Porten til de amerikanske lande« på den globale Maritime Silkevej.

Nødvendigheden af at blive en del af Bælte & Vej Initiativet er klar. Se f.eks. på det, der nu finder sted i Haiti – lige i centrum af de amerikanske kontinenters orkan- og jordskælvszone. Kina og borgmesteren for Port-au-Prince har annonceret et multimilliarddollar-program for genopbygning af byen og dens opland, inklusive forsvarsværker mod storm, el- og vandforsyning, sikre boliger, og det hele på et nyt, produktivt niveau. Se på kontrasten til den måde, hvorpå Obama-administrationen, på vegne af Wall Street, blankt afviste forslaget om at bruge en »ingeniørkorps-fremgangsmåde« for at redde og genopbygge Haiti efter det forfærdelige jordskælv i 2010, med efterfølgende sygdom og lidelse i de forgange syv år.

Vi kan nu – efter Trumps udtalelser – forvente en optrapning af de i forvejen skandaløse angreb mod ham. Husk, hvad der ramte Bill Clinton, efter han i 1998 sagde, at verden havde brug for »en ny finansarkitektur«. Inden for tre måneder gik sagen om hans afsættelse i gang. Disse angrebs stamtavle er den samme – det døende, britiske, monetaristiske system, som det fremlægges i det nye EIR-dossier, »Bob Mueller er en umoralsk, juridisk morder: Han vil gøre sit job, hvis I giver ham lov«, en rapport, der endelig kan bringe hele den fjendtlige operation til fald.

Vi er stolte over at annoncere, at, i denne situation, der nu er under udvikling, indvier vi, torsdag, den 5. okt. kl. 12 EDT (kl. 18 CET, dansk tid), et nyt, internationalt webcast (på engelsk) med Schiller Instituttets stifter og forkvinde, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, om den »Nye Silkevejsånd«.

(Webcastet kommer her: http://newparadigm.schillerinstitute.com/blog/2017/10/04/new-schiller-institute-webcast/)

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump trykker hånd med kaptajn David Guluzian, øverstbefalende officer for amfibiefartøjet USS Kearsarge under et besøg på skibet for at diskutere de igangværende operationer i Puerto Rico og de amerikanske Jomfruøer. 3. sept., 2017. (US Navy)

4. okt., 2017 – Morgenens overskrift i New York Times opsummerede Wall Streets frygt: »Trump lover at udslette Puerto Ricos gæld. Kan han gøre det?« Wall Street husker, hvordan Franklin Roosevelt svang præsidentskabets magt over Wall Street, og de er i panik. »Kontaktet sent tirsdag sagde investorer, der er Puerto Ricos gældskreditorer, samt deres rådgivere, at de ’blev taget på sengen’ og ikke vil kommentere«, rapporterede Times.

Artiklen i Times opstillede sine argumenter for, hvorfor USA’s præsident ikke har, ikke kan have og gør klogt i ikke at have magt til at forsvare amerikaneres liv, da denne puertoricanske statsgæld er i form af gæld udstedt til kommunerne, som primært regeres af delstatslove, og ikke af den føderale regering; eller jo, det føderale skattevæsen (Internal Revenue Service) kan, under visse omstændigheder, træde til, »men ikke for simpelt hen at ’udslette’ delstatens gæld«.

Også Bloombergs nyhedstjeneste fremførte, at »det står ikke klart, hvordan Puerto Ricos gæld simpelt hen kan forsvinde, bortset fra under en konkursbehandling«.

Times, Bloomberg og andre finansmedier vifter med truslen om, at Trumps udtalelse om at »udslette« Puerto Ricos $72 mia. store gæld vil være ansvarlig for en nedsmeltning af det kommunale marked generelt. Men, præsidenten konstaterede simpelt hen, hvad der var sandheden. Puerto Ricos økonomi har intet fundament for at betale Wall Streets ågergæld; den eneste løsning er FDR’s Glass/Steagall-reorganisering af systemet, som EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche har insisteret.

Wall Streets overskrifter ændredes midt på morgenen i dag og brugte direktør for kontoret for management og budget, Mick Mulvaneys udtalelser til CBS og CNN til at berolige sig selv om, at Det Hvide Hus havde »neddæmpet« præsident Trumps forpligtelse. »Det ville jeg ikke tage alt for bogstaveligt. Jeg talte længe med præsidenten, da vi fløj hjem i Air Force One«, sagde Mulvaney. Han udtalte Wall Streets holdning, da han sagde: »Puerto Rico må finde ud af de fejltagelser, de har begået med deres egne finanser i løbet af den seneste generation.«

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump besigtiger skaderne efter orkanen og oprydningsindsatsen i et nabolag i Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, tirsdag, 3.okt., 2017. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)       

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 3. okt., 2017 – Det kan ikke blive mere indlysende, at en forbindelse må skabes mellem USA’s aktuelle, presserende behov for at bygge og genopbygge katastroferamt infrastruktur med billioner af dollars i investeringer, og så Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ, der bygger sådan infrastruktur i hele verden.

Blot i løbet af de seneste par dage har Kinas infrastrukturbanker meddelt deres involvering i Indiens løfte om, at alle husstande skal have elektricitet inden udgangen af næste år; i en udstrakt moderne genopbygning af Filippinernes økonomiske infrastruktur; i et løfte om at være med til at industrialisere Bolivia og gøre det til et stålproducerende centrum; i et genopbygningsprojekt, der skal gøre Port-au-Prince og Haiti jordskælvssikkert og beskyttet mod oversvømmelse. Finansfirmaer siger, dette vil frembringe et voksende behov for stål frem til midten af 2020’erne, med hundredevis af infrastrukturprojekter med ny teknologi under Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Heri er også inkluderet byggeri af havne og højhastighedsjernbaner i Europa, hvor den »Maritime Silkevej« kommer ind i Europa gennem Balkan.

Både Kina og Japan, der nu oplever voksende forsoning efter årtiers fjendtlige relationer, er rede og villige til at investere i sådan ny infrastruktur i Amerika. USA mangler en national kreditbank, gennem hvilken sådanne investeringspartnerskaber kan oprettes.

Frem til det tidspunkt, hvor præsident Trump tager af sted på sin diplomatiske Asien-rundrejse (3.-14. nov.), og som omfatter topmøder i Kina og Japan, er to udviklinger afgørende:

Præsidenten må befries for den heksejagt, der anføres af »særlige anklager« Robert Mueller på vegne af britiske og amerikanske efterretningstjenester, der har forsøgt at eliminere Trump, først som kandidat, og nu, som præsident. Intet vil standse denne heksejagt, med undtagelse af den mest gennemgribende afsløring af Muellers historie for forbrydelser mod USA, ved hjælp af EIR’s 35-sider lange »dossier«, der netop er udgivet, om disse forbrydelser. Dette er en nutidig afpresser i J. Edgar Hoovers tradition, der kører i højeste gear efter NSA-overvågningsmetoder; præsident Trump kan ikke helt alene bekæmpe den kampagne for afsættelse af ham, som Mueller leder. EIR’s stiftende redaktør Lyndon LaRouche, der blev forfulgt af en »Få ram på LaRouche-task force«, under Muellers ledelse, for 30 år siden, opfordrer til en global cirkulering af EIR’s dossier for at stoppe det.

For det andet, må de af Larouche foreslåede økonomiske love, inklusive en genindførelse af Glass/Steagall-loven og skabelsen af en nationalbank i Hamiltons tradition til infrastruktur og varefremstilling, ligge på Kongressens og præsidentens bord på det tidspunkt, hvor han tager til Asien.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump og præsident Xi Jinping. 8. juli, 2017 (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

3. oktober, 2017 – Bælte & Vej Initiativet (BRI) under Kinas ledelse har ført til dannelsen af en BRI-investeringsfond i New York. Investeringsfirmaet Kraneshares, der har hjemsted i New York, indviede sin Ét Bælte, én Vej Fond den 8. september.

Kraneshares direktør Jonathan Krane sagde, »Vi mener, at OBOR-initiativet er i færd med at skabe et nyt paradigme i global investering. OBOR-initiativet vil få billioner af dollars i investering i løbet af det kommende årti og burde øge både Kinas og deltagerlandedes økonomier og handel«.

Som Krane indikerede, så er BRI i en hidtil uset skala; det involverer investeringer i byggeri af infrastruktur og industri i en større målestok end Marshallplanens investeringer efter krigen.

Fra LaRouche PAC Manhattan Project Borgermøde i New York City, 30. sept., 2017.

Nu har Kina udviklet en ny model for udenrigspolitik, og det er virkelig vigtigt, at amerikanere bliver bekendt med den; for det er ikke sådan, at Kina er ved at tage over, sådan, som Bannon siger. At Kina på en eller anden måde truer med at tage USA’s position. Nogle af jer husker måske, at der for et par måneder siden var et møde i New York, hvor den kinesiske ambassadør i Washington, Cui Tiankai, grundlæggende set fremlagde en præsentation, hvor han sagde, at der var 16 eksempler i historien, hvor et land ville overgå den magt, som frem til dette punkt havde været den dominerende. At det i 12 tilfælde førte til krig; og at, i 4 tilfælde overtog den fremvoksende magt simpelt hen den gamle dominerende magt. Ambassadør Cui sagde, at Kina hverken vil have de 12 tilfælde, hvor der blev krig, og ikke ville gentage disse eksempler; og heller ikke ville have de andre 4, for det, Kina tilbyder, er en helt ny model for relationer staterne imellem. Dette vil jeg gerne gennemgå, for jeg mener, det er absolut afgørende. Kina foreslår en ny model for stormagter, baseret på den absolutte respekt for de andre staters suverænitet, princippet om ikke-indblanding, princippet om accept af en anden samfundsmodel og et win-win-samarbejde mellem de to. Dette er selvfølgelig, hvad forholdet mellem USA og Kina bør blive til. Dernæst er et andet aspekt af denne nye, kinesiske model, en ny relation til Kinas naboer. Dette er allerede i kraft med ASEAN-landene, med Shanghai Samarbejdsorganisationen; det er i kraft i det Sydkinesiske Hav, hvor lande, der er naboer, indser fordelene ved gensidigt økonomisk samarbejde snarere end geopolitisk konfrontation.

Et tredje aspekt, som i et aspekt er det vigtigste, er, at Kina har udviklet en helt ny model for relationer med udviklingslandene. Dette er mest synligt i Afrika. Det, Bælte & Vej Initiativet, den Nye Silkevej, har gjort på fire år, siden Xi Jinping annoncerede det, har ikke alene ført til historiens største infrastrukturprogram, hvor folk blot diskuterer, om det nu er 12 gange eller 20 gange så stort som Marshallplanen i genopbygningen (i Europa) efter Anden Verdenskrig. Det er et åbent spørgsmål; det er det gode. Det har fuldstændig forandret karakteren af det afrikanske kontinent, fordi kineserne har bygget jernbaner fra Djibouti til Addis Abeba; de bygger nu jernbaner fra Kenya og Mozambique hele vejen til Rwanda. De har bygget mange industriparker, vandkraftværker, systemer til kunstig vanding; og nu planlægger de at gennemføre det største infrastrukturprojekt nogensinde – Transaqua-projektet – der med sikkerhed ville transformere hele det afrikanske kontinent.

