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.

 

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 21. sept., 2017 – Det store spørgsmål, som historien stiller os i dette øjeblik, og som vil afgøre den fremtidige, historiske kurs, og endda, om der i det hele taget bliver nogen fremtidig historie, er, om USA, under præsident Donald Trump, fuldt og helt vil gå sammen med Kina og Rusland i det store Verdenslandbro-projekt samtidig med, at USA gennemfører statsmand og økonom Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love.

Præsident Trumps tale for FN den 19. sept., som med overlæg er blevet fuldstændig forvrænget af de løgnagtige transatlantiske medier, demonstrerer for enhver, der tager sig tid til at læse den, hvor tæt vi er på endelig at skabe de historiske forandringer til det bedre – hvis vi handler nu. Som det ses i de nedenstående, korte uddrag, så var præsident Trumps faktiske tale en passioneret appel til den suveræne nationalstats evne til at forbedre skæbnen og vilkårene for menneskeheden, og suveræne nationalstaters evne til at gøre fælles sag på vegne af den menneskelige art og faktisk skabe en ny renæssance. Den russiske udenrigsminister Sergei Lavrov responderede korrekt til fremstødet i præsident Trumps tale som helhed, da han karakteriserede den som »bemærkelsesværdig« og »en meget velkommen erklæring, som vi ikke har hørt fra en amerikansk leder i meget lang tid«.

Samtidig var der også de barske fordømmelser af fire udenlandske regeringer. Der er ingen grund til at gentage dem her, for det er det eneste, medierne har dækket af talen, hvor de i en uendelighed gentager og udlægger det. Men det er uklogt, og de øger faren for krig.

LaRouche-bevægelsens bestræbelser nu kan være afgørende for, hvilken vej, dette går, selv på kort sigt. Vil kupforsøget mod præsidenten blive overvundet og endelig sætte ham fri til fuldt ud at samarbejde med Rusland og Kina, som han ønsker, og som han må? Det vil forandre alt.

Den hårde kampagne imod »Russia-gate«-svindlen mod præsidenten, som blev udkæmpet ved hjælp af Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity’s (VIPS) memorandum fra 24. juli, har inspireret flere kræfter til at gå ind i kampen. Og den har været med til at inspirere dem, der allerede kæmper, til at kæmpe mere beslutsomt og ihærdigt. I går udgav Bill Binney og Ray McGovern fra VIPS, der netop har talt på en EIR-konference i Manhattan den 9. sept., en ny hit-artikel, »Flere huller i narrativen om Russia-gate«, på Consortium News, og som snart vil komme i EIR-magasinet. De fører krigen direkte over i fjendens lejr og giver ingen indrømmelser. Ligeledes i går tweetede chef for WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, at hverken Robert Muellers team eller Senatets Efterretningskomite havde »gjort sig den ulejlighed« at kontakte WikiLeaks eller ham selv. Dette gør hele deres såkaldte efterforskning ugyldig – at de ikke gør noget som helst forsøg på at kontakte en part, der alene er i besiddelse af betydningsfulde, og muligvis afgørende, beviser.

Nu har orkanen Maria »totalt ødelagt«, som præsident Trump sagde, Puerto Rico, som aldrig før i dets historie. Dets elektricitetsnet er ødelagt og må genopbygges fra grunden. Der er massive oversvømmelser. Den føderale regering responderer til nødsituationen, men det stiller omgående det overordnede spørgsmål: en genopbygning af alle de ramte områder i USA og indsættelse af den rette, nye infrastruktur, kan kun gøres gennem LaRouche-planen og LaRouches Fire Love, indbefattet massiv udstedelse af statslige kreditter sådan, som LaRouches handleplan for nødsituationen, »Ikke flere Harvey-katastrofer« fra 31. august, dikterer.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump taler for den 72. samling af FN’s Generalforsamling. (Official White House Photo by D. Myles Cullen)

21. sept., 2017 – De følgende, korte uddrag repræsenterer den reelle, overordnede retning og indholdet som helhed, af præsident Trumps tale for FN’s Generalforsamling den 19. sept. – og ikke de udvalgte klip, som de løgnagtige medier i én uendelighed gentager og brygger videre på. Et blik på det komplette udskrift eller en video, der ikke er klippet i, bekræfter dette. Ingen, der er offer for de transatlantiske medier, ville have nogen anelse om, hvorfor den russiske udenrigsminister sagde til interviewerne fra Associated Press og TASS, at han fandt talen »bemærkelsesværdig«.

Trump sagde:

»Det står i vores magt, ifald vi vælger det, at løfte millioner ud af fattigdom, hjælpe vore borgere til at realisere deres drømme og sikre, at nye generationer af børn kan vokse op, fri for vold, had og frygt.

For at overvinde nutidens farer og opfylde forhåbningerne til fremtiden, må vi begynde med fortidens visdom. Vor succes afhænger af en koalition af stærke og uafhængige nationer, der omfavner deres suverænitet for at fremme tryghed, fremgang og fred, for sig selv, og for verden.

Vi forventer ikke, at forskellige lande skal være fælles om den samme kultur, de samme traditioner eller endda de samme regeringssystemer. Men vi forventer, at alle nationer overholder disse to, suveræne kerneforpligtelser: at de respekterer deres eget folks interesser og alle andre, suveræne nationers interesser. Dette er denne institutions skønne vision, og det er fundamentet for samarbejde og succes.

Stærke, suveræne nationer lader forskellige lande med forskellige værdier, forskellige kulturer og forskellige drømme ikke blot sameksistere, men arbejde side om side på basis af gensidig respekt.

Stærke, suveræne nationer lader deres folk tage deres egen fremtid i besiddelse og have kontrol over deres egen skæbne. Og stærke, suveræne nationer giver personer lov at blomstre i livets fylde, som det var Guds plan.

I Amerika søger vi ikke at påtvinge nogen vor livsstil, men lader den snarere skinne som et eksempel, alle kan se. Denne uge giver vort land en særlig grund til at være stolte over dette eksempel. Vi fejrer 230-års jubilæet for vor elskede Forfatning – den ældste forfatning i verden, der stadig er i kraft …

I udenrigsanliggender fornyer vi dette grundlæggende princip om suverænitet. Vor regerings første forpligtelse over for dens folk, over for vore borgere – er at tjene deres behov, sikre deres tryghed, beskytte deres rettigheder og forsvare deres værdier.

Som USA’s præsident vil jeg altid sætte Amerika først, ligesom I, som ledere af jeres lande, altid vil, og altid bør, sætte jeres lande først. [Applaus]

Alle ansvarlige ledere er forpligtet til at tjene deres egne borgere, og nationalstaten er fortsat det bedste middel til at opløfte menneskenes livsbetingelser.

Men, at skabe et bedre liv for vort folk, fordrer også, at vi arbejder sammen i tæt harmoni og enhed for at skabe en mere sikker og fredelig fremtid for alle folk …

Med opfyldelsen af vore forpligtelser over for vore egne nationer, indser vi også, at det er i alles interesse at søge en fremtid, hvor alle nationer kan være suveræne, fremgangsrige og trygge …«

Og som konklusion sagde han:

»Vi udsender nu en opfordring om en stor opvågnen af nationer, om en genoplivelse af deres ånd, deres stolthed, deres folk og deres patriotisme.

Historien stiller os spørgsmålet, om vi lever op til opgaven. Vort svar vil være en fornyet vilje, en genopdaget beslutsomhed og en genfødt helligelse. Vi må besejre menneskehedens fjender og befri selve livets potentiale.

Vort håb er et ord – og en verden af stolte, uafhængige nationer, der omfavner deres forpligtelser, søger venskaber, respekterer andre og gør fælles sag i den største fællesinteresse af alle: en fremtid med værdighed og fred for befolkningen på denne vidunderlige Jord.

Dette er De forenede Nationers sande vision, ethvert folkeslags ældgamle ønske og den dybeste længsel, der lever i hver eneste, hellige sjæl.

Lad dette være vor mission, og lad dette være vort budskab til verden: Vi vil kæmpe sammen, yde ofre sammen og stå sammen for fred, for frihed, for retfærdighed, for familie, for menneskehed og for den almægtige Gud, der skabte os alle.

Tak. Gud velsigne jer. Gud velsigne verdens nationer. Og Gud velsigne Amerikas Forenede Stater. Mange tak.«

Det Hvide Hus har udlagt talen i sin helhed på sin website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/09/19/remarks-president-trump-72nd-session-united-nations-general-assembly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-Hk_po6KGI

Med formand Tom Gillesberg.

Tom Gillesberg: »Velkommen til disse ualmindeligt dramatiske tider, hvor det internationale spændingsniveau stiger, og heldigvis er det ikke kun entydigt den forkerte vej. Jo, medierne her, ’fake news’ på alle 27 kanaler har jo haft travlt med at fortælle, at, nu holdt Trump jo sin store tale i FN og snakkede om bål og brand, Nordkorea, ’raketmand’, selvmordpilot, ’vi kommer og nakker dig’, eller noget i den stil, og nu rabler det hele nok. Men det er kun en meget lille del af historien. Det, som man ikke rapporterer, er, at den samme Donald Trump i sin tale til FN faktisk havde hovedfokus et andet sted. Det, der var bemærkelsesværdigt ved Trumps tale, var det, som bl.a. Lavrov, som var den russiske repræsentant – Vladimir Putin er ikke til stede ved FN’s Generalforsamling i år, og så er det udenrigsministeren, der er højeste, russiske repræsentant og ham, der render rundt og møder præsidenter og alt mulig andet – og det, han sagde om Trumps tale, det var, at den var bemærkelsesværdig. Den var tydeligvis ikke kun for internationalt brug, men også for den hjemlige publik. Lavrov sagde, at han særlig godt kunne lide, at Trump sagde, at USA ikke ønskede at påtvinge andre sin livsstil. ’Det er en velkommen udtalelse, som vi ikke har hørt fra en amerikansk leder i lang tid’, sagde Lavrov. Også Trumps udtalelse om, at ’stærke, suveræne nationer lader ikke bare forskellige lande med forskellige værdier eksistere samtidigt, men også samarbejde side om side på basis af gensidig respekt’. Det, han yderligere sagde, som også er lidt i den dur, så at sige, det er, at Trump sagde, ’Vi må samarbejde om en fælles sag, som alle har interesse i. En fremtid med værdighed og fred for menneskene på denne vidunderlige Jord. Som præsident for USA sætter jeg Amerika først, ligesom I som ledere af jeres lande, altid sætter, og altid bør sætte, jeres lande først. Nationalstaten forbliver det bedste middel til at opløfte menneskets omstændigheder.’

Det egentlige fokus i talen, det nye i talen, det var, at han sagde, at det er nationalstaten og samarbejde nationalstaterne imellem, der er kernen til, at menneskeheden får en god fremtid. …«

Hør hele Tom Gillesbergs analyse:   

2. del:

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 20. sept., 2017 – Abraham Lincolns store økonom, Henry C. Carey, skrev i 1851 en bog med titlen, »The Harmony of Interests« (Interessernes harmoni). Han fremførte, at industriens, landbrugets og kommercielle foretagenders interesser var indbyrdes afhængige, og at det samme var tilfældet for regering, forretningssamfund og arbejderklassen. Lyndon LaRouche har længe været fortaler for, at det samme koncept var afgørende for verdensfred og udvikling blandt nationer. I sin artikel fra 2010, »The Question Before US«, opfordrede LaRouche til, at de »fire magter« (Rusland, Kina, Indien og USA) indleder en »missionsorienteret proces for transformering af verdens økonomiske systemer, bort fra de nuværende, ødelæggende virkninger af underkastelse af et implicit finansielt imperialistisk, globalt, monetært system« og skabe fundamentet for »gensidigt fordelagtigt, globalt samarbejde blandt folkeslagene, der er organiseret som et samfund af henholdsvist suveræne nationalstater«.

Præsident Trump gav i sin tale i FN udtryk for samme tanke: »Hvis vi entusiastisk skal gribe de fremtidige muligheder og overvinde de aktuelle farer sammen, kan der ikke være nogen erstatning for stærke, suveræne og uafhængige nationer – nationer, der er rodfæstet i deres historie og engageret i deres bestemmelse; og vigtigst af alt, nationer, der har patrioter, mænd og kvinder, der er villige til at yde ofre for deres land, deres medborgere og for alt det i den menneskelige ånd, der er bedst.«

Den russiske udenrigsminister var en af dem, der roste talen. »Jeg mener, at det er en meget velkommen erklæring, som vi ikke har hørt fra en amerikansk leder i meget lang tid«, sagde han til AP og TASS efter et frugtbart møde med udenrigsminister Rex Tillerson. Han bemærkede, at den aktuelle, sørgelige tilstand i de amerikansk-russiske relationer skyldes »arven efter Obama-administrationen«.

Præsident Trump har afvist den »unipolære verden«, som den blev promoveret af de neokonservative – både Bush-fraktionen hos republikanerne og Obama/Hillary-fraktionen hos Demokraterne – som mener, at USA er den »eneste supermagt« og må holde andre nationer svage (Rusland og Kina i særdeleshed) for at bevare denne dominerende stilling. Han har insisteret på at blive venner med Rusland, og han har krævet et samarbejde med Kina om den Nye Silkevej. Dette er den grundlæggende årsag til hysteriet omkring ham, centreret i Det forenede Kongerige og de korrupte elementer i Bush- og Obama-æraens efterretningstjenester, der er i færd med at orkestrere et coup d’état imod nationens præsident.

Dette kupforsøg begyndte med en indsats for at oppiske frygt og vrede mod Rusland i den amerikanske befolkning, som udmalede Trump som en russisk marionet. Da dette mislykkedes, forsøgte de at fremprovokere racekrig i Amerika og udmalede Trump som tilhænger af hvidt overherredømme. Også dette mislykkedes. Alt, hvad de nu har tilbage, er Robert Mueller, James Comey og James Clapper, Obama/Bush-håndlangerne, alle notoriske løgnere, der nu er blevet fanget i endnu en stor løgn i deres desperate fremstød for at bringe USA’s regering til fald. Som Trump anklagede i et Tweet fra 4. marts: »Har netop fundet ud af, at Obama har aflyttet mig i Trump Tower lige før sejren. Fandt ingenting. Dette er ’McCarthy-isme’!« Comey og Clapper har højlydt benægtet denne aflytning – men det er nu blevet afsløret, at Trumps kampagneleder, Paul Manafort, der havde en lejlighed i Trump Tower, blev aflyttet i den periode, hvor han ledede kampagnen.

Wall Street Journal, der har oplevet internationalt oprør over, hvordan avisen dækker Trumps præsidentskab, udgav en stærk leder i dag, som direkte afslører: Comeys og Clappers løgne; britisk efterretningstjenestes rolle i Russiagate-efterforsknings-fuphistorien; og FBI’s og Justitsministeriets hindring af retfærdighedens gang med deres blokering af en indsats fra Kongressens side for at efterforske hele roderiet.

I dag sagde Helga Zepp-LaRouche, at al råben og skrigen om Trumps FN-tale, der kun fokuserer på hans barske ord om Nordkorea, Iran og Venezuela, kommer fra dem, der desperat forsøger at klamre sig til det gamle paradigme for den unipolære imperieverden med anglo-amerikansk dominans. Den politiske kamp for at etablere »et samfund af suveræne nationalstater« er nu blevet udtalt af præsidenten, alt imens Vladimir Putin konsekvent har insisteret på, at den Nye Silkevej netop er baseret på et sådant samfund af suveræne nationalstater.

At bringe denne nye realitet i forgrunden har aldrig været så presserende, eller så gennemførligt. Det amerikanske folk griber ud efter midlerne til at løfte deres ånd mod noget bedre, i traditionen efter det nu mistede Amerikanske System for politisk økonomi. Enden på Imperium er inden for vor rækkevidde, og en verden, baseret på menneskets sande værdighed gennem et samfund af suveræne nationalstater, er midlet til dette mål.

Foto: Præsident Donald J. Trump på den 72. FN’s Generalforsamling, 18. sept., 2017. (Whitehouse Photo)

19. sept., 2017 – I sin første tale for FN’s Generalforsamling i dag, beskrev præsident Donald Trump målet for at etablere en verdensorden, hvor »stærke, suveræne nationer … med forskellige værdier, forskellige kulturer og forskellige drømme ikke bare sameksisterer, men arbejder side om side på basis af gensidig respekt … og gør fælles sag for den største fælles interesse af alle: en fremtid med værdighed og fred for befolkningen på denne vidunderlige Jord«. Det betyder, sagde han, at jeg som præsident for USA sætter Amerika først, ligesom I, som ledere af jeres lande, altid vil, og altid bør, sætte jeres lande først«.

Men selv med sine udtryk for disse ideer, og selv, mens han bekræftede princippet om, at »nationalstaten fortsat er det bedste udgangspunkt for at hæve de menneskelige vilkår«, gik Trump videre, idet han faldt i den britiske imperiefælde med, i de mest barske vendinger, at være fortaler for en farlig politik for regimeskifte mod en »lille gruppe slyngelregimer« (som han skiftevis beskrev som »kriminelle«, »depraverede«, »korrupte«, »destabiliserende« osv.), som han hævdede, var kilden til terrorisme og flygtninge og en trussel mod verdensfreden, og som FN må stå sammen om at fjerne.