Dette er en ny model for relationer, og den er ikke baseret på geopolitik. Den har ideen om en alliance mellem fuldstændigt suveræne nationalstater; det er faktisk, hvad John Quincy Adams havde foreslået, da han var præsident for USA.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 2. okt., 2017 – Historien om Imperium er historien om »del og hersk«. På et tidspunkt, hvor menneskets historie står over for en transformation sådan, som vi i dag oplever, med det store potentiale for et nyt paradigme for hele menneskeheden, baseret på den Nye Silkevejspolitik for global udvikling, skal man se på større destabiliseringer med en skarp lugtesans, der lugter det beskidte spor af Imperium.

Som Helga Zepp-LaRouche i dag mindede verden om: Nationalstaten er Imperiets fjende.

Det britiske Imperium har altid promoveret ideen om »Regionernes Europa«, der var baseret på etniske og religiøse forskelle, som var belejligt for destabiliseringer af nationalstater, der ikke var samarbejdsvillige. Hvem står bag krisen i Catalonien, der truer, ikke alene Spanien, men hele Europa? Hvem var det, der opdelte Cameroun i engelsk- og fransktalende sektorer efter Første Verdenskrig, og nu har aktiveret kravet om uafhængighed for den engelske sektor, som har ført til 17 dødsfald i dag og potentielt kaos i morgen? Bemærk, at Kina nu er Camerouns førende handelspartner, som det er tilfældet med nationer i det meste af Afrika, og nu er i færd med at bygge et undersøisk kabel fra Cameroun til Brasilien, som vil betjene alle nationerne i Afrika og Sydamerika.

Hvorfor har Israel så åbenlyst støttet den kurdiske folkeafstemning, der destabiliserer ikke alene Irak, men også Iran, Syrien og Tyrkiet, hvis regeringer har været et mål for London og Wall Street?

Det fuldstændig tossede, horrible mordorgie i Las Vegas må ikke afskrives uden at følge sporet, snarere end at acceptere historien om den »enlige morder«, der så ofte har været brugt til at skjule sandheden.

Det måske mest klassiske eksempel på britisk del-og-hersk er iscenesættelsen af den israelsk-palæstinensiske konflikt, der er blevet brugt til at opsplitte hele verden i det seneste århundrede. I dag er det et prøveeksempel for de to paradigmer, som menneskeheden står overfor. I dag mødes de to palæstinensiske bevægelser, Fatah og Hamas, i Gaza for at drøfte forsoningen af palæstinensisk styrelse. De fleste presserapporter og »ekspertanalyser« afskriver denne bestræbelse som værende dømt til nederlag, af samme grund, som lignende bestræbelser tidligere er mislykkedes.

Men, i dag er der en forskel – Bælte & Vej Initiativet. En palæstinensisk forretningsmand, Munib al-Masri, annoncerede søndag en plan for at skabe et selskab, der er helliget til udviklingsprojekter i Gazastriben til støtte for Kinas Bælte & Vej Initiativ. Al-Masri er viceformand for det Internationale Handelskammer for Silkevejen. Formanden for denne institution, Lu Jianzhong, der er præsident for CCCC International Holding Ltd. i Kina, har været involveret i byggeri af infrastruktur i hele Afrika og besøgte i sidste uge Vestbredden, hvor han mødtes med præsident Abbas og økonomiminister Odeh.

Det er netop den Nye Silkevej, der kan forandre historiens imperiegeometri, og som kan skabe fred gennem udvikling. Genopbygningen af Syrien, f.eks., er allerede begyndt gennem det internationale samarbejde mellem Rusland, Kina og andre, der er involveret i Bælte & Vej-processen.

Der er al mulig grund til at mene, at denne historiske Nye Silkevejsproces kan lykkes med virkelig at forene verden i det nye paradigme. Præsident Trump har sagt, at han ønsker at gøre Amerika stort igen gennem samarbejde med andre store nationalstater, der hver især sætter deres eget folk først, men samarbejder i harmoni med alle andre nationalstater. Dette var grundlaget for den Westfalske Fred i 1648, som afsluttede de religiøse krige i Europa og skabte den moderne nationalstat. Dette er den konfucianske harmoni, der har inspireret Kinas mirakuløse vækst ud af fattigdom i løbet af de seneste årtier, efter Kulturrevolutionens mareridt.

Det kupforsøg mod præsident Trump, der udføres af det forbryderiske slæng omkring Robert Mueller, kan og må knuses ved hjælp af EIR-dossieret, der er udfærdiget til formålet.[1] Det er netop samarbejdet mellem USA, Rusland og Kina i den Nye Silkevej, der adresserer alle nationers og alle folkeslags fælles interesser, og som har været EIR’s og Schiller Instituttets mission siden deres grundlæggelse. Nu er vores tid kommet.

Foto: Folkeafstemning i Catalonien; folk, der protesterer på Las Ramblas for uafhængighed fra Spanien. 2. okt., 2017. (Sasha Popovic / Flickr / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

[1] Se også: LPAC Internationale Webcast, 29. sept.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, USA, 1. oktober, 2017 – Steve Bannon, præsident Trumps nyligt fratrådte assistent, er febrilsk i færd med at mobilisere støtte til sin plan om at drive USA ind i en geopolitisk, imperial, økonomisk krig mod Kina – dvs., for at sabotere Trumps erklærede hensigt om at arbejde tæt sammen med Kina om at genopbygge den smuldrende, amerikanske infrastruktur og potentielt bringe USA ind i den Nye Silkevejsproces for infrastrukturbyggeri i hele verden. En forsidehistorie om Bannon i Bloombergs Businessweek fra 28. sept. forklarer hans hensigter i en artikel med titlen: »Bannon er tilbage og har Kina på sigtekornet«, med underoverskriften: »Fra Birmingham til Beijing anfører den tidligere Trump-strateg sin egen bevægelse og advarer nu om den påtvungne teknologioverførsel af amerikansk innovation til Kina – og samarbejder med Henry Kissinger«.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche talte via video til lørdagens LaRouche PAC Manhattan Project Borgermøde i New York City den 30. sept. og identificerede her den fare, som denne Bannon-operation repræsenterer. Hun påpegede Obama/Hillary-netværkerne og deres neokonservative kammerater på den Republikanske side, der er helliget til at stoppe Trumps bestræbelse på at arbejde tæt sammen med Rusland og Kina, og som nu får tilslutning fra »Bannon-faktoren, der forsøger at bearbejde Trump for at forsøge at sætte ham op mod Kina. Jeg mener, dette er strategisk, og vi må absolut gå imod dette, for kendskabet til, eller opfattelsen af, hvad det er, Kina rent faktisk gør i Vesten, er absolut fejlagtigt.«

Den kendsgerning, at Kina nu foretager enorme spring inden for snart sagt alle områder af videnskab, teknologi og industri, betvivles ikke længere af briterne og kredsene på Wall Street. Men, snarere end at se på den fantastiske transformation af den kinesiske økonomi som en mulighed for samarbejde om at genindføre vækst i de vestlige økonomier og i verden generelt, så beskriver de det som en eksistentiel trussel mod deres unipolære magt og mod deres evne til at afstive deres bankerotte finanssystem gennem yderligere nedskæringspolitikker og udplyndring af realøkonomien her og i hele verden.

Intetsteds bliver dette mere tydeligt end i Puerto Rico. Den løgnagtige mainstreampresse kører grelle overskrifter om, at Trump ignorerer befolkningen i Puerto Rico, på trods af den igangværende massive militære og civile mobilisering for at genskabe den ødelagte ø og dens befolkning – en mobilisering, der af Puerto Ricos guvernør og af øens repræsentant i den amerikanske Kongres er blevet behørigt rost. Sandheden om Obama-administrationens og hans Wall Street-sponsorers overlagte ødelæggelse af denne plagede ø kan ikke længere undertrykkes. Det var Obama, der sidste år underskrev den lov, der gav et håndplukket panel magten til at overtage Puerto Ricos finanspolitik fra deres valgte regering og indføre dødbringende nedskæringspolitik mod deres hospitaler, el-nettet og mere endnu og efterlade dem praktisk talt hjælpeløse, stedt over for orkanen – og at sætte statsgældens fordringer (det meste af den illegitim) foran menneskers behov. Præsident Trumps henvisning til statsgældskrisen i Puerto Rico, som eksisterede længe før orkanen, reflekterer hans voksende erkendelse i løbet af den seneste uge af, at den private sektor intet har gjort, og intet vil gøre, for at adressere hverken den aktuelle krise, eller de underliggende årsager.

I sidste uge besluttede Trump, at den indledende oprydning i Puerto Rico ville blive dækket 100 % af USA’s regering, og den næste dag annoncerede han så, at hans $1 billion store infrastrukturplan ikke længere ville involvere den private sektor – den såkaldte PPP-model – men ville blive 100 % finansieret af den nationale regering og lokalregeringer. Dette stiller naturligvis det spørgsmål, hvor den nationale regering og lokalregeringerne skal få midlerne fra – et spørgsmål, der kun kan besvares gennem fremgangsmåden med LaRouches Fire Love, der genindfører et kreditsystem i Hamiltons tradition til erstatning af det nu bankerotte, britiske, monetære system, der i løbet af de seneste 50 år i stigende grad har overtaget både USA og de europæiske nationer.

Fr. Zepp-LaRouche adresserede i sine bemærkninger lørdag denne civilisationskrise ud fra det positive perspektiv, der har udgjort baggrunden for hendes og hendes mand Lyndon LaRouches politikker i det seneste halve århundrede, og som hun kaldte »den Nye Silkevejsånd«. »Og denne Silkevejsånd er magtfuld!«, sagde hun. »Det er noget, som jeg mener, kan indsprøjtes i alle andre lande.«

Hun henviste til den vanskelige tid, da LaRouche og flere af hans medarbejdere blev fængslet af Bush-familien – gennemtvunget af samme Robert Mueller og hans korrupte kohorter, der nu kører et kupforsøg mod præsident Trump – og tilføjede:

»Det, der holdt mig oppe hele tiden, var det faktum, at jeg vidste, at det, vi gør, er en politik, der er baseret på Universets fysiske love; at det, vi gør med at promovere videnskabeligt og teknologisk fremskridt og med at have et billede af mennesket, der er i overensstemmelse med Universets skabende kræfter, og at vore modstandere går imod naturlig lov (Universets lov), og derfor kan de ikke vinde.

Man må således udvikle et perspektiv, der ikke er bundet af, og ikke er påvirket af ens daglige omgivelser og ens daglige oplevelser, men at man må oplyse sin vision omkring noget andet: man må have en idé om, hvor menneskeheden skal befinde sig om 100 år fra i dag. Man bør have en idé om, hvad Universets fysiske love går ud på, og hvorfor ens modstandere ikke er andet end stakkels påståelige idioter, der ikke kan vinde.

Jeg mener, at, hvis man tager et internationalt aspekt som ens udgangspunkt, vil man være i en langt bedre position til at være en amerikansk patriot, fordi man først er en verdensborger, og man er derfor under påvirkning af undertrykkende omgivelser, og det er sådan, jeg har gjort det – og jeg kan forsikre jer for, at det virker.«   

Foto: Steve Bannon taler på 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) i National Harbor, Maryland.         