Ikke Det britiske Imperium, som skabte og styrer terrorisme som et krigsredskab mod nationalstaten; ikke det umiddelbart forestående sammenbrud af det britiske, monetaristiske system, der har gjort de transatlantiske nationer bankerot (den amerikanske økonomi er i strålende form, sagde han, med vores aktiemarked på sit højeste og lav arbejdsløshed); men derimod de fem regeringer i Nordkorea, Iran, Syrien, Cuba og Venezuela, som han krævede, at andre regeringer skulle gå sammen med USA om at afsætte.

Alt imens Trump ikke angreb Rusland og Kina ved navns nævnelse, og takkede dem for at være med til at skærpe sanktionerne mod Nordkorea, så advarede han imidlertid om »trusler mod suverænitet« i Ukraine og i det Sydkinesiske Hav – et implicit angreb på disse to nationer.

Trumps mest fjendtlige udtalelser var over for Nordkorea, hvor han sagde, at det var »en skandale, at visse lande ikke alene ville handle med et sådant regime, men også ville bevæbne, forsyne og finansielt støtte et land, der truer verden med en atomkonflikt«. Dernæst truede han med, at USA, »hvis det blev tvunget til at forsvare sig selv eller sine allierede, ikke ville have noget valg, men totalt ville ødelægge Nordkorea. ’Rocket Man’ er på en selvmordsmission for sig selv og sit regime. USA er rede, villigt og har kapaciteten, men dette vil forhåbentlig ikke blive nødvendigt«.

Trump krævede også regimeskifte i Iran og Syrien og gentog den britiske løgn, at den syriske regering havde brugt kemiske våben mod sit folk, hvilket retfærdiggjorde USA’s missilangreb imod den syriske luftbase i april i år.

Det er sigende, at hvem så siden, der skrev denne tale for præsidenten, inkluderede referencer, der promoverer den efterkrigsorden, som præsident Harry Truman søgte, denne lille mand, der, på vegne af Winston Churchill, begravede Franklin D. Roosevelts projekt for en verden uden imperium efter krigen.

Foto: USA’s præsident Donald J. Trump holder sin ’jomfrutale’ i FN den 19. sept., 2017.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 18. sept., 2017 – Endnu et sammenbrud truer Wall Street/City of Londons finanssystem, og advarslerne om det kommer nu hurtigere og hurtigere, fra IMF til den Internationale Betalingsbank og til Storbritanniens Adam Smith Institute, hvis rapport i sidste uge kaldte det for »en ulykke, der blot venter på at ske«. Selv en af de største af disse banker, Deutsche Bank, advarer nu også om de gigantiske bobler og en »pludselig korrektion, der kunne destabilisere finanssystemet«. Henved 10 – 20 % af selskaberne i USA og Europa vil gå bankerot ved enhver signifikant stigning i rentesatserne, advarer de – Federal Reserve vil sandsynligvis udløse denne stigning i denne uge.

Tiden er inde til at huske på, at Lyndon LaRouche holdt en dramatisk, international udsendelse med en advarsel, i 2007: »Der er ingen mulighed for, at det nuværende finanssystem ikke kollapser, ingen! Det er færdigt! Det nuværende finanssystem kan ikke fortsat eksistere, under nogen omstændigheder, under noget præsidentskab, under noget lederskab, eller under noget lederskab blandt nationer. Kun en fundamental og pludselig ændring i det globale, monetære finanssystem vil forhindre et generelt og omgående kædereaktionslignende kollaps.« I samme udsendelse forklarede han – inkl. mht. lovgivende tiltag fra USA’s side – hvad der kunne have stoppet dette forfærdelige sammenbrud i 2008.

Nu har han igen forklaret det.

Der er tre lande, hvis lederskab må forhindre endnu et styrt ud i kaos og massearbejdsløshed som i 2008: Kina, der kom igennem dette kaos og har været drivkraft bag størstedelen af det økonomiske fremskridt siden da, med globale infrastrukturprojekter; USA, hvis præsident Donald Trump sidste år advarede om »en gigantisk boble på Wall Street« og lovede at genoprette økonomisk vækst; og Rusland. Den blotte tanke om disse tre magter, der samarbejder i et nyt paradigme for økonomisk udvikling – Kinas »Nye Silkevej« for store infrastrukturprojekter – destabiliserer fuldstændigt den angloamerikanske elite og de neokonservative, samt selveste London og Wall Street.

Som de oprindelige ophavsmænd, for årtier siden, til det nye paradigme med store infrastrukturprojekter, der nu virkeliggøres under Kinas »Bælte & Vej Initiativ«, er Lyndon og Helga LaRouche afgørende for dette samarbejde mellem store magter for fremskridt. Donald Trumps mønsterbrydende præsidentskab gør det muligt for USA at deltage.

Den statsanklager, de for 30 år siden havde den opgave at organisere »Få ram på LaRouche-specialstyrkerne« for at sætte Lyndon LaRouche i fængsel, er nu den »særlige anklager«, der forsøger at tvinge Trump ud af præsidentskabet. Robert Mueller forsøger at give præsident Trump »LaRouche-behandlingen«.

Så ophidsede er de neokonservative og finansbaronerne over muligheden for, at USA kunne tilslutte sig den Nye Silkevej, at deres amerikanske publikation, Foreign Policy, har udgivet et rasende angreb mod Helga Zepp-LaRouches kampagne til forbundsdagsvalget i Tyskland! De er fast besluttet på at stoppe ethvert fremskridt for et sådant nyt paradigme noget steds i Europa og USA.

Men en tilslutning til den Nye Silkevej er præcis, hvad USA har brug for. Hvis Trump skal beskytte amerikanerne mod den »gigantiske boble på Wall Street«, han advarede mod, og bygge en ny, økonomisk infrastruktur for atter at gøre nationen produktiv og stor, så er dette midlet. Det amerikanske folk må tage kontrollen over Wall Street ved at insistere på en genindførelse af en Glass/Steagall-opdeling af bankerne. Det er det første, nødvendige tiltag for at bringe den amerikanske økonomi ind i dette internationale samarbejde om store projekter.

Foto: Lyndon LaRouche på sin 95-års fødselsdag, sammen med sin hustru Helga og EIR-korrespondent Hussein Askary fra Sverige.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 17. sept., 2017 – Den virkelighed, der konfronterer det transatlantiske finanssystem, har en vis evne til at hævde sig.

På den ene side er der tænksomme statsmænd, såsom tidligere franske premierminister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, Macron-regeringens udsending til dette års Bælte & Vej Forum i Beijing, der den 16. sept. til Xinhua sagde, at »Europa bør tilslutte sig det af Kina foreslåede Bælte & Vej Initiativ så snart som muligt«, med Xinhuas parafrase. »Lad os gribe muligheden og skabe flere profitter. Jeg mener, vi vil opnå win-win-resultater gennem samarbejde med vore asiatiske partnere«, sagde Raffarin. »Frankrig, såvel som andre europæiske lande, har brug for hastig vækst. Vi bør blive involveret i stedet for blot at diskutere det, for så spilder vi en masse tid. Initiativet er meget vigtigt for Europa … Kina tilbyder en hjælpende hånd.«

På samme måde er Panamas regering, der netop har etableret diplomatiske relationer med Folkerepublikken Kina efter i årtier at have haft relationer med Taiwan, nu i færd med fuldt og helt at komme med om bord i Bælte & Vej Initiativet. Under den kinesiske udenrigsminister Wang Yis besøg til landet, understregede præsident Juan Carlos Varela Panamas betydning som logistisk havne- og lufthavnsplatform og opfordrede Kina til at benytte Panama som dets område for iscenesættelse af Bælte & Vej Initiativet for hele Latinamerika. Medlem af Panama Canal Authority Economics Unit, Eddie Tapiero, understregede en yderligere, afgørende pointe: Bælte og Vej »er en ny forretningsmodel for globalisering i verden, og Panama bør ikke være en udenforstående. USA må, som alle latinamerikanske landes hovedpartner, blive en del af initiativet. Med alle spillerne, der arbejder hen mod samme mål, vil landene på længere sigt opnå en balance i deres styrke og stabilitet.«

Selv Rajoy-regeringen i Spanien synes at have regent ud, hvad vej, vinden blæser. Efter at have deltaget i Bælte & Vej Forum i Beijing, var Rajoys regering vært for et meget succesfuldt besøg i Spanien af Kinas statsrådgiver Yang Jiechi, hvor Spaniens yderligere integration i Bælte & Vej blev diskuteret.

På den anden side er der Wall Streets ekstremt opportunistiske intrigemagere, såsom Jim Rogers, uddannet på Balliol College (Oxford University) og sammen med George Soros medstifter af Quantum Fund, og som nu er gået egne veje som »investor og finanskommentator«, og hvis synspunkter, indrømmer han, bedst beskrives som den Østrigske Skoles monetarisme. I et interview, der blev udgivet af RT den 16. sept., sagde Rogers, at, hvis USA lancerer en fuldt optrappet handelskrig mod Kina, ville dette omgående give bagslag og sandsynligvis føre til, at Kina og Rusland trådte til og omgående erstattede det nuværende internationale finanssystem. »Hvis de indfører store sanktioner mod Kina, bringer det hele verdensøkonomien til fald. Og det vil sluttelig gøre mere ondt på USA end på Kina, fordi det bare vil tvinge Kina og Rusland og de andre lande tættere sammen. Rusland og Kina og andre lande forsøger allerede at etablere et nyt finanssystem. Hvis Amerika indfører sanktioner imod dem, ville de blive nødt til at gøre det meget hurtigere.«

Det, som disse udviklinger reflekterer, understregede Lyndon LaRouche i dag, er, at det, der er i færd med at blive skabt, er udviklingen af et nyt system, der vil fungere. LaRouche var den oprindelige skaber af dette nye system, der skulle erstatte det bankerotte Britiske Imperium, og mange af de personligheder, der i årenes løb var involveret sammen med LaRouche i promoveringen af denne politik, i alle dele af planeten, kommer nu tilbage for at spille større roller. Dette ses fra Thailand, til Europa, til Panama. Det er LaRouches indflydelse, hans ideer, der er drivkraften bag denne dynamik.

Noget er ved at ske, forklarede LaRouche. Hele feltet er ved at åbne op; der kommer atter frisk vand. Forskellige folk og politiske kræfter vil komme med om bord og vil få jobbet gjort. Det er disse mennesker, vi må organisere med dette formål for øje, sagde han.

Foto: Der poseres for fotografen før receptionen med Kinas præsident Xi Jinping som vært for BRIKS-ledere og statsoverhoveder for inviterede stater. September, 2017. (en.kremlin.ru)

Vært Matthew Ogden: Aftenens udsendelse er noget speciel. Mange af jer ved, at hr. Lyndon LaRouches 95-års fødselsdag blev fejret for en uge siden, den 8. sept.; 95 år, en moden alder. Jeg lægger et billede op på skærmen af hr. LaRouche ved sin fødselsdagsfest den følgende dag. Det var en meget glædelig fest. Mange af de hilsner, der kom fra hele verden, var varme lykønskninger og hyldest fra mennesker, der har kendt hr. LaRouche, der har arbejdet med hr. LaRouche, og som respekterer hans bidrag til at ændre verdenshistoriens gang hen over disse mange og produktive 95 år. Nogle af disse hilsner er blevet samlet i et Festskrift; heriblandt hilsner fra meget fremtrædende politiske ledere fra USA – valgte repræsentanter og tidligere valgte repræsentanter. Richard Black fra Virginia, tidligere kongresmedlem Lacy Clay, tidligere justitsminister Ramsey Clark har sendt de varmeste hilsner. Tidligere senator Mike Gravel, der ligeledes har været præsidentkandidat og er berømt for Pentagon Papirerne. Der var dr. Hal Cooper, en ingeniør, der har arbejdet meget hårdt på visionen om Verdenslandbroen og har deltaget i nogle af de seneste begivenheder i New York City. Mark Sweazey, der er en leder af UAW (United Automobile Workers) fra Ohio, der har arbejdet med hr. LaRouche for at stoppe nedlukningen af automobilindustrien. Carol Smith, en aktivist fra Kentucky. Ron og Denna Wierczorek, meget kendte aktivister fra South Dakota, borgere i dette land. Så er der kunstnere – Maestro Anthony Morss fra New York City, en fremtrædende dirigent; Alan Leathers, en sanger fra Washington, D.C. Dernæst, politiske, videnskabelige og militære ledere fra hele verden. Latinamerika – fra Argentina, Bolivia, Brasilien, Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru. Der kom hilsner andre steder fra; fra hele Asien, inklusive flere hilsner fra Kina og Rusland. Folk fra Australien, Malaysia, Filippinerne, Thailand. Vi havde en rapport herfra for nylig; hr. Pakdee Tanapura, der arrangerede det meget succesfulde møde om Kra-kanalen, der netop fandt sted i mandags. Fra Spanien, og endda fra Yemen fra hr. Fouad al-Ghaffari, der er præsident for BRIKS’ Ungdomskabinet. Vi håber at kunne udsende et interview med ham i løbet af de næste par dages aktivisme, han vil gennemføre i Yemen for at stoppe saudiernes folkemordskrig mod det yemenitiske folk.

Men, som I ser, så er det kun et lille udvalg af de mange varme hilsner, der er kommet fra hele verden og hele USA i denne glædelige anledning af hr. LaRouches 95-års fødselsdag.

I aften vil vi faktisk gå nogle år tilbage i tiden. Vi vil gå fem år tilbage til hr. LaRouches 90-års fødselsdag. Ved denne lejlighed holdt hr. LaRouche en tale, der nu er blevet temmelig berømt, og hvori han kræver afslutningen af partisystemet; men han fremlægger også programmet for USA’s økonomiske genrejsning og en helt ny vision for det, der må sker mht. internationale relationer og dette lands politik.

Der er sket meget siden dengang, for fem år siden. Det synes næsten at være en evighed siden, mht. verdenshistoriens forløb. Hvis man tænker på, hvad der er sket, så blev denne tale, som vi skal ske et klip fra, holdt før kineserne vedtog den Nye Silkevej som deres officielle politik – Bælte & Vej Initiativet; før overfloden af nye udviklingsbanker, der kom fra BRIKS-landene – den Ny Udviklingsbank og Asiatisk Infrastruktur-Investeringsbank; før alle disse udviklinger fandt sted i udlandet. Og selvfølgelig, før det skelsættende valg i 2016 her i USA.

Hvis man ser på, hvad der er sket i USA, i betragtning af, at denne tale, som vi skal se et klip fra, blev holdt under præsidentvalgkampen i 2012 mellem Barack Obama og Mitt Romney. Men det er næsten fænomenalt, hvor forudvidende, hr. LaRouche var, mht. det, der ville finde sted i USA; noget, som ingen andre så komme og sikkert ikke troede på, da de hørte hr. LaRouches ord dengang. Begge de såkaldte politiske partier i dette forrige præsidentvalg ophørte med at eksistere i deres tidligere form. Der er intet genkendeligt Demokratisk Parti, eller Republikansk Parti. Der er måske nogle af de samme personer, men ikke de såkaldte establishment-partier, vi havde før 2016, før oprøret i det Demokratiske Parti, der formede sig omkring Bernie Sanders, og dernæst oprøret i det Republikanske Parti omkring Donald Trump; før begge disse ting indtraf, fremlagde hr. LaRouche det, han kaldte afslutningen af establishment-partisystemet, der var i færd med at ødelægge selve USA’s sjæl.

Vi har set dette fortsætte i 2016-valget, meget klart. Der var meget mere, der forenede det amerikanske folk end splittede det. Se f.eks. på den brede støtte til Glass/Steagall; noget, vi skal høre hr. LaRouche tale om i denne tale fra for fem år siden. Se på den brede støtte til infrastruktur, til produktive jobs; se på den brede opposition til konfrontationen med Rusland, der ville føre til Tredje Verdenskrig. Det er, hvad Hillary Clintons kampagne repræsenterede i det amerikanske folks øjne. Dette er, hvad det etablerede Republikanske Partis forskellige kampagner repræsenterede i det amerikanske folks øjne. Der var meget mere på det tidspunkt, der forenede det amerikanske folk end splittede det. Det var i realiteten LaRouche-programmet.

Går vi frem til nutiden og ser, hvad der er sket i USA i de seneste par uger, ser vi igen, at det amerikanske folk forenes. Se, hvad der skete i Houston omkring Harvey; den form for uselviskhed og næstekærlighed, som folk viste ved at gå ud for at redde og beskytte folk mod denne naturkatastrofe. Dette kendte ikke til skel; der var ingen partilinjer. Der var ikke noget, »Er du et flertal, er du et mindretal? Er du Republikaner, er du Demokrat? Er du konservativ, er du liberal?« Alle var amerikanere. Den samme stemning skete i Florida i kølvandet på orkanen Irma dér. Vi ser nu, at det endda smitter i politik i Washington. I en meget spirende form, men USA’s præsident har nu virkelig fornærmet establishment-personerne i det Republikanske Parti – Mitch McConnell og Paul Ryan og deres lige – ved at række ud til det Demokratiske Parti for at gennemføre et genrejsningsprogram for Houston og begynde at arbejde på noget af den politik, der burde have været politik fra Dag Ét. Dette skulle have været hans første 100 dage i embedet: Infrastruktur; produktive jobs. Dette begynder nu endelig at vise sig i en spirende form; og det er vores ansvar at forsætte med at lede.