Nødvendigheden af en reorganisering af det miserable finanssystem, som er skyld i, at svælget mellem rig og fattig på uacceptabel vis er blevet større, og hvis uretfærdighed har gødet jorden for Brexit, Hillary Clintons valgnederlag, ’Nej’ i den italienske folkeafstemning om forfatningsændring og nu, det elendige valgresultat for den Store Koalition i Tyskland, burde ikke være så svær at indse. De økonomiske nedskæringer i de nye, tyske delstater, der havde indledt Treuhand-politikken (som havde til opgave at privatisere statsejede virksomheder i det tidligere Østtyskland, -red.) under Birgit Breuel, var et udtryk for dette uretfærdige system. Uden denne oplevelse, affolkningen af hele landsbyer og følelsen af at være blevet skubbet ud i samfundets yderkant, på trods af renoverede markedspladser, ville reaktionen på flygtningekrisen i det østlige Tyskland aldrig være faldet så voldsomt ud, og AfD ville nu ikke være det stærkeste parti i Sachsen og det næst-stærkeste parti i de fire andre, nye delstater.

Men uagtet mainstreammediernes omfattende censur, vokser nu et helt nyt, økonomisk system, der beror på helt andre principper – nemlig på menneskehedens almene vel og et win-win-samarbejde mellem de deltagende stater. Det er i Tysklands egeninteresse at arbejde med i dette nye paradigme.

Einstein havde fuldstændig ret: »Man kan ikke løse problemer med den samme tankegang, ved hvilken de er opstået!«

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Vært Matthew Ogden: God aften; det er den 29. september, 2017. Med mig i studiet i dag har jeg William Wertz fra Executive Intelligence Review. Vi vil diskutere den netop udkomne specialundersøgelses-rapport; dossieret med titlen, »Robert Mueller Is an Amoral Legal Assassin; He Will Do His Job if You Let Him!«

Jeg viser rapportens forsidebillede her på skærmen [Fig. 1]. Som I ser, så er rapporten nu tilgængelig; den er allerede blevet cirkuleret i over et døgn. Den er allerede i hænderne på folk i hele USA, og man kan se den her: lpac.co/ytdos (LPAC’s hjemmeside; EIR-rapporten findes som pdf på vores hjemmeside).

Rapporten er delt op i tre afsnit og følger tråden af personen Robert Mueller igennem tre af de mest berygtede forbrydelser i de seneste 30 år. For det første, de falske anklager og retsforfølgelsen af Lyndon LaRouche – LaRouche-sagen; for det andet, det aggressive bedrag af det amerikanske folk mht. sandheden om begivenhederne den 11. september, 2001, som dernæst blev brugt til at lancere en række krige for regimeskifte; og for det tredje, det igangværende kup imod den siddende amerikanske præsident, mens vi taler. Og I vil se, forhåbentlig i løbet af denne udsendelse – og vi opfordrer jer til at læse hele dossieret – at tråden til Robert Mueller kan spores hele vejen igennem disse afgørende, historiske vendepunkter. Hvis man trækker i denne tråd, vil hele dette apparat, hele denne operation, blive optrævlet.

Will Wertz er her i dag for at fremlægge nogle af rapportens punkter i en overordnet gennemgang, og for at guide jer gennem rapportens indhold og komme med nogle refleksioner over hvert af disse tre, afgørende knudepunkter, som detaljeret dækkes i rapporten. Og, forhåbentlig også for at lokke jer og tilskynde jer til at læse og studere denne rapport i detaljer. Jeg vil lade Will gå i gang, og vi vil vise noget materiale på skærmen undervejs, men vi vil gennemgå noget af indholdet fra rapporten.

William Wertz: Tak. Matt. Skønheden i denne rapport – som er noget, der omgående må handles på for at redde denne republik og præsidentskabet og bevæge verden ind i et Nyt Paradigme, som det defineres af den kinesiske politik for Ét Bælte, én Vej, og som er blevet vedtaget af mange lande i hele verden, inklusive Rusland, og som USA er blevet inviteret til at tilslutte sig – er, at den identificerer dette angreb på præsident Trump og det amerikanske præsidentskab over en længere tidsperiode; og hvor det fundamentale spørgsmål er, om verden fortsat skal være domineret af et bankerot, finansielt imperiesystem, der kontrolleres af briterne, eller om vi i stedet bevæger os ind i et Nyt Paradigme, baseret på princippet om fred gennem økonomisk udvikling. Det er det fundamentale spørgsmål. Dette er noget, som Lyndon LaRouche har kæmpet for i årtier. Tilbage i 1971, den 15. august, fremlagde han meget klart de alternativer, der ligger foran menneskeheden, og foran dette land, med Nixon, der annoncerede første fase, anden fase, af nedtagningen af Bretton Woods-systemet, som Roosevelt havde indsat efter Anden Verdenskrig. Han (LaRouche) sagde dengang, at vi har et alternativt valg; alternativet er at satse på en politik for økonomisk udvikling på global skala, eller også vil vi blive konfronteret med et forsøg på at gennemtvinge en fascistisk, økonomisk politik i Schachts tradition, som ville resultere i massive dødstal over hele verden. Med ’Schachts tradition’ refererer jeg til Hjalmar Schacht, finansminister under Adolf Hitler, der kom til magten med hjælp fra sådanne folk som John Foster Dulles og briterne.

Det, LaRouche gjorde i 1970’erne efter denne vurdering, var, at han fremlagde mange absolut afgørende udviklingsprogrammer. I 1975 var han fortaler for skabelsen af en International Udviklingsbank. Senere krævede han oprettelsen af en Nationalbank i USA efter samme principper som Alexander Hamiltons Første Nationalbank. Han præsenterede udviklingsprogrammer for områderne i Stillehavsbækkenet og det Indiske Oceans bækken. Han præsenterede et program ved navn Operation Juárez, for Mexicos udvikling, som en model for Nord-Syd-relationer gennem udveksling af mexicansk olie til gengæld for amerikansk teknologi. Senere præsenterede han programmer for den Eurasiske Landbro i samarbejde med sin hustru, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, og som senere udvikledes til Verdenslandbroen. Briterne var totalt modstandere af denne politik – totalt. Vi vil få at se, at dette har været en kamp under hele perioden 1970’erne og 1980’erne og under hele 11. september-perioden, og frem til det aktuelle angreb på Trumps præsidentskab. Det har været en kamp mellem Det britiske Imperium, som har interveneret i USA for at forhindre, at USA gik i denne retning, som Lyndon LaRouche har forsøgt at styre USA i; og som LaRouche er på randen til at styre USA i, i dag, og som er årsagen til, at briterne er så bange!

Tilbage i 1980’erne spillede Lyndon LaRouche en afgørende rolle i udformningen af den tiltrædende Reagan-administration. LaRouche var ophavsmand til det Strategiske Forsvarsinitiativ, som Reagan senere annoncerede i marts måned, 1983. LaRouche var også modstander mod briterne i krigen om Malvinas-øerne (som briterne kalder Falklandsøerne), og han krævede en gennemførelse af Monroe-doktrinen imod briternes kolonipolitik dér. Som et resultat mødtes LaRouche og hans hustru i 1982 med Indira Gandhi; han og hans hustru mødte Indira Gandhi i april 1982 for at diskutere udviklingen af det indiske subkontinent og Stillehavsbækkenet. I maj 1982 mødtes han med José López Portillo (Mexico) for at diskutere Operation Juárez. Som respons på dette sendte Henry Kissinger, i august 1982, et brev til FBI-direktør William Webster med krav om en efterforskning af Lyndon LaRouche på en anklage om angivelig chikane af Kissinger for at være britisk agent. Der blev ligeledes sendt et brev den 27. august 1982 fra den britiske regering til FBI; som krævede en efterforskning af Lyndon LaRouche og hans organisation. Den 24. september 1982 skrev FBI, i skikkelse af chef for kontraefterretning, James Noland, et svar til briterne.

Matthew Ogden: Vi har faktisk en FOIA-udgivelse (FOIA: Freedom of Information Act) af dette FBI-memo, som vi viser på skærmen [Fig. 2]. I kan selv se det følgende citat, som Will vil læse.

Will Wertz: Der står, og det er altså fra James Noland til den britiske regering: »Vi vil gerne gentage vores konklusion om, at, alt imens mange af NCLC’s chikane-aktiviteter« – NCLC var Lyndon LaRouches organisation – »og de temaer, som NCLC’s publikationer promoverer, såsom EIR [Executive Intelligence Review] ofte er favorable over for sovjetisk misinformation og propagandainteresser, så er der ingen direkte beviser for, at russerne dirigerer eller finansierer LaRouche eller hans organisation. Det er imidlertid helt igennem sandsynligt, at russerne (sovjet-russerne) har udviklet eller vil udvikle kilder internt i NCLC, der befinder sig i en position, hvor de kan indskyde sovjet-inspirerede anskuelser i NCLC’s aktiviteter og publikationer. Det er sandsynligt, at russerne vil forsøge at drage fordel af eller udnytte NCLC-meninger, der er paralleller til eller fremmer sovjetiske, udenrigspolitiske mål.«

Minder dette jer om interventionen på vegne af Storbritanniens Government Communications Headquarters – GCHQ – eller på vegne af MI6’s Christopher Steele, for at forsøge at få en efterforskning af USA’s præsident Donald Trump, for angiveligt ’aftalt spil’ med russerne?

Alligevel skete der det, at præsidentens Udenrigspolitiske Råds Styrelse den 12. januar, 1983, krævede en efterforskning fra FBI’s side. Robert Mueller kommer ind i billedet i 1982. Han blev en del af USA’s justitsminister William Welds stab i Boston i 1982. Efter valgene i 1984 lancerede Weld en efterforskning af LaRouche; og i 1986 efterfulgte Mueller Weld, da Weld af George Bush – det var faktisk Ronald Reagan, der var præsident, men under indflydelse af George Bush, senior – blev udnævnt til at lede Justitsministeriets Kriminal-afdeling. Mueller bragte dernæst en vis John Markham ind for at udføre retsforfølgelsen af Lyndon LaRouche, der begyndte i Boston. Efter en razzia den 6. oktober, 1986 i Leesburg, Virginia, mod LaRouches hovedkvarter, hvor der var en trussel om, og en faktisk plan for, at forsøge at iscenesætte mordet på Lyndon LaRouche. Dette forsøg blev forpurret, men retsforfølgelsen forsatte i de sene 1980’ere.

Her følger resten af webcastet i engelsk udskrift:

This prosecution was typical of Mueller’s corruption.  For
instance, in Boston itself, the prosecution ended in a mistrial
after government misconduct had been brought to light.  The jury,
when they polled themselves afterwards, having only heard the
complete prosecution case, unanimously said that they would have
voted for acquittal.  The judge in that case made the following
statement:  He said that the government had “engaged in
systematic and institutional prosecutorial misconduct”; this is
Robert Mueller.  The case was then shifted to Virginia, and what
they did there was that they had a judge in the so-called “Rocket
Docket” who made it impossible for the defendants to raise the
fact that the government had illegally put companies associated
with LaRouche into involuntary bankruptcy.  That was a very
significant factor in undermining the defense in that case.
After the case had resulted in convictions, the bankruptcy judge,
Martin Bostetter, ruled that the bankruptcy was a “constructive
fraud on the court.”
Ramsey Clark was the attorney for Lyndon LaRouche in the
appeal.

OGDEN:  Let’s put this quote on the screen, too; we have
Ramsey Clark’s quote [Fig. 3].