Men jeg vil afspille dette uddrag af hr. LaRouches bemærkninger.

(Se hele LaRouche 90-års tale her (dansk): »Evnen til at gøre det gode – Mennesket har en særlig opgave i universet«)

Her følger resten af webcastet i engelsk udskrift:

I think you’ll find it fascinating

reflecting on what has happened in the past five years between

Mr. LaRouche’s 90th birthday and Mr. LaRouche’s 95th birthday.

In fact, what is the power of ideas to shape history?  What do we

have to expect in the days, weeks, months, and years to come?

This is the vision that leadership, that statesman-like

leadership that you’re about to hear from Mr. LaRouche.  This is

how history is formed.

 

[BEGIN VIDEO]

LYNDON LaRouche: … The problem is, {the party system}.

Now, George Washington, President George Washington and

others, at the founding of our republic, as an independent

republic, tried to {prevent} the formation of {a party system}.

And I think, the time has come, to eliminate {the party system}.

[applause]  At this time, it’s the only way, formally, through

the legal process, that we could eliminate the possibility of

these two kinds of Presidents.

What’s wrong?  Why should we have {party systems}?  We have

a Constitution, which is defined;  the Constitution is fine, if

it’s carried through, as intended; it is our system.  But why do

we have to have parties intervening in between the process of

selecting Presidential leadership in national government?  Why do

we do that?  What screwball invented this kind of nonsense?

Because that’s what happened:  People become partisan, and say,

“which party wins is going to determine the fate of the nation!”

No party has that kind of right!  There can not be a party,

that has the right, to oversee and control the destiny of the

nation!  You can have a President, there’s nothing wrong with

that.  But you can’t have a President as the President of a

party.  Or, you can not have a conniving, between two

Presidential teams, or two party teams, which connive by special

agreement among themselves, to create the composition of a

national government!  These things are obscenities, which leaders

of our nation, beginning from the George Washington

Administration, recognized as evils!  And the idea of going to a

European kind of government, which is inherently corrupt — by

its very nature, not necessarily by the {intention} of the

people, or the intention of the politicians, {they just don’t

know any better!}

And the only way this can be done, is, if we infect the

population, with the realization, {we do not want a party

system!}  We have state governments, don’t we?  Under our

Constitution.  We have local governments, within state

governments, under our Constitution.  We have bodies which the

nation creates, to perform functions of the Federal government,

the military and the rest of  it. {So we don’t need parties!}

They don’t do any damned good!

I mean, it’s like Franklin Roosevelt:  If Franklin Roosevelt

had just been the President and didn’t have to deal with these

damned parties, we would haven’t the mess we got into.  What we

need, we need to have {not} a contention, over which {party} is

going to win, when the party was {not] inherent in the conception

of nation.  What we need is a Federal Republic, with its state

composition and other local compositions playing their role.

{We don’t need this party system} which is a system of

inherently corruption.  What we need, is the election, due

process election, of a composition of government.  And we don’t

want people diverting the attention of the population, from the

issues of the nation, over the issues of partisanship! {That’s}

where the problem lies!

When you rely on parties, as such, you set up a kind of

controversy, or competition, for power, between or among party

systems.  These party systems then {excite the passions} of the

foolish voters, who now are concerned about voting for the

{party, first}, and the {nation, second!}  When it must be the

{nation, first,} and the not the party.

The voluntary part of the system, that’s fine; the citizen

has a right, to make formations, to make agreements among

themselves, and to cast their votes accordingly, and to discuss

these matters accordingly.  But we don’t want the top-down rule

of a party system, which is controlled by the money sent to them,

by financial interests which control the money which gives one

party advantage over the other!  You want the bare citizen, as a

citizen, to have an equal right, and independence of this party

system.

This has been said, again and again, in the course of the

history of the United States!  That people with insight, realize

the essence of the corruption in the United States, is based in

and derived from the use of the party system.  And you see it

right now:  You have, the nation is now mortgaged, for the

selection of its government, its national government, is

mortgaged to the {party system!}  Everything is stopped, except

which party is going to win!  And one is almost as bad as the

other.

And why should we be spending our time, selecting a

government, of two parties, neither of which is fit to be our

government!  Why don’t we have a national government selected in

the way that George Washington, for example, President George

Washington, had intended?  We would not {have} that mess!  And

the citizen would be called upon, not to decide who’s butt he

wants to kiss, but rather what the issues are and programs that

this citizen wishes to express.  We want to engage the citizen in

the dialogue!  We don’t want to take the competition {between}

groups of citizens.  {We want the citizen to force the reality,

that he or she is voting for the government.}  And what the

citizens do in voting for a government, will determine the fate

of the nation.

We want to {confront} the citizen, with the responsibility

of {his} being accountable, or her being accountable, for the

responsibility of what government is, and what it becomes.  We

have to {force} responsibility upon the individual citizen, as a

citizen, not as a sucker, playing into some kind of game.  And

this has been understood for a long time, by the best thinkers of

the United States, that it is the party system, as typified by

the Andrew Jackson Presidency, one of the most corrupt

Presidencies in our history.  And the corruption that was done,

to the United States, by the election of Andrew Jackson, and the

people who controlled him,  which were British bankers; so,

Andrew Jackson was a tool of British imperial bankers:  They

owned him.  They ran him.  And it was because of the party

system, that this could happen.

And we got the same thing today:  You’re shacked up with a

couple of clowns — Dummo and the Crook, and the Insane Crook.

Now, the only thing we can do, or the only thing I can do,

on this thing right now, apart from telling you about this

wonderful information, is to awaken you to realize what we’re

really up against, to recognize what the real problems are.  If

you’re thinking about looking at this mess out there, from the

standpoint of Democratic or Republican, you’re not thinking!

Because you’re not thinking in terms of the essential interest.

Because what you’re doing, whatever you do, you are imprisoned to

pledging your support, to a party!  Not to the nation.  Yes, you

say, “to the nation,” but it’s the party that controls you.  And

that is how Andrew Jackson destroyed the United States, was with

the party system! That’s what doomed Franklin Roosevelt. Franklin

Roosevelt would never have had this clown, Truman, stuck on him,

except for the party system business.  And that’s where our

problem lies.

And we have to make that clear.  Because we know what the

state of mind is?  What’s the state of mind of the voter?  He’s

playing football, not politics!  He’s playing a version of

football, baseball, whatever — gambling!  Racketeering,

whatever!  And his mind, his passion, is associated with winning

this, for this party, this team, this that, that and so forth —

{not for the nation!}  The objective of our system of government

must be to {force the citizen, as a citizen, to think through

what the national interest is!}  And we don’t do it.  We say,

“Which party are you going to support?”  Well, what’s the party

going to do? “Well, I think it’s a good party,” in other words,

they don’t know what the hell they’re doing — and they’re

passion is involved in being sure they won’t do it. And that’s

where we stand. And that’s the thing we’ve got to think about.

And you’ve got to destroy the self-confidence of those

damned fools, who think that the “party vote,” the vote for the

party {should determine the decision of the nation.}  That is a

false and fraudulent conception, and it’s about time we called a

halt to it.  And right now, would be a very good time.  All

right.  [applause]

Now, what’re we going to do?  Let’s lay out, here, we have

our organization.  We have a conception of how to organize this

nation, how to deal with the great crisis, the financial crisis,

the economic crises, which occur in this nation; and which occur,

also, similarly, in other nations, which I think would tend, at

this time, to look with a friendly eye at what I might propose

here, right now.

All right: First of all, the world is bankrupt.  The

trans-Atlantic region is {totally, hopelessly bankrupt!} Every

part of Western and Central Europe is totally bankrupt!  It’s

{incurably} bankrupt, under its present system.  Nothing be done

to save it in its present form.  There’s no way you can bail it

out!  There’s no way you can take it out of this — except one

way:  Glass-Steagall.

Now, of late, you will have observed that Glass-Steagall has

become increasingly popular, in England, in the continent of

Europe, and other notable places!  So what does Glass-Steagall

do?  Well, essentially it says that the system of government

we’re running under right now, is hopelessly corrupt; so, let’s

shut it down!  Let’s shut down all the bail out.  We’re not going

to pay it!  We jes’ ain’t gonna pay it!  [applause]

So what’re we going to do?  Well, we’re going to have a

grand old time:  We’re going to go to a straight credit system,

which is Glass-Steagall, immediately!  Now, that means, that all

those other guys, the gamblers, Wall Street types and so forth,

are going to find themselves sitting — well:  They have all

these claims.  All these values.  They own all this property, in

terms of title.  But we say, the point is here, with

Glass-Steagall, that you can run your kind of banking system if

you want to  —  under penalties of law, of course! But you don’t

have any right to come to the Federal government, to demand that

the Federal government bail them out, if they happen to go

bankrupt.