WERTZ:  What Ramsey Clark said was that “The LaRouche case
represents a broader range of deliberate cunning and systemic
misconduct over a longer period of time using the power of the
Federal government, than any other prosecution by the U.S.
Government in my time and to my knowledge.”  Later in another
spin-off case in New York State, New York State Supreme Court
Justice Stephen G. Crane said, “The actions of the Federal
prosecutors raise an inference of a conspiracy to lay low these
defendants at any cost.”  This is not just one judge.  We’re
talking about at least two judges, a bankruptcy judge, and the
former Attorney General of the United States Ramsey Clark, who
effectively denounced this so-called honest Robert Mueller for
conducting one of the most incredible corrupt prosecutions in
U.S. history.
If we look forward to the 9/11 period, Lyndon LaRouche
wrongly imprisoned by this apparatus which was launched by the
British and carried forward by the Bush administration.  Bush was
President at the time of the trial and the sentencing.  LaRouche
was out of prison and continued his fight for a policy of
economic development; calling for a New Bretton Woods system to
replace the system which had been abandoned by Nixon in 1971.  He
was working, as he had in the earlier period, on negotiating in
the early 1980s with the Soviets for the National Security
Council of the United States under Reagan for the SDI.  He
continued those discussions with the Russians, this time around a
New Bretton Woods conception under President Clinton.  Clinton
himself, before the impeachment proceedings were launched against
him, called for a new financial architecture at a speech before
the CFR [Council on Foreign Relations] in New York, along the
lines of what LaRouche had advocated.
LaRouche was also at the end of the 1990s, he was warning
about the campaign to create an Arc of Crisis around Russia — no
longer the Soviet Union, but Russia.  He produced a video called
“Storm Over Asia” in which he developed precisely how this
operation was being run against Russia.  Then in January of 2001,
he warned that there could be some sort of terrorist action in
the United States such as a Reichstag Fire [which brought Hitler
into power], which could be engineered under the Bush
administration.  That’s precisely what occurred on September 11,
2001.
Again, what do we have here?  Mueller assumed office as FBI
Director on September 4, 2001, just days before 9/11.  What he
did from that point on, was to carry out what Senator Bob Graham,
who headed up the Congressional investigation of 9/11, has
described as “aggressive deception.”

OGDEN:  Here’s a clip from a press conference that Bob
Graham did a little bit over a year ago at the National Press
Club, where he discusses the role that the FBI played in
stonewalling the Congressional investigation into 9/11; both in
terms of the details regarding San Diego — that’s what was
contained in the 28 pages — but also in an even bigger case of
cover-up, the details of the cell that was located in Sarasota,
Florida.  So you’ll hear Bob Graham talk about what he called
“beyond a cover-up, but an aggressive deception campaign against
the American people.”

SEN. BOB GRAHAM

:  It appeared as if the FBI was
moving from a cover-up which I considered to be a passive
withholding of information, to aggressive deception in the case
of Sarasota — which is one of several examples.  They rewrote
the narrative; they said we’ve finished the investigation, and we
have found no connections.  When in their own files, written by
their own special agent who was from the Tampa office,
incidentally, they had contrary information.  They then, and have
continued, to withhold that information, other than the 80,000
pages from the public.  I consider to justify the categorization
of being aggressive deception.

OGDEN:  Then later in the same press conference, which you
can watch in full there — it’s lpac.co/graham-press-conference.
But later in the same press conference, he talked about how the
Deputy Director of the FBI actually detained him and his wife at
Dulles Airport, and warned them to stop pursuing the truth about
what was contained in these documents about the Saudi connections
to 9/11.  So, here’s a short clip where he talks about that
warning from the FBI to him and his wife.

GRAHAM

:  The question is raised, “Why are you doing
this?  Fifteen years later, what difference does this make?  Get
a life.”  I was told that by the Deputy Director of the FBI.
FEMALE REPORTER:  Just one follow-up.  You were pretty much
harassed by the FBI when you tried to go further in your
inquiries.  Since you went public, have you heard of anybody else
who had that kind of treatment from the FBI?
GRAHAM:  No.  This was a situation which occurred in 2011 as
all this information about Sarasota was starting to come out.  My
wife and I flew up from Miami to Dulles to have Thanksgiving with
our daughter who lives in Great Falls.  We were met at the
airport by two FBI agents.  They said that an official of the FBI
wants to talk with you about the Sarasota situation. Well, I was
encouraged; feeling that maybe some of the questions that we’d
been asking were now going to be answered.  So, we drove with the
two agents to the office at Dulles which the FBI has.  My wife
was put in one room, and she was given as entertainment the FBI
training manual.  If you want to know some arcane aspects of FBI
training, she’s fully prepared.  I was taken into another room,
with the Deputy Director of the FBI, a young female FBI agent,
and a middle-aged lawyer from the Department of Justice.
Essentially, the message was, we’ve done this complete
investigation; everything that’s known is known, and you need to
get a life.  I pointed out what he didn’t know was that I had
actually read two of the investigative reports by their agent,
which contradicted what they had said publicly and what he had
just said to me privately.  He said, “Oh, you don’t understand.
One, that wasn’t a very good agent.”  Well, the idea that has
there been an investigation by the FBI in its history that was as
important to the American people as full knowledge as 9/11?  And
the very fact that they would say they had sent as an
investigation into what I think was an important component of the
total picture, someone that they declare to be less than a fully
capable person was itself revelatory.  And then he proceeded to
say, “And we have other information that puts what you read in
context.  And you will see that in fact what we have said is
true.”  So, I said “Fine.  Could I see the information that will
put it into context?”  And he pointed to the young female agent,
and directed her to assemble the files.  We arranged a time to
meet at the FBI office for the District of Columbia.
So, a few days later, I showed up for our meeting, prepared
to read these files.  The Deputy Director was there, and he said
the meeting is cancelled and we’re not going to reschedule.  And,
since I knew who the agent was who had been described as less
than competent; and I had called him to try to have a telephone
conversation, and he said “I know you’ve been calling Agent ‘X’.
Stop calling him, because I’ve told him to not take your calls.”
That was the last of any official character meeting that I had
with the FBI. [END VIDEO]

OGDEN:  There are more details concerning Mueller’s direct
involvement in this kind of stonewalling around the Congressional
inquiry into 9/11; telling Bob Graham and his other investigators
not to fly out to interview one of the known personalities in San
Diego.  They disobeyed those orders and did it anyhow.  But just
parenthetically, immediately after this press conference that Bob
Graham did in Washington D.C. at the National Press Club, a fight
erupted around the so-called JASTA bill — Justice Against
Sponsors of Terrorism — which would allow the 9/11 families to
sue Saudi Arabia for their role in financing and coordinating the
9/11 attacks.

Yesterday just happens to be the one-year anniversary of the major victory — you can see on the screen
here [Fig. 4] — of the Senate override of Obama’s veto of this
JASTA bill, which was absolutely dramatic.  This was a rally in
front of the White House [Fig. 5] of 9/11 families and activists,
asking the Congress to override Obama’s veto; and then next [Fig. 6], this is an article in one of the Capitol Hill newspapers.
“Senate Poised To Override Obama Veto.”  Then this is the final picture [Fig. 7], this was actually in the cloakroom immediately after the Senate cast their votes.  The cloakroom of the U.S. Senate.  I had the pleasure to actually be there in the gallery with the 9/11 families when the U.S. Senate overrode Obama’s veto of the JASTA bill.  That was the CNN coverage.  This was obviously a major victory, parenthetically.  But it’s part of the story, and the role that Bob Graham had to play in going directly head-to-head with the FBI and others in the Executive Branch who were trying to cover up and protect the Saudis in the 9/11 case.

WERTZ:  Now, there are, along with the statement from James
Noland that I read earlier, in response to the British
government’s request back in 1982 for an investigation of Lyndon
LaRouche, there were two other attachments which were
declassified.  The one basically was an attack upon LaRouche for
having opposed in what they called the Falkland Islands, but
which is the Malvinas Islands.  LaRouche did that from the
standpoint of the Monroe Doctrine.  The second was they objected
to the LaRouche Movement revealing that the policy of the British
was to promote the Muslim Brotherhood.  If we look at the period
after 9/11, in which Robert Mueller is carrying out this
“aggressive deception” as Senator Graham puts it, to cover up the
role of the Saudis.  When you’re talking about the Saudis, you’re
talking about a satrap of the British; that’s what you’re talking
about in this situation.
What follows 9/11?  Regime-change wars.  What follows 9/11
immediately is Tony Blair’s sexed up dossier claiming that Saddam
Hussein had weapons of mass destruction; which, as it turns out,
he did not have.  And which the British undoubtedly knew he did
not have.  Once again, British intervention.  And after the
invasion of Iraq, you had the effective creation of ISIS; you had
then under Obama, continued regime-change policies under the name
of the Arab Spring, which was just a policy of bringing the
Muslim Brotherhood to power in such locations as Tunisia, Egypt,
Libya, and Syria.  As Lyndon LaRouche said after the
assassination of Qaddafi, the reason they assassinated him was
that they were in a hurry to move into Syria, as part of what he
had earlier described as the “Storm Over Asia”; an effort to
encircle Russia and to ensure that a New Paradigm does not
emerge.
A critical point in this narrative really is in the period
of 2013-14.  I should just say, Mueller stepped aside as FBI
Director on September 4, 2013; and as you know, he was replaced
by James Comey.  James Comey, it should be remembered, was the
Deputy Attorney General under Mueller from December 2003 until
August 2005.
In the year 2013, President Xi of China went to Kazakhstan,
and he announced the Chinese commitment to the Silk Road; a
policy which had been advocated for a significant period of time
by Lyndon LaRouche and his wife, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who is well
known today as the Silk Road Lady.  The Chinese have an immediate
appreciation of the role that she has played in advocating this
policy.
In the next year, you have the Ukraine coup — February
2014; orchestrated by Obama and by the British and the French,
among others.  But the basic idea here was, again, encirclement
of Russia, in this case with a bunch of Nazis, which is what the
Maidan consisted of.
On July 16, 2014, as the dossier that Barbara Boyd has
authored on Mueller indicates, you had the BRICS organization
meeting in Brazil, and what they formed was the New Development
Bank.  Remember, LaRouche had called for an International
Development Bank, back in 1975: This whole policy that LaRouche
had advocated over these decades, at that point was in the
process of coming into existence, and it was at point,
particularly following the coup in Ukraine, that the operation
against associates of Trump’s began, that is, even before he
announced for President.  We now know, that contrary to the lies
of James Comey and [then Director of National Intelligence] James
Clapper, there was wiretapping of associates of President Trump.
We know for a fact that the dossier indicates that Paul Manafort,
who became Trump’s campaign manager when he announced for
President, was wiretapped beginning in the year 2014; and this
continued through 2016.  It was discontinued for a certain period
of time, and then resumed into 2017 before Obama left office,
including a time period in which it was known that Manafort, even
though he was no longer campaign manager, was speaking to
President Trump.  Manafort had a residence in the Trump Tower all
of this time.
Why was he targetted, initially?  Well, because he had
provided advisory services to the Yanukovych government [in
Ukraine] — this was a duly elected government, which was
overthrown unconstitutionally in 2014, by Nazis.  So, of course,
that becomes grounds for investigating somebody whose client was
overthrown by a bunch of Nazis, by the Obama administration!
The investigation begins there.
Also, in 2014, Michael Flynn was fired by Obama — why?
Because he had opposed the Obama Arab Spring policy, which gave
rise to ISIS, Michael Flynn said at the time.  So you can imagine
that it is perhaps the case that surveillance of Michael Flynn
began at that time as well.
Now, what the dossier on Mueller goes through is that
Mueller should be removed as Special Counsel, and there should be
an actual Special Counsel who investigates the crimes which
Mueller aggressively deceiving the American people about, in his
investigation of President Trump.  And I would also point out,
think of the statements by various judges about the corrupt
investigation and witch hunt directed at Lyndon LaRouche — well,
on June 15, 2017, Trump wrote:  “You are witnessing the single
greatest witch hunt in American political history.”  And I would
say that, the precursor for this was the unprecedented witch hunt
against Lyndon LaRouche, but that President Trump is effectively
getting the same treatment as Lyndon LaRouche did then, from the
same sources, from the British.
Now, there are seven areas, that should be investigated — ,

OGDEN:  We can put this on the screen here.  We have the
list of the seven actual crimes.

WERTZ:  First, instigation of a coup against the United
States by a foreign power.
So, although the charge is that President Trump, or his
associates, colluded with the Russians, the fact of the matter
is, that all the evidence shows that this entire operation has
been concocted by the British, and been carried out by stooges in
the intelligence community under President Obama; who was
particularly happy every time he visited Buckingham Palace.
Now what do we have as evidence?  Well, the {Guardian}
reports that as early as 2015, shortly after he announced for
President, that the British began to surveille Trump and his
associates.  And according to the public account — and this
cannot be taken at face value; this investigation of Trump may
have started earlier.  The communications between the British and
[then CIA Director] Brennan or others in the U.S. intelligence
community, could have occurred before 2016. The report in the
{Guardian} says that sometime in the summer, Hannigan of the
Government Communications Headquarters,  the GCHQ, which is the
equivalent of our NSA, spoke with Brennan about allegations that
Trump was being influenced by the Russians or working with the
Russians.
But the point is, it was the GCHQ which was directly
involved — according to public accounts in the {Guardian}, in
prompting Brennan to create a six-intelligence agency taskforce
to investigate Trump, {during} the Presidential campaign!
And I think the only other case of this kind of thing, was
what happened to Lyndon LaRouche, because Lyndon LaRouche was
running for President, back in 1988, and the investigation of him
was launched while he was a Presidential candidate in the United
States, and — really, actually, an indictment during the
Presidential campaign, which is completely unprecedented.
Additionally, you have the Christopher Steele dossier:
Christopher Steele is allegedly an “ex” MI6 agent.  He headed up
the MI6 Russian desk in Moscow, until 2009.  In 2009, he left
that position and formed Orbis Business at the same time period
Fusion GPS, a U.S. company which was involved in commissioning
Steele’s dossier, was also created.  And these two companies were
working together since at least 2010 when they signed a
confidentiality agreement between them as a shield for revealing
what was actually going on.
So you have the circulation of the Christopher Steele
dossier — and they didn’t just produce this for Hillary Clinton.
They were briefing the press!  They were giving direct briefings
to the press; they were giving it to John McCain who then gave it
to Comey, and so forth.  They were actively circulating this
unverified, so-called “intelligence” against Donald Trump, who
was a candidate for President, then became President.
And it’s very important to understand that Christopher
Steele, it’s public record that he worked with the FBI’s Eurasian
Organized Crime Unit in New York City, from at least 2010. The
former head of the FBI’s Eurasian Organized Crime Unit in New
York City is none other than Andrew McCabe; who for a while,
after Comey was fired, was Acting Director of the FBI, and is
still Deputy Director of the FBI.  And it’s believed that McCabe
was the person who was working closely with Christopher Steele.
It came to light, for instance, that the FBI actually offered to
pay Steele $50,000 to continue with his research, although the
FBI’s been stonewalling on the details on that.
So what you have here is completely a British operation
directed at Trump and his associates; and I’ll get to this in
terms of the wiretapping.
And it’s also believed that the Christopher Steele dossier
provided the roadmap for the FBI’s investigation, and also may
have been used for getting ,” FISA [Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Court] surveillance authorization directed at people
such as Manafort.
Second crime is false reporting of a crime: And that’s
precisely what has occurred in the case of the allegation that
the Russians hacked Podesta and the DNC. It has been documented
thoroughly by numerous sources that this was a leak by an
insider, and not a hack by the Russians.  The most definitive
proof of this is the memorandum put forward by the Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).  And these are
top-notch former NSA, former CIA agents such as William Binney
and Ray McGovern.  They prove forensically that it could not have
been a hack over the internet; it had to be a leak onto some sort
of memory device, because of the speed involved [in the data
transfer].
This has been submitted to Mueller; he’s done nothing on it.
It’s been submitted to the President with the idea that he should
ask Pompeo of the CIA to get to the bottom of this.  We don’t
know if anything’s been done along these lines.
They also show that at least the Guccifer 2.0 claimed
hacking, attributed falsely to the Russians, when in fact there
was cutting and pasting to put the Russian language on the
alleged hack trail.  This is something which the CIA has the
capability to do under Brennan; it’s called the Marble Framework.
Assange of WikiLeaks has denied that this came from the Russian
government.  He recently met with Congressman Dana Rohrabacher,
and said that he was willing to provide testimony which would
definitely establish that this was not a hack and that it was not
given to him by the Russians.  Rohrabacher (R-CA) has been trying
to meet with Trump in order to present this evidence, but it’s
been blocked, according to him, by the staff at the White House.
Craig Murray, a U.K. former ambassador to Uzbekistan, has
said it was a leak and he knows it personally, because he met
with a person that he said was the leaker.
Seymour Hersh was taped in a discussion, without his knowing
he was being recorded, and he indicated that he had sources who
indicated that Seth Rich,  a DNC computer technician, may have
been the person who carried out the leak.
So all of this information is not being taken into account,
in continuing with the narrative that this was a Russian hack,
and you’re supposed to believe that.
Then you have the third crime, which is an attempt at
entrapment of Donald Trump, Jr., Manafort, and Jared Kushner,
among others, in a Trump Tower meeting.  The British hand is all
over this: The person who set up the meeting and sent the emails
to Donald Trump, Jr., which misrepresented the purpose of the
meeting, was one Ron Goldstone, a British national.  It should
also be pointed out that one William Browder, who testified
before Congress, in this case against Fusion GPS, because they
were lobbying against the Magnitsky Act, which was the subject of
the discussion at the Trump Tower.  This was a person who
renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1989 and became a British
citizen.
So again, what we’re dealing with here is a complete British
operation. It’s just transparent that that’s the case.  But this
was a deliberate attempt to try to set up a situation which would
involve the Trump immediate circles, in attempting to get
information on Hillary Clinton allegedly coming from the
Russians.
Fourth area: Felonious leaks of intelligence by the Obama
administration.  This has to do with the unmasking, which was
completely out of control, or I guess you could say it was under
very directed control by the Obama administration officials.  For
instance, it’s been revealed that Samantha Power, the Obama UN
ambassador, requested 260 unmaskings of U.S. citizens in the
course of 2016.  And she even tried to get even more unmaskings
before the inauguration of Donald Trump.  What reason does she
have to be asking for such intelligence, from the standpoint of
being at the UN?
Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, it is known
asked for many unmaskings, in this case, her National Security
Council records were transferred to the Obama library, so that
justice could be obstructed, because records at the library are
sealed for a number of years.
This is a deliberate policy of targetting U.S. citizens,
particularly Trump associated by the Obama administration, and
those are two such cases.
You have also the attempted J. Edgar Hoover-style sexual
blackmail of Trump, by Comey:  This is the fifth area that should
be investigated.  Comey met with Trump in Trump Tower on Jan. 6,
2017; he met with him alone.  Other people had come to the
meeting, but he asked them to leave and then met with Trump
alone, and presented him with an aspect of the Steele dossier
which claimed that he had been involved in sexual perversions in
a hotel in Moscow.  Trump has reportedly asked for an immediate
investigation of this fraudulent dossier, which Comey refused to
do.
But this is the kind of thing that J. Edgar Hoover did to
many, to Martin Luther King, Jr., and to many others, as a means
of terrorizing and controlling people to go along with a policy
desired by J. Edgar Hoover’s controllers, which is also the case
with respect to Comey.
A sixth area for investigation is the wiretapping of Trump
associates, and then the lying by Comey and Clapper to the U.S.
Congress. Clapper in particular was asked, was there a FISA
ordered surveillance of Trump or his associates?  He said no.
“Would you know about it if it had occurred?”  “Yes, I would,”
and he left a loophole and said: Well, there may have been some
other jurisdiction was carrying out a wiretap that I don’t know
about.
But this is what he said, and he definitively said there was
no FISA Court wiretap, and yet, that’s precisely what came out:
That Manafort, the campaign manager of Trump, was wiretapped and
he had a resident at Trump Tower, and this is precisely what
Trump had tweeted on March 4th, 2017:  “Terrible! Just found out
that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the
victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”  So that has to be
investigated.
And then the final thing in the dossier, is the attempted
entrapment of the President by Comey himself, into an obstruction
of justice charge:  So you have the head of the FBI who is acting
virtually as somebody who goes to a meeting with wires on, and
goes back to his controllers at the FBI to consult after each
visit with Trump.  And then writes memos, which he illegally
leaked to the press, and he actually said:  “I thought that might
prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”  So he had the
intention of getting a special counsel against Trump, on the
grounds  — one would be to claim that Trump asked him not to
pursue an investigation of Michael Flynn; of course Trump didn’t
do that, as indicated.  He merely said, “I would hope that he
wouldn’t be prosecuted.”  And of course, as has been pointed out,
the President has the right to actually pardon somebody.  So, as
Alan Dershowitz, the civil rights attorney, and Democrat, has
said he had every right to say what he did.
And the other aspect is to say that somehow Trump was
obstructing justice by firing Comey!  So the attempt was set up
to get Mueller to be able to carry out this kind of an
investigation against Trump.
Using methods of entrapment, lying throughout, what you had
is a witch hunt against a President of the United States.  It’s
not the first time that the British have been involved in this,
and their stooges in the United States, but this is really
unprecedented, with the exception of the witch hunt which was
carried out earlier against Lyndon LaRouche.
And it’s time that this be stopped! And that’s the whole
point of this dossier.
The dossier should be seen as a political weapon in the
hands of the American citizenry.  The issue here is what Benjamin
Franklin said after the Constitutional Convention adopted a
Constitution.  We have a republic, the question is, can you keep
it?  And the responsibility rests on the American citizen to use
this dossier to actually force the issue in the country right
now, to stop this British coup.
Robert Mueller’s full name, as the dossier indicates, is
Robert Swan Mueller III.  Our intention is to make this operation
being carried out by Mueller right now, to be his final swan
song.

OGDEN:  As we saw on the screen there, the question that was
asked at the conclusion of this final section of the dossier is
the following: “{Have our intelligence agencies, actually
instigated an Active Measures counterintelligence program
illegally and against a sitting President?}” [emphasis in
original]
So that’s the question and as the dossier states a little
bit later on:  It’s very clear that there has been a foreign
government that has intervened to attempt to sway the U.S.
electoral process and the U.S. democratic process, and that that
foreign government is the British government.  And so if you
follow the thread of Robert Mueller, not just in the attacks
right now against President Donald Trump, but if you follow it
back to the aggressive cover-up of the events of 9/11, and even
the prosecution and witch hunt against Lyndon LaRouche in the
1980s, you’ll see if you pull that thread it will unravel a much,
much larger apparatus, and it will reveal a lot more.
This dossier follows that thread very clearly through these
three crucial inflection points in our nation’s recent history
and the call to action is obviously to access this dossier which
we’re making available and to circulate it as widely as possible.
Will, you made the point that the context for all of this is
much more significant than maybe even all of the mechanisms by
which these crimes have been carried out.  The context is what
reveals and uncovers the true motivation behind this entire
process, and I think if you take the connections between this
dossier, which choose 1982 as a crucial year to examine what
Lyndon LaRouche’s activities were at that time — meeting with
López Portillo, meeting with Indira Gandhi, proposing the
Strategic Defense Initiative, and authoring {Operation Juárez},
and if you trace that forward to the announcement in 2013 by Xi
Jinping of the new Silk Road, the Eurasian World Land-Bridge, and
the new international financial institution of development that
that represents, that’s the unifier for this entire period of
history.
And despite the attempts, over and over, and over again, to
derail that locomotive of world history, we’ve reached the point
where that is the prevailing dynamic on the planet. And the
attempts to try to sabotage that and undermine it continue to
fail.  And so, this is the latest attempt in that, but to look at
what the motivation is — maybe you can just say a little bit
more about what that context is.