Now, I can tell you, as you probably have suspected, that

practically every part of the whole system in the United States,

today, {is already hopelessly, incurably bankrupt!}  And there’s

only one way we can escape from this bankruptcy:  You want to

have some money to live on?  There’s one thing you got to do:

Glass-Steagall!  And that will open the… it won’t solve the

problem, but it will open the gates, to permit the problem to be

solved.

If you take, and say, all these things that are not and

don’t conform to Glass-Steagall, all these things must be

cancelled.  That means these banks can still have their banking

system, as long as they don’t go bankrupt.  We’re not going to

shut them down arbitrarily, we’re just letting them out on their

own, and saying, “this is not our business.  The Federal

government is not responsible for this.”

All right, now that will reduce the debt of the United

States, {tremendously!}  It would have a similar effect in

nations of Europe!  The French banks would not be pleased with

1. They would probably say some very nasty things about me,

but… things like that.

But the point is, the world now knows, and increasingly in

Europe, and starting in England and other countries in Europe

itself, there’s an understanding that Glass-Steagall is a

necessary alternative.  And these guys are having a terrible

time, in fighting off the Glass-Steagall popularity.  But that

will do it.

The problem is, because we waited so long, since we

cancelled Glass-Steagall, we waited too long, and they ran up a

hyperinflationary debt, which is really beyond even dreaming.  So

therefore, the result is, if we go with Glass-Steagall, we’re

going to have relatively little money, under our Federal system;

because we wasted it by throwing it into the garbage pail, and we

can’t get it back.  So therefore,  we’re going to have to go to

another measure.  Now, I said, national banking.  Now, why

national banking?  Because, unless you create a banking system,

under the U.S. government, under protection and regulation of the

U.S. government, you can’t do anything much with the economy.

We have very little industry left in the United States, it’s

been systematically destroyed.  Especially since the last three

terms of the Presidency.  We have been running a garbage pail;

and therefore, we have no means, by ordinary means, to save the

economy.  We don’t have jobs.  Now, as most of you know, under

NAWAPA, we would create, quickly, {4 million or more jobs} —

real jobs! Really productive jobs.  We would create, at least,

immediately, a couple million more highly skilled categories of

jobs.  We would start the process of a general recovery of the

United States — but oh!  Wait a minute!  Got one more problem.

Where’s the money going to come from, that we’re going to loan,

for NAWAPA, and loan for other high-technology jobs, and certain

other kinds of skilled jobs?  The Federal government is going to

have to {create credit}, which will be run through national

banking system, so that under national banking and Federal

government approval, we can conduit credit into creating these

jobs.

Let’s take the practical question of the food supply in the

United States right now:  As you probably know, food is about to

be cancelled, and the Obama Administration is doing everything

possible to destroy it.  Because they’re doing everything to

destroy food, for fuels.

So therefore, what’re we going to do?  Well, what we’re

going to do, is by giving the Federal credit, into, say, the

NAWAPA system, we’re going to create a flow of credit, into the

various phases of this process, which will immediately charge

NAWAPA, in particular, and other things that go with NAWAPA.  We

have also, we have the lost auto industry, the whole Detroit

system, for example, and we’re going to put that back into work!

So, we’re going to create, instantly, that is, by Federal decree

— instantly create sufficient growth, not only to get rid of

this hopeless debt, which never was really a legitimate debt, at

all, and we’re going to restart the economy, by taking people,

when you have very few people who are actually involved in

productive jobs, they’re not involved in producing things;

they’re mostly employed in various kinds of services, which are

not particularly productive, and do not lend any productive value

to the U.S. economy.  They’re simply pass-outs, under one guise

or the other.

So in this case, we are launching a recovery of the U.S.

economy, by supply the credit, as we did in the beginning of the

development of our economy, after we won our Revolution, we’re

going back to that system of recovery to get things moving, and

it’s going to start immediately.  And the easiest way for us to

do this, is NAWAPA.  NAWAPA is a project, which is relevant,

because it’s focused on {water management}.  And the problem we

have in the United States today, is a water management problem!

In the Central States, we don’t have rain!  We don’t the means to

grow crops.  And we don’t have people who are employed, in

actually productive forms of employment!  Physically productive

forms of employment.

The difference is, with this kind of reform, of three steps:

NAWAPA as a driver, an incentive driver, which will save the

organization of production in the Central and Western States of

the United States!  The going back into the area of the so-called

Detroit area, with several million jobs, immediately, will have a

similar effect.  Which means that we then can use a credit

system, managed under Federal control, as we’ve used credit

systems, like Franklin Roosevelt did in the past, and use that

kind of credit system under a Glass-Steagall type government

system, and we can start the regrowth of the U.S. economy.

We also have, as a byproduct of this:  If we as the United

States {do} this, you will find that the nations of Eurasia, will

join us.  You will find that nations of Europe, who are now being

destroyed by their own system, will now go back into functioning,

and we will use international credit, which is an extension of

the national banking concept, instead of speculation, in order to

restart the economy.  And that can be done.

So there is a practical solution, a {sane} practical

solution, as opposed to the other kind, for this problem we have

as a nation. How far are we from getting it, is the question?

Well, that depends.  It depends how desperate people are,

and how much their desperation is moderated by the sense of

attachment to a solution.  Our job is to present the solutions.

You know, society is actually led, when it’s led, by a tiny

minority of the human race.  We have not, because of our

underdevelopment, we have not built up nation systems, which are

actually rationally, and truly represent {the will of human

beings.} What we approach is the conditional will of human

beings, by providing them with promises, which we hopefully can

keep, and that they will be satisfied by trusting us, by the

means of the measures we offer to them, as suggestions.  A very

tiny minority, of the human population in all nations, actually

has any comprehension, any qualifications for comprehension of

how an economy runs or how it should be run. We have to bring

them to us, to our ideas, our conceptions, based on the fact that

they need precisely the solutions that we present.  It may not

exactly what they would dream for, but it’s what we could

deliver!  And if people understand that that’s what the game is,

they’ll accept it, at least in large part.

It’s what they can believe that we can deliver.  And it’s

our saying that we can deliver this, but we {can’t do that, yet}.

And if you promise everything, they’re not going to trust you,

and for good reason.  If you give specific promises, that {will

work}, and make sense, and can be explained to the people, it’ll

work!  And if they don’t accept it, that’s their fault!

But our responsibility, which is limited — we don’t run the

world; we don’t have powers to supervise the world as a whole. We

can only argue!  We can only argue as an intelligentsia, that we

have done some thinking that the other people have not yet caught

onto, or didn’t know about.  And we can tell them, what [we} can

do!  What {we} understand, what {will} work for them; and say,

“We’re going to have to work harder, and better, in order to

fulfill the kind of promises we wish to deliver.”  And say, we

need their cooperation in doing that.

We’ve got to give them a sense, that whatever we’re

promising them, we’re committed to delivering, and that our

promise of delivery has been made credible to them.  And that

experience, as in the case of the Franklin Roosevelt recovery in

the United States during the 1930s, the same program, the same

policy that Franklin Roosevelt used in reviving the U.S. economy.

But we have to tell these guys, “Stop being the kind of

idiot, who believes in the party system!  That’s number one.

Number two, don’t believe in Obama, get him out of there, and

make sure he’s removed quickly.”  And we’re going to have to

figure out what we’re going to do about this Republican.

[laughter]  Because that’s a real weak point, there.

However, I believe this:  If we can establish a functional

Presidency of the United States as was done in establishing the

United States  under George Washington’s Presidency, if we have a

President, and we use our system of government, our

constitutional system of government, we can solve this problem.

Not the way people would like, by “wish factory” or something,

but by the fact, we can point the direction, and it’s up to the

people to follow the direction, and choose to follow the

direction.

{But we must do what is not done right now}:  The problem

with government now, is that the U.S. government and its

functions, are chiefly one, big, damned lie!  They promise things

that do not exist, or will not exist, and make rules which make

no sense, and are willing to get into wars, by which civilization

and mankind in general, could be destroyed.  And we have to use

that argument and that bill of particulars, as a method of

convincing them, this has to be done.

And the key thing is this, to come back to the theme I

started with:  Space.  It’s obvious, there’s a limited timeframe

within which mankind can continue to live safely under the system

of the Sun, the current Sun system.  The Sun has a limited —

some people say 2 billion years; some would say, well, long

before 2 billion years, the Sun is going to act up, and life is

going to be {most unpleasant} on this planet!

So, we as mankind, have to address this question.  And it’s

obvious that to address this question, we have to give new

attention, to space, the questions of space.  We have to find

ways of intervening in the space system, or the solar space

system and so forth, and this is possible.  But we must turn to

that direction, to think, “well, we can’t stand around, following

a fixed recipe, like a kitchen cookbook recipe, forever.  We have

to  anticipate the problems which face mankind in the future, we

have to search for solutions to those problems, and we’ve got to

convince people.