WERTZ:  I think the point is, in defeating this British
operation which Mueller is spearheading at this point, we create
the conditions under which President Trump can move to join with
Russia, China, India in the development of the One Belt, One Road
policy.  This is crucial in terms of reversing the destructions
over the recent decades of our industrial capacity in the United
States; it’s crucial in terms of developing world peace, solving
crises such as Korea, solving crises such as the terrorist
onslaught in the Middle East and Northern Africa in particular.
That collaboration is crucial.  Trump has signalled that he wants
to move with such collaboration.
And this is a longstanding fight to bring humanity together,
operating on a common destiny of humanity, what John Quincy Adams
called a “community of principle among a family of sovereign
nation-states.”
The British Empire, as the Venetian Empire before it, has
been opposed to that.  It has operated under the geopolitical of
dividing nations among themselves, creating warfare such as we’ve
seen repeatedly over the last more than a hundred years, with two
world wars, and perpetual warfare ever since.
And so we’re in a situation, where, as Lyndon LaRouche
recently said, “Victory is within our reach,” and you have to
understand this broad arc of history in order to have an
appreciation of what’s occurring in so-called contemporary
affairs.  It’s not what meets the eye:  it’s this broader
question — we’ve got a financial crisis in the world.  The
system is overbloated and ripe for collapse; the problems of 2008
were never solved.  And we have a solution before us which is New
Paradigm:  Peace based upon economic development, cooperation
among nations for the purpose of promoting, as our Constitution
says, the General Welfare, not just of our own population, but of
the population of the entire planet.
And I think that’s the issue between the British Empire
policy of geopolitics, versus the policy of a community of
principle among nation-states, which is a U.S. policy; the policy
expressed by President Xi of China of a “win-win” policy, as
opposed to a zero-sum game — this is what’s at stake right now.
I think the American citizen, as this dossier concludes, has to
take responsibility, circulate this dossier!  We’re going to be
producing a leaflet and maybe multiple leaflets that you can get
from our site and then circulate throughout the country, to bring
people’s attention to this dossier.  We’re not in a position to
produce a large number of these in hard copy, but we do have an
electronic version which will be available on the LaRouche PAC
site.
And by doing this, we can create the conditions under which
not only is the presence of the United States defended against
this coup attempt, and it’s very much like the Maidan in Ukraine
that’s being attempted right now; what’s being done to Trump is
almost precisely modeled on the Maidan that brought about the
coup in Ukraine.  But more broadly than that, by defending the
Presidency was the chance of bringing about a different geometry
on the globe as a whole, and creating the conditions under which
we can move towards what the actual mission of mankind is:, which
is not only to develop this planet Earth, but also to assert
dominion over the Galaxy and eventually the Universe.

OGDEN:  Well, thank you, and let me put on the screen, one
more time, the cover page of this dossier, so you can get a look
at it, and we’ll have the link here on the screen.  You can
access this dossier at lpac.co/ytdos. And again, the title:
“Robert Mueller Is An Amoral Legal Assassin:  He Will Do His Job
If You Let Him.”
You’ll find this report fascinating:  You’ll learn a lot
about history, the history of this country over the last 30, 35
years that you did not know, I guarantee you.  And you’ll learn a
lot about what’s going on right now.  There’s much, much more
than what meets the eye.
Thank you for joining me, Will.  And thank you for tuning
in, and we encourage you, read the dossier and circulate it as
widely as you can.  And stay tuned to larouchepac.com

Af Barbara Boyd.

Indledning:

Robert Swan Mueller III – den særlige anklager, der har fået til opgave at bringe USA’s præsident til fald – er, som hans navn antyder, et produkt af elitens privatskoler og universiteter. I de nationale nyhedsmedier roses han på ensartet og nøgtern vis som ubestikkelige, fair, »ærlige Bob«, »skolemester Bobby med tre pinde«. Vi vil vise, at dette image er et skamløst falsk PR-nummer fra Washington, D.C., der er skabt for de godtroende.

I virkeligheden er Robert Swan Mueller så korrupt, man kan være, og bøjer og drejer loven efter behov for at tjene deres mål, som tildeler ham opgaver. Magten hos anklagerfunktionen og institutionerne, han tjener, dikterer, hvad der er retten for ham, snarere end den fordomsfrie forfølgelse af retfærdighed, som loven bestemmer for hans kald. I, hvad han selv kalder et afgørende øjeblik, brød han rækkerne efter college for at tjene som marinesoldat i Vietnamkrigen. Herefter ønskede han aldrig at gøre noget som helst andet end at retsforfølge. Hans udnævnelse til særlig anklager udgør toppen af en lang karriere, hvor han har set sig selv som en streng og villig kriger, en pligtopfyldende marinesoldat, der handler på vegne af en hvilken som helst ond plan, hans overordnede præsenterer ham for, og bruger hvilke midler som helst, der synes nødvendige for at udføre planen.

I de seneste uger har aktivister fra LaRouche-bevægelsen gentagne gange fået at vide af borgere, de møder: »Det ser ud, som om præsident Trump nu får ’LaRouche-behandlingen’«. De to mænd kunne ikke være mere forskellige, mht. position eller kulturelle og intellektuelle præstationer. LaRouche er et verdenshistorisk geni af samme støbning som Leibniz. Men, begge mænd har rørt ved det, der viste sig at være den ’tredje skinne’ (den farlige, el-førende skinne i f.eks. undergrundbanen) i amerikansk politik, siden Franklin Roosevelts død. De udgjorde en trussel mod det angloamerikanske, britiske imperiesystem efter krigen. LaRouche udgjorde en sådan trussel direkte, konsekvent og eksplicit ved navn. Trump udgør en sådan trussel implicit, ved at afvise evindelig krigsførelse og søge bedre relationer med Rusland, kræve gennemførelse af Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling, støtte det, han henviser til som det Amerikanske System for politisk økonomi og ved at love massiv infrastrukturudvikling og en moderne platform for varefremstilling, for produktive jobs.

I begge tilfælde krævede briterne, som vi vil få at se, deres skalp, baseret på den opfattede trussel mod dem, med, som det mest specifikke eksempel på denne trussel, ønsket om en samarbejdsrelation med Rusland og en afslutning af den »unipolære« ramme for relationer mellem nationer. I begge tilfælde udløste de kontrollerede medier en uafbrudt spærreild af hæslig, slibrig og ærekrænkende dækning, dag efter dag, for at skabe betingelserne for en folkelig opbakning til en retsforfølgelse for kriminel aktivitet. Alt imens der er mange andre aktører i disse ’Kabuki-danse’ (tilnærmelsesvis, spil for galleriet) – kompromitterede og terroriserede politikere og dommere, og et efterretningssamfund, der fungerer som gendarmer for vores Orwellske politistat – så var det stumpe instrument, der blev valgt til angrebet, Robert Mueller. Undervejs, mellem disse to opgaver, spillede Robert Mueller en enormt betydningsfuld rolle i mørklægningen af den saudisk/britiske rolle i mordene på næsten 3.000 amerikanere den 11. september, 2001, og det totalt ødelæggende udsalg af USA’s Forfatning, der fulgte i kølvandet på terrorangrebet – en rolle, der, hvis den blev grundigt efterforsket, udgør forhindring af retfærdighedens gang, blandt andre forbrydelser.

Dette dossier vil tage jer igennem Muellers karriere, baseret på det, der er umiddelbart og offentligt tilgængeligt. Det efterlader et spor af ureglementeret anklagervirksomhed, inklusive det, som tidligere senator Bob Graham kalder »aggressivt bedrag« af den amerikanske Kongres og offentlighed, med hensyn til begivenhederne den 11. september, 2001, og inkluderer en betydelig rolle i overvågningsstaten efter 11. september, som har udtaget og ødelagt det fjerde forfatningstillæg og resten af vor Forfatnings Lov om Frihedsrettigheder. De af jer, der arbejder inden for vor moderne Leviatan, kan utvivlsomt pege på andre ureglementerede aktiviteter, og vi opfordrer jer til at læsse på – vær så venlige at afsløre det. Intet mindre end dette er, hvad I skylder jeres ed over for USA’s Forfatning.

Læs hele EIR’s dossier:

Download (PDF, Unknown)

27. sept., 2017 – Ifølge Washington Post og flere andre medier, indikerede præsident Trump, da han i går mødtes med en tværpolitisk gruppe af kongresmedlemmer fra Husets Måder og Midler-komiteen, at public-private partnerships, kendt som P3’er, ikke fungerer som middel til finansiering af infrastrukturudvikling. En unavngiven embedsmand fra Det Hvide Hus sagde til WP, at, selv om administrationen har forsket i disse fremgangsmåder, »så udgør de ganske bestemt ikke nogen ’magisk kugle’, der kan løse alle nationens infrastrukturproblemer, og vi vil fortsætte med at overveje alle brugbare muligheder«.

Hvad præsidenten nu beslutter mht., hvordan man skal finansiere det $1 billion store infrastrukturprogram, han annoncerede i sin administrations begyndelse, vides endnu ikke. Men det fremlægger på bordet (hvor det altid har ligget) overvejelse af den kreditpolitik i Hamiltons tradition, som Lyndon LaRouche har foreslået, som det eneste, brugbare middel til at finansiere landets økonomiske genopbygning.

Kongresmedlem Brian Higgins (D-NY), der deltog i mødet, sagde, han mente, præsidentens bemærkninger signallerede en åbenhed over for at arbejde sammen med Demokrater om planen, og endda en forhøjelse af den føderale forpligtelse. Under mødet, rapporterer Higgins, indikerede Trump, at han ville søge at betale for infrastrukturprojekter gennem direkte føderale bevillinger, ved enten at betale for projekter med nye skatteindtægter eller også ved at stifte ny gæld. I et telefonisk interview til Bloomberg News fremkom Higgins med det synspunkt, at, efter otte måneder, hvor Senatets og Husets lederskab ikke har samarbejdet med præsidenten om en gennemgribende revision af sundhedsforsikringen, så »føler han sig nu fri til at finde partnerskaber andre end dem, der ikke har fungeret i de seneste otte måneder«.

Under gårsdagens møde understregede præsident Trump, iflg. de tilstedeværende, et grelt eksempel på P3’s fiasko i vicepræsident Mike Pences hjemstat Indiana, for at demonstrere, at denne fremgangsmåde ikke vil fungere på det føderale niveau. Efter at et privat, spansk firma ikke fuldførte en strækning af interstats-hovedvej 69 i Indiana, udsteder delstaten nu offentlig gæld for at fuldføre de 40 % af projektet, som det spanske firma efterlod ugjort.

Foto: Skaderne på Puerto Ricos infrastruktur er enorme, og øen er flere steder mørklagt og isoleret.

23. sept., 2017 – Den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov lagde skylden på Obama-administrationen for de dårlige relationer mellem Rusland og USA. »De russisk-amerikanske relationer lider, ikke alene, fordi der er konflikter, men fordi den tidligere administration opførte sig ondskabsfuldt, hævngerrigt og plantede en mine med forsinket udløsning under de russisk-amerikanske relationer«, sagde Lavrov på en pressekonference ved afslutningen af sine aktiviteter på FN’s Generalforsamlings møder, iflg. TASS. »Det ville jeg ikke have forventet af en Nobels Fredspristager«, sagde han ironisk. Lavrov sagde, han var overbevist om, at »det er meget dårligt, at et enormt potentiale for vore bilaterale relationer er lagt i mølposen pga. russofobisk hysteri, og at globale spørgsmål lider, fordi Rusland og USA ikke kan koordinere«.

Lavrov sagde, han ikke kunne tro på USA’s udenrigsminister Rex Tillerson, da denne hævdede at have beviser for Ruslands indblanding i de amerikanske præsidentvalg. »Da jeg spurgte Rex Tillerson, hvordan man kunne bekræfte hans ord om, at Ruslands indblanding i de amerikanske valg er veldokumenteret, sagde han, ’Jeg kan ikke vise dig noget, da det er klassificeret information’«, sagde den russiske udenrigsminister. »Ved du, jeg kan ikke tro på det.«

»Man har kørt en kampagne op over lovligheden af valget af præsident Trump og over det faktum, at Rusland skulle have sikret, at han blev præsident ved at blande sig i valgkampagnen, men de har ikke fremlagt ét eneste bevis«, sagde Lavrov. »Om indblandingen i valget er der, selv om der nu er gået et år, siden diverse kommissioner begyndte at arbejde, ingen, nogen steder, der har fremlagt én eneste kendsgerning for os.«

»Vi har den såkaldte dekonfliktion, men det er sandsynligvis ikke nok, når kampen mod terrorisme skrider frem, når vi ødelægger terrorist-arnesteder i Raqqa og Deir ez-Zor«, sagde han. »For at give terroristerne det faktiske endelige stød, så er ikke kun dekonfliktion nødvendig, men koordination. Men det amerikanske militær er blevet forbudt at koordinere.«

I sin berømte tale til Kongressen advarede John Quincy Adams om, at Amerika »drager ikke til udlandet i søgen efter uhyrer at ødelægge«, men snarere respekterer »andre nationers uafhængighed samtidig med at bevare sin egen … og afholder sig fra indblanding i andres anliggender«. Et ekko af denne principerklæring fra John Quincy Adams kunne i denne uge høres i præsident Trumps tale til FN’s Generalforsamling, hvor han reelt erklærede afslutningen på politikken for regimeskifte og en unipolær verdensorden, som har domineret de seneste to administrationer, og erklærede, »Vi forventer ikke, at forskellige lande skal være fælles om de samme kulturer, traditioner eller endda regeringssystemer« og opfordrede til »en verden af stolte, uafhængige nationer, der … gør fælles sag i den største fælles interesse for os alle: en fremtid med værdighed og fred for befolkningen på denne vidunderlige Jord«.

Men præsident Trump modsagde imidlertid sig selv i selvsamme tale og opremsede bogstavelig talt et litani af ikke mindre end et halvt dusin »uhyrer, der skulle ødelægges«, fra Nordkorea til Iran, til Cuba, Venezuela og Syrien. Denne dobbelthed, som man ikke kan karakterisere som andet end »En fortælling om to taler«, som indeholdt det bedste og det værste, reflekterer den kamp, der nu raser, om dette præsidentskabs sjæl. De positive elementer af denne tale, som åbenlyst reflekterer en hældning mod at arbejde sammen med nationer som Kina og Rusland, må omfavnes. Men de andre, meget destruktive aspekter må opgives og summarisk afvises, og erkendes som det, de er: forsøg på at køre af sporet, det positive potentiale for et nyt system med win-win-relationer, udført af dem, der af geopolitiske grunde er imod det fremvoksende, nye paradigme for fred gennem økonomisk udvikling, som eksemplificeres af Kinas politik for den Nye Silkevej.

Vært Matthew Ogden: Godaften; det er 22. sept. 2017. Tak fordi I lytter til vores ugentlige, strategiske webcast her fra LaRouche PAC.

I denne uge har vi set FN’s Generalforsamling samles i New York City. Lad mig begynde aftenens udsendelse med at citere en stor, amerikansk præsident, statsmand og diplomat, hvis 250. fødselsdag vi fejrer i år: John Quincy Adams sagde det følgende i sin berømte tale til Kongressen den 4. juli, 1821: »Amerika udråbte for menneskeheden de umistelige rettigheder, som er menneskets natur, og de eneste lovlige fundamenter for regering. I forsamlingen af nationer … rakte Amerika det ærlige venskabs, den ligeværdige friheds og den generøse gensidigheds hånd frem til dem. Hun har … respekteret andre nationers uafhængighed og samtidig hævdet og bevaret sin egen. Hun har afholdt sig fra indblanding i andres anliggender, selv, når konflikterne har været over principper, som hun holder sig til, som til den sidste, vitale dråbe, der når hjertet … Hvor som helst standarden for frihed og uafhængighed har udfoldet sig, eller vil udfolde sig, dér vil hendes hjerte, hendes velsignelser og hendes bønner være … Men, hun drager ikke til udlandet i søgen efter uhyrer, der skal ødelægges. Hun er en velynder af frihed og uafhængighed for alle. Hun forfægter og advokerer kun sin egen. Hun vil anbefale den almene sag gennem sin stemmes udtryk og sit eget eksempels venlige sympati. Hun ved meget vel, at, ifald hun melder sig under andre faner end sin egen, er det end fanen for udenlandsk uafhængighed, ville hun involvere sig, så hun ikke kunne vikle sig ud, i alle krigene født af interesse og intrige, af personlige griskhed, misundelse og ærgerrighed, der antager frihedens farver og tilraner sig en frihedens standard … Hendes politiks fundamentale grundsætninger ville umærkeligt skifte fra frihed til magt. Båndet på hendes pande ville ikke længere gløde med frihedens og uafhængighedens uudsigelige pragt; men ville i dets sted snart blive erstattet af et imperialt diadem, der med falsk og uren glans udsender de skumle stråler af herredømme og magt. Hun kunne blive verdens diktator: hun ville ikke længer være herskeren af sin egen ånd.«

Denne principerklæring fra John Quincy Adams, som blev holdt for næsten 200 år siden, og som på mange måder var forudvidende på grænsen til det profetiske i sin advarsel; denne tale bør udgøre grundlaget for vores udenrigspolitik som republik, og er faktisk fortsat i centrum for spørgsmålet og fred og krig den dag i dag. Det er i forhold til denne erklæring, at vores lederes udtryk, siden dengang og frem til i dag, for amerikansk udenrigspolitik må måles og sammenlignes.

Her følger engelsk udskrift af resten af webcastet:  

Now, let us shift our focus to the speech which President

Trump delivered at the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday

of this week.  I don’t think that there’s any other way of

characterizing what President Trump had to say other than to call

it “The Tale of Two Speeches”.  In some respects, it could be

seen as the best of all possible speeches; but in other respects,

and in a very large way, very substantially so, it was the very

worst of all speeches.  As Helga Zepp-LaRouche said, it was

almost as if he delivered two completely separate and

contradictory speeches at once.  One thing that’s very clear for

the observer, is that there are many opposing interests at work

in this administration, and that there’s a fierce policy war

ongoing right now behind the scenes for the very soul of this

Presidency.  It’s one which it is our responsibility to be very

clear-eyed about, to understand what the factors involved here

are, including the ongoing political coup attempt against this

Presidency from inside many of the institutions of our own

government.  But also to articulate the fact that this war is

ongoing, with sobriety and clarity.  And we must do this if we

are indeed intending to allow the very positive potential which

is reflected in this speech, to defeat the very negative

tendencies which are also very clearly present.

So, let’s take a look first at the positive elements of this

speech.  Granted, if you’ve only been reading the Western media

accounts, you might not have been exposed to many of the parts

which you are about to hear; and you might be very ignorant of

the fact that there was a very substantially positive aspect of

this speech.  For those who were there in the assembly hall

listening to the speech, and then for you who are viewing this

webcast right now, you might be surprised at the positive and

hopeful and clear-headed tone which began this speech.  One which

is perhaps very reminiscent of some of the statements that you

just heard John Quincy Adams make in that speech from almost 200

years ago.

What I’d like to do for you, is just play about seven or

eight minutes of the beginning of President Trump’s speech to the

United Nations General Assembly.

 

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP

:  To put it simply, we meet at a

time of both of immense promise and great peril. It is entirely

up to us whether we lift the world to new heights, or let it fall

into a valley of disrepair.

We have it in our power, should we so choose, to lift

millions from poverty, to help our citizens realize their dreams,

and to ensure that new generations of children are raised free

from violence, hatred, and fear.

This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world

wars to help shape this better future. It was based on the vision

that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their

sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their

prosperity.

It was in the same period, exactly 70 years ago, that the

United States developed the Marshall Plan to help restore Europe.

Those three beautiful pillars — they’re pillars of peace,

sovereignty, security, and prosperity.

The Marshall Plan was built on the noble idea that the whole

world is safer when nations are strong, independent, and free. As

President Truman said in his message to Congress at that time,

“Our support of European recovery is in full accord with our

support of the United Nations. The success of the United Nations

depends upon the independent strength of its members.”

To overcome the perils of the present and to achieve the

promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past.

Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent

nations that embrace their sovereignty to promote security,

prosperity, and peace for themselves and for the world.

We do not expect diverse countries to share the same

cultures, traditions, or even systems of government. But we do

expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties: to

respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every

other sovereign nation. This is the beautiful vision of this

institution, and this is foundation for cooperation and success.

Strong, sovereign nations let diverse countries with

different values, different cultures, and different dreams not

just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual

respect.

Strong, sovereign nations let their people take ownership of

the future and control their own destiny. And strong, sovereign

nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life

intended by God.

In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on

anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to

watch. This week gives our country a special reason to take pride

in that example. We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our

beloved Constitution — the oldest constitution still in use in

the world today.

This timeless document has been the foundation of peace,

prosperity, and freedom for the Americans and for countless

millions around the globe whose own countries have found

inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity, and

the rule of law.

The greatest in the United States Constitution is its first

three beautiful words. They are: “We, the people.”  Generations

of Americans have sacrificed to maintain the promise of those

words, the promise of our country, and of our great history. In

America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are

sovereign. I was elected not to take power, but to give power to

the American people, where it belongs.

In foreign affairs, we are renewing this founding principle

of sovereignty. Our government’s first duty is to its people, to

our citizens — to serve their needs, to ensure their safety, to

preserve their rights, and to defend their values.

As President of the United States, I will always put America

first, just like you, as the leaders of your countries will

always, and should always, put your countries first. [Applause.]

All responsible leaders have an obligation to serve their

own citizens, and the nation-state remains the best vehicle for

elevating the human condition. But making a better life for our

people also requires us to work together in close harmony and

unity to create a more safe and peaceful future for all people.

The United States will forever be a great friend to the

world, and especially to its allies. But we can no longer be

taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the

United States gets nothing in return. As long as I hold this

office, I will defend America’s interests above all else.