And the big thing you have to do, is this:  Most people in

the United States today, behave stupidly, and this, of course, is

helped by the educational system, it’s helped by the terrible

conditions of life of children, as well as adolescents, and there

are many things that have to be done.  And our job is, as a

minority in society, and with other minorities in society which

{wish}  to find and initiate true solutions for these problems,

we have to get out, and convince people, and educate them.

And in particular, get them immediately to understand, that

these two Presidencies that they’ve stuck out there for voting,

ain’t shucks! And we’ve got to do something about that, and the

best way, is to go out and say that these guys aren’t fit to run

anything, and give some indications of what we’re thinking.

It can work.  It can work because the situation of all

humanity, on this planet right now, is almost a hopeless one. The

war danger, the thermonuclear war which is hanging over us right

now, is threat number one.  The shortage of food in the United

States, for people, citizens of the United States, is another.

The conditions of health care, are another.  All of these

conditions are intolerable!  {And nobody’s doing a damned thing

about it, from the standpoint of government on down!}  I don’t

hear of any big riots coming out of the Congress, against the

lack of such needed reforms!  They’re going by… the party

system. And I think we have to just treat the party system, as

the kind of fraud that it has always been!

We should have a system of representative government, in

which the citizens can use those other citizens who are the most

qualified, and the most committed, to provide leadership, to

provide the ideas and the leadership which is needed for the

rest.  If you can’t be something, inspire it in somebody else.

Thank you.  [ovation]  [END VIDEO]

 

OGDEN:  So as you can see, this is a speech which remains

very timely in terms of its urgent political importance, and we

would encourage you to watch the speech in its entirety; we’ll

make that available for you.

But if you just thinking about what you’ve just heard, the

economic program, the prescience of what Mr. LaRouche’s remarks

there were, five years ago, our country still finds itself in a

state of dire economic emergency, perhaps even having gotten

worse in the last five years;  and that program is still urgent

in terms of its implementation.

But what {has} changed is, indeed, the party structure as we

thought we knew it at that time, has ceased to exist, in terms of

the two establishment parties — what was the Democratic Party

and what was the Republican Party.  And this is a change,

perhaps, in par with what we saw in the middle of the 19th

century when the two established parties at that time nearly

ceased to exist:  This was a turmoil out of which, perhaps the

greatest President of our entire history, Abraham Lincoln,

emerged.

But our responsibility, and what we have to recognize, is

that the importance of Mr. LaRouche’s leadership and the

importance of the leadership of that small minority which he was

discussing, is perhaps more important now, because of this very

reality, than ever before.  As you just heard Mr. LaRouche

describe, in a very eloquent way, our job is to present the

solution, because society is actually led, by a very tiny

minority of intellectual leaders, and society as a whole invests

their trust in those whom they are confident have their best

interests in mind, and have the unique understanding of what must

be done; a very tiny minority has any qualified understanding of

how an economy actually must be run, and can deliver on that

understanding, which is the crucial ingredient.  That’s where

leadership comes from, that’s what makes leadership qualified,

and that’s what serves as the actual qualified leadership in a

republic such as ours.

Now, speaking of a republic, as my colleague Benjamin

Deniston noted in his {Festschrift} contribution to Mr.

LaRouche’s 95th birthday: “When age is measured, not merely in

years, but in wisdom and in creativity, and especially in

contributions to the progress of society, we can truly say,

taking due note of Plato’s famous {Timaeus} dialogue, we are

truly blessed with Mr. LaRouche’s 95th birthday, to have an old

man among us, a {very} old man among us.”

So we wish Mr. LaRouche a very happy 95th birthday, and we

wish him many more.

Thank you very much for tuning in to this special broadcast

tonight, and we encourage you to watch that address in its

entirety. Thank you and good night.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 14. sept., 2017 – Det faktum, at præsident Trump er begyndt at arbejde med top-Demokrater i Kongressen, siden orkanerne Harvey og Irma, for i fællesskab at opnå de presserende nødvendige resultater for det amerikanske folk, har overrasket mange – men ikke os. Lyndon LaRouche forudsagde, i anledning af sin 90-års fødselsdag, for blot fem år siden, at »topartisystemet«, som var en vederstyggelighed for vor Forfatnings grundlæggere, var i færd med at blive fjernet. En række hidtil usete begivenheder, som har været totalt uventet af andre, men som i princippet blev forudsagt af LaRouche, har bragt os tættere på dette resultat i dag, end nogen andre havde forventet, selv på så sent et tidspunkt som for blot et par uger siden!

Et umiddelbart resultat af denne forandring er, at det må hjælpe i kampen for Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love, med start i genindførelsen af den oprindelige Glass/Steagall-lov, under omstændigheder, hvor præsidentens kampagne for embedet lovede at genindføre loven, alt imens også mange Demokrater offentligt er gået ind for det. Og det sker på et tidspunkt, hvor selv Storbritanniens ekstremt liberale Adam Smith Institute, som vi bemærkede i går, advarer om en nært forestående nedsmeltning af finanssystemet. Sagen kunne ikke haste mere.

Men briterne har ikke tænkt sig at opgive at sænke dette præsidentskab, ligesom de heller aldrig opgav at sænke Franklin Roosevelt. Vi må fortsætte vores kampagne for VIPS-rapporten, der afslører svindelnummeret med Russiagate. Langs retningslinjerne af de kampagner, der blev drøftet på EIR’s Manhattan-konference den 9. sept., bør VIPS-rapporten læses ind i Kongressens optegnelser (Congressional Record). Præsident Trump bør tvinge sin CIA-direktør, Mike Pompeo, til at fremstille den relevante, sandfærdige dokumentation.

En smuk illustration af betydningen af den indre konsekvens af Lyndon LaRouches Fire Nye Love fra juni 2014, kom frem under en højtideligholdelse den 12. sept. i det oversvømmelseshærgede Houston, og som medlem af LaRouche PAC Policy Committee, Kesha Rogers, rapporterer om i dag. Som hun skriver, så samledes en overraskende stor flok, 1000 mennesker, på Rice Universitet for at fejre præsident Kennedys berømte »Månetale« præcis 55 år tidligere, og for at høre Apollo 13-astronaut Fred Haise. Blandt andre sigende bemærkninger, genkaldte oberst Haise, hvordan Apollo-programmet havde genopfundet sig selv efter det tragiske tab af tre Apollo 1-astronauter i en brand i rumfartøjet på jorden i 1967. Jeg ville tilføje her, at deres genlancering af sig selv var så succesfuld, at, i alle de efterfølgende rummissioner, mistede man ikke ét eneste menneskeliv frem til katastrofen med rumfærgen Challenger i 1986.

I deres monografi om »Apollotraditionen« sagde Seamans og Mueller, to Apollo-topadministratorer, at det program, der blev gennemført efter Apollo 1-tragedien, krævede, at alle i programmet – omkring 30-40.000 mennesker – gentagne gange afkrævedes at genopfinde sig selv, som nye, bedre og mere kapable mennesker, inden for rammerne af et tværfagligt team.

For at sige dette på en anden måde – de var, i det mindste i en periode, i stand til at besejre middelmådighed. Middelmådighed dræber. Heri finder traditionen efter John Kennedy, Apollo-traditionen, sin plads inden for Lyndon LaRouches Fire Nye Love.

Foto: Helga og Lyndon LaRouche, ved sidstnævntes 95-års fødselsdag, september, 2017.

Af Kesha Rogers, Houston; medlem af LaRouche PAC Policy Committee.

»Vi vælger at tage til Månen. Vi vælger at tage til Månen i dette årti og at gøre de andre ting, ikke, fordi det er let, men fordi det er svært …«

Tirsdag, den 12. september markerede 55-års dagen for præsident John F. Kennedys »Månetale« på Rice Stadium.

For at højtideligholde denne historiske begivenhed, der har inspireret så mange, stuvede næsten 1000 mennesker sig sammen i Stude Concert Hall på Rice Universitetet. Begivenheden, der skulle markere denne historiske dato, havde titlen, »Fiasko er ikke en mulighed: Legemliggørelsen af credoet, ’Vi gør dette, ikke, fordi det er let, men fordi det er svært’«. Gæstetaler var Apollo 13-astronaut Fred Haise. Ellen Ochoa, direktør for Johnson Space Center, talte ligeledes under en kort, ledet spørgsmål-og-svar-session, sammen med Haise.

Præsidenten for Rice Universitet, David Lebron, citerede i sine åbningsbemærkninger de samme ord, som præsident John F. Kennedy udtalte i sit første foredrag på Rice Universitet den 12. sept., 1962:

»Vi mødes på et universitet, der er kendt for sin viden, i en by, kendt for fremskridt, i en stat, kendt for styrke, og vi har brug for alle tre ting, for vi mødes på et tidspunkt for forandring og udfordring, i et årti for håb og frygt, i en tidsalder for både viden og uvidenhed. Jo mere, vor viden øges, desto mere udfoldes vor uvidenhed.« Hr. Lebron forklarede, at, i kølvandet på orkanen Harvey, der har hærget Texas-området – som Irma nu har hærget Floridas kyster – er disse ord af John F. Kennedy lige så relevante i dag, som de var, da de først hørtes for 55 år siden.

Fred Haise, der er 84 år gammel, holdt en ærefrygtindgydende tale for den tætpakkede forsamling, hvis antal overgik alles forventninger. Han talte om USA’s bemandede rumfartshistorie og den rystende historie om Apollo 13-missionen i 1970. Haise var Apollo 13’s pilot i månemodulet. Apollos 13’s mission var at lande i Fra Mauro-området på Månen, men en eksplosion om bord på rumfartøjet tvang besætningen til i stedet at gå i kredsløb om Månen uden at lande, og Fra Mauro-målet blev flyttet til Apollo 14. Da Haise talte om sin oplevelse om bord på Apollo 13, fortalte han om det tragiske tab af liv i Apollo 1 i 1967, efter en ildebrand brød ud i cockpittet, mens rumfartøjet endnu befandt sig i affyringsrampen, og alle tre astronauter omkom. Læren af denne tragiske begivenhed, og den forpligtelse, der blev indgået dengang, at »fiasko er ikke en mulighed«, reddede Haises og hans besætningsmedlemmers liv senere, som han forklarede. De, hvis liv tidligere var blevet ofret, kan meget vel have reddet livet for dem, der fulgte efter.

Jeg mener, dette er en bemærkelsesværdig lære for nutiden. Vil vi tage ved lære af Harvey? Vil vi bygge den infrastruktur, vi behøver for at sikre, at ikke ét eneste yderligere liv vil gå tabt pga. menneskeskabte fejl og forsømmelse? Så meget er blevet tabt, så mange har ydet ofre – hvordan vil vi rette op på uretten og gøre de nye opdagelser, der vil sikre en bedre fremtid foran os?

Jeg spurgte oberst Haise om den lære, man kunne uddrage af rumprogrammet og Apollo, som kunne være med til at lede nationen i denne kriseperiode, i kølvandet på orkanerne. Han svarede ved at understrege betydningen af at have den rette leder, nødvendigheden af teamwork for genopbygning og infrastruktur, og behovet for at indsprøjte tilstrækkelige resurser i denne genopbygning – som kun kan komme fra en føderal mission af den art, som Kennedy forstod, var nødvendig for at gøre Apollo til en succes. Under spørgsmål-og-svar, hvor Ochoa syntes at indordne sig under den linje, hvor NASA i stigende grad skifter over til at bero på privatiseret rumflyvning, påpegede oberst Haise ligefremt, at disse private selskaber kun eksisterer pga. NASA, og at, i modsætning til NASA, hvis de ikke tjener profit, ophører de med at have en mission.

Oberst Haise konkluderede med at sætte fokus på menneskets enestående evne til at gøre opdagelser, som intet dyr er i stand til. Hverken gris eller delfin kan bygge et rumfartøj, sagde han, men det kan vi. Han fik stående ovation for sin tale, og tilhørerne forlod meget inspireret lokalet, med store forhåbninger til fremtiden.

Foto: JFK holder den berømte ’Månetale’ på Rice Stadium, 12. sept., 1962.  

Will Wertz: For mange år siden, faktisk for 2.500 år siden, skrev Platon to dialoger, blandt andre; Timaios og Kritias. Det, han diskuterede i begge disse dialoger, er en oversvømmelse, der udslettede en hel civilisation. I Timaios beretter Platon, at en præst sagde til Solon,

»I hellenere er ikke andet end børn. Der er ikke én eneste gammel mand iblandt jer. Der har været, og vil igen komme, mange ødelæggelser af menneskeheden, der fremkommer af mange årsager. De største er blevet frembragt gennem ild og vand.«

Han påpeger, at grunden til, at disse civilisationer ikke kunne håndtere sådanne naturkatastrofer, er, at

»Gudernes overbærenhed begyndte at svækkes, og de begyndte at opføre sig upassende. De blev inficeret af ondt begær og magtens arrogance«.

Vi har nu heldigvis i USA nogle ’gamle mænd’ – i særdeleshed Lyndon LaRouche; som faktisk er yngre end de fleste mennesker mht. til hans intellekt.

Jeg vil fremlægge præcis, hvad det er, Lyndon LaRouche har kæmpet for, i en kort gennemgang, for jeg har ikke tid nok til at gå i dybden. Men Lyndon LaRouche har, som Dennis antydede, kæmpet imod Det britiske Imperium, en kamp, der mindst går tilbage til hans tid i Anden Verdenskrig på det indiske subkontinent i Burma – som det hed dengang – og Indien. Han så på første hånd briternes folkemordspolitik mod den indiske befolkning. På dette tidspunkt udviklede han et livslangt forpligtende engagement for at besejre Det britiske Imperium, og til at gøre det, Franklin Roosevelt under krigen sagde til Winston Churchill, at han var forpligtet over for at gøre. Roosevelt sagde, vi udkæmper ikke Anden Verdenskrig for at bevare Det britiske Imperium. Efter Anden Verdenskrig vil vi bruge det Amerikanske Systems metoder for økonomisk udvikling til at udvikle resten af verden. Desværre blev denne Roosevelts mission saboteret efter hans død af Winston Churchill og af Harry S. Truman; sidstnævnte var en meget smålig mand. Man fik den første mobilisering mod Rusland, og mere specifikt mod den alliance, som Roosevelt var forpligtet overfor; og som var en alliance mellem USA, Rusland, Kina og andre nationer for at udvikle planeten ved hjælp af det Amerikanske Systems metoder.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

 

Se hele konferencevideoen her: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzJCl1xnvvU

Foto: Den britiske geopolitiker, Harold Mackinders kort. Den grundlæggende idé er, at man ser på Europa, Afrika og Asien, og det er verdens-øen. Den britiske politik var at omringe det, de kaldte omdrejnings-området eller hjertelandet, som er Rusland, med en intern halvmåne. Mackinders grundtema var, at »den, der hersker over Østeuropa, kontrollerer hjertelandet. Den, der hersker over hjertelandet, kontrollerer verdens-øen. Den, der hersker over verdens-øen, kontrollerer verden«. Grundelementet i Det britiske Imperiums geopolitik, og i deres to ‘Verdenskrige’.

11. sept., 2017 – Efter at have ramt Florida Keys, og igen ramt Naples, Florida, har orkanen Irma hærget i hele staten – fra nord til syd, og fra øst til vest. Udfald i elforsyningen har ramt henved 10 mio. mennesker, defekte kommunikationssystemer er overalt, og blokerede veje gør det ekstremt vanskeligt at foretage et totalt skøn over skaderne, især i Florida Keys, som en reporter på stedet beskrev som en »krigszone«.

Foreløbig rapporteres der om fire dødsfald i Florida, men myndighederne forventer, at dette tal vil stige, især ødelæggelserne i Florida Keys taget i betragtning. Fox News rapporterede, at der her ikke er brændsel, elektricitet, vand i vandhanerne eller fungerende mobiltelefoner.

»Borgerne vil ikke kunne vende tilbage til Florida Keys i flere uger«, sagde rådgiver fra Homeland Security, Tom Bossert, i dag. Der er meget få forsyninger, og det varsler en humanitær krise for dem, der ikke tog væk.

På en pressekonference her til morgen skønnede Eric Silagy, præsident for statens største elværk, Florida Power and Light, at mere end halvdelen af staten – 10 millioner mennesker – er uden strøm, hvilket langt overstiger de 6,2 mio., der mistede strømmen under superstormen Sandy. Bemærk: I 2013 pralede FPL med, at de havde investeret $3 mia. i »smartgrid-infrastruktur« for at skabe et »stærkere, smartere og mere stormresistent elektricitetsnet«, rapporterede The Atlantic. Det var stort set »det bedste, landet kunne have præsteret«, men nu har Irma åbenbart »ødelagt i hvert fald en stor del af dette system«.

FPL’s vicepræsident for kommunikationer, Rob Gould, sagde til ABC, at, alt imens østkystnettet kunne genoprettes inden for en standard tidsramme, så ville der blive behov for en »engros-genopbygning« af vestkystens elektricitetsnet, som muligvis ville blive den længste og mest komplekse i USA’s historie.

Med stormen, der bevægede sig mod nord, forårsagede et skybrud store oversvømmelser i Jacksonville, på grænsen til Georgia, som udløste et nødvarsel om akut oversvømmelse. Da Irma kom ind over Georgia, rapporteredes om en tornado, afledt af stormen, på kysten, og man udstedte for første gang nogensinde