But in fulfilling our obligations to our own nations, we

also realize that it’s in everyone’s interest to seek a future

where all nations can be sovereign, prosperous, and secure.

America does more than speak for the values expressed in the

United Nations Charter. Our citizens have paid the ultimate price

to defend our freedom and the freedom of many nations represented

in this great hall. America’s devotion is measured on the

battlefields where our young men and women have fought and

sacrificed alongside of our allies, from the beaches of Europe to

the deserts of the Middle East to the jungles of Asia.

It is an eternal credit to the American character that even

after we and our allies emerged victorious from the bloodiest war

in history, we did not seek territorial expansion, or attempt to

oppose and impose our way of life on others. Instead, we helped

build institutions such as this one to defend the sovereignty,

security, and prosperity for all.

For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope. We

want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife. We are

guided by outcomes, not ideology. We have a policy of principled

realism, rooted in shared goals, interests, and values.

 

OGDEN:  So, that was the beginning of President Trump’s speech to

the United Nations General Assembly.  As has been reported,

immediately afterwards in a press conference, Foreign Minister

Sergey Lavrov of Russia responded very favorably to that aspect

of the speech.  As he said, “I think it’s a very welcome

statement, which we haven’t heard from an American leader for a

very long time.”  This is true, in this aspect of the speech;

because what you just heard from President Trump was essentially

a declaration that the policy of regime-change was over.  He

said, we’re looking for a coalition of strong and independent

nations that will be sovereign nations, but will exist in shared

security, prosperity, and peace.  So, an end to the so-called

“unipolar” world.  He said, “We do not expect diverse countries

to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of

government.”  He said we should “let diverse countries with

different values, different cultures, and different dreams not

just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual

respect.”  And, he said, these countries can work to make a

better life for all people by working together in “harmony and

unity”.  For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope,”

he said.  “We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and

strife.”

So, this is a very positive statement of US foreign policy;

and one which could be taken as an end to the commitment to

geopolitics and a unipolar world.  However, from there, the

speech took a very dramatic turn.  Immediately after vowing that

the policy of regime-change was over, President Trump proceeded

to list off no less than half a dozen regimes in this world which

must be changed or overthrown.  Literally, he had a litany of

“monsters to destroy”, in the words of John Quincy Adams.  Apart

from vowing to “totally destroy North Korea”, he also called to

dismantle the Iranian nuclear deal; calling the Iranian

government a “corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a

democracy”.  And he similarly went after Syria, Cuba, and

Venezuela.  Curiously, nowhere did he call out the Saudis for

their genocidal war that’s now being perpetrated against the

people of Yemen, or their support — financial and otherwise —

for the hijackers that attacked the very city in which he was

speaking on 9/11 and killed almost 3000 Americans.  A case which

is now being litigated by family members of the victims of 9/11

in front of US court.

So, after hearing the initial statements of harmony and

friendship and respect for sovereignty and not seeking to impose

our way of life on anyone, but rather letting diverse nations

with diverse values, cultures, dreams, and even systems of

government, not merely mutually coexist but work side by side on

the basis of mutual respect.  After hearing those words —

frankly so reminiscent of what you heard John Quincy Adams say in

his address from 1821 — it was rather shocking to then hear in

exactly the same speech, President Trump proceed with a litany of

threats and regime change which frankly was reminiscent of George

W Bush’s infamous Axis of Evil speech.  We saw how that proceeded

with the case of the regime-change war in Iraq.  So, this is

precisely what John Quincy Adams had warned so strongly against

in the words “Let us not go abroad in search of monsters to

destroy.”

But then, after that litany of threats, President Trump then

proceeded to conclude his speech by saying the following: “Our

hope is a world of proud independent nations that embrace their

duties, seek friendship, respect others, and make common cause in

the greatest shared interest of all.  A future dignity and peace

for the people of this wonderful Earth.  This is the true vision

of the United Nations, the ancient wish of every people, and the

deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul.”

So, as I said, it was almost like the Tale of Two Speeches,

which somehow both got combined into one address.  But the kind

of self-contradiction and duality which was on display and came

across almost as being schizophrenic on the part of the speech

writer, taking very due note of the very positive aspects of what

he laid out in the beginning, what maybe could be called the

Trump Doctrine, the end of this unipolar world and the end of

regime change; the very dangerous and negative aspects of what he

then proceeded to say in the very same speech should not be

sugar-coated by any means.

In speaking with Helga Zepp-LaRouche earlier today, she had

the following to say.  She said, “It’s very clear that Foreign

Minister Lavrov responded to the positive elements of Trump’s

speech.  But it’s also clear that there are very negative and

very destructive elements of Trump’s speech which came across as

almost two different speeches.  How can you denounce regime

change on the one hand, and then make a list of half a dozen

regimes that you demand to be changed in the very same speech?”

She said that “The solution here is that Trump has to follow

through on the constructive things he said; but he must also

abandon the policies which are obviously destructive.  This North

Korea thing could blow up at any minute, if this policy

continues,” she said.  “It’s nice that he said the things that he

did in the beginning; but it’s almost like they are two opposing

policies coming out of his mouth.  What’s very clear is that

there are two opposing interests working on Trump.  There’s a war

ongoing for the soul of this Presidency.  The positive elements

of this policy statement must be reinforced and strengthened,”

she said.  “But, the negative elements — such as the verbal

escalation against North Korea — should be recognized as an

effort on the part of certain elements in this administration to

drive a wedge in the potential for cooperation between the United

States and China.  This policy,” she said, “has clearly been

inserted by the neo-con elements which are still influencing this

Presidency.

“What we must do, is demand that Trump stick to his promise

which he expressed in the campaign, to cooperate with Russia and

with China.  This is the world of independent nations united for

‘common cause and shared interests’ which he referred to in the

conclusion of his speech.  This should absolutely be pursued,”

she said, “but what that means is that this other stuff has got

to go.”  She noted that now with the increase in the US military

budget, which is now greater than ever before, we have nearly

$700 billion in our military budget; far greater than the next

seven countries in the world combined.  She asked the question:

How much of this money could be used for infrastructure instead?

She also emphasized that the point is that we have an

extraordinary opportunity on our hands; but there are also very

real dangers facing us as well.

In reflecting on what’s occurred this week, it’s always very

important to approach the situation from above; from the top

down.  The defining question for anybody who’s sober-minded in

international relations today is, will the world unite around the

New Paradigm of development which has been initiated by China in

the form of the New Silk Road policy?  Or, will a continuation of

the perpetual warfare policy and regime-change policy of the past

two administrations be allowed to escalate and to derail this

emerging potential?  Both in terms of undermining the ability of

the United States and countries such as China and Russia to

cooperate, and also in a very real way, threatening to actually

bring the world to the brink of thermonuclear war.  Will the

United States abandon the geopolitics associated with the Cold

War and the British imperial of zero-sum game and unipolar

hegemony, and instead embrace the win-win paradigm of peace

through development and relationships between countries based on

mutual respect, mutual benefit, and mutual gain?

The answer to that question still remains unclear in the

wake of President Trump’s address to the United Nations General

Assembly, either in the positive or in the negative.  But, if you

look at the world stage, we are watching before our very eyes, a

new paradigm in the relations between nations emerge.  This is

seen very clearly in the Belt and Road Initiative and all the

developments that are associated with that — the positive

development projects that China is bringing to central Asia, and

emphatically bringing to Africa, and bringing to Latin America.

Apart from all the political gossip and all the partisan

propaganda and media punditry that you’re exposed to on a daily

basis, the question for an American citizen to ask is, how will

President Trump respond to this emerging new paradigm?  And how

will the United States fit into that emerging new international

dynamic of peace through development?  That’s the measuring rod

against which not only his words but his actions must be judged.

He has some very clear opportunities in the coming months to

follow through on what is clearly his inclination for a positive

relationship with China and with Russia; including his seemingly

very positive personal relationship with President Xi Jinping.

The ASEAN summit is upcoming in less than two months, and it has

been announced that President Trump will be travelling to attend

the ASEAN summit.  As part of that trip to Asia, he will be

making his very first state visit to China.  This has all of the

positive potentials; it implies everything that could occur in

terms of the United States joining the New Silk Road, following

up on the attendance to the Belt and Road Forum by Matthew

Pottinger, who was sent personally by Trump as an envoy of the

United States.  The personal visits that President Xi Jinping has

made to the United States; the very good appointment of Terry

Bransted to be the Ambassador to China, who we know has very

positive views of China-US relations.  Also, emphatically the

question of Chinese investment into rebuilding the infrastructure

of the United States, in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane

Irma, now Hurricane Maria and the destruction that that has

wrought on the island of Puerto Rico.  This question of not only

reconstruction, but construction of an entirely new

infrastructure platform in the United States could not be more

urgent.  President Trump has committed himself to at least $1

trillion in investment in that kind of infrastructure.  We know

that the scale is far, far greater; and that requires a return to

Hamiltonian economics.  But it also requires the United States to

enter into a very decisive and reciprocal relationship with China

in terms of mutual investment and mutual development.  That is

the framework around which the positive opportunities for

cooperation with China can be built.

If we take that kind of approach from above and say it’s not

within the interstices of Congressional partisan politics, or

bickering inside the halls of Congress that we’re going to make

the necessary policy revolution in terms of the economics of the

United States.  But it’s from recognizing that a far greater

global process is now underway; a dynamic which is sweeping the

planet.  It’s sweeping away both the geopolitical paradigm of

British imperial divide and conquer geopolitics; but it’s also

bringing in an entirely new approach to how you construct peace

through economic development.

So, the defining question in international relations is, how

will the United States fit into that?  That remains the

overarching question at the very root of this fight for the soul

of the US Presidency.

As we’ve documented and will be continuing to document in an

exposé which is forthcoming from LaRouche PAC, there is a very

real concerted effort from inside the institutions of the United

States to undermine this Presidency and to box Trump into making

very real strategic mistakes.  The time has come for him to learn

those lessons and to throw that aspect out, and to embrace the

positive aspects as you could hear in the beginning of this

address to the United Nations General Assembly.

So, let me go back to the words of President John Quincy

Adams, who was our chief diplomat as Secretary of State for many

years, who was diplomat to the nation of Russia, and after being

President for one successful term, returned to the United States

Congress and fought a battle against slavery which in turn

inspired Abraham Lincoln.  But in his prophetic and very

prescient speech, he warned that yes indeed, the United States of

America will proclaim the “inextinguishable rights of human

nature”, will abstain from “interference in the concerns of

others”, will “respect the independence of other nations while

asserting and maintaining her own.”  “But America does not go

abroad in search of monsters to destroy.”  He warned that if we

were to do that, the “fundamental maxims of our policy would

change insensibly from liberty to force.  We would no longer beam

with the splendor of freedom and independence, but instead an

“imperial diadem would be substituted, flashing in false and

tarnished lustre in the murky radiance of dominion and power.”

We would become the dictator of the world; “no longer the ruler

of [our] own spirit.”

So, let us take a lesson from the words of John Quincy

Adams.  Let us once and for all abandon the regime-change

geopolitics of the last two administrations; and let us embrace

decisively and fully the new win-win paradigm which has been

spelled out so clearly by President Xi Jinping of China, both in

words and in actions.  And was indicated by President Trump in

the beginning of his speech to the United Nations General

Assembly.  Let us embrace those policies, and let us abandon the

policies of regime change and perpetual war.

Thank you for joining me here today, and please stay tuned

to larouchepac.com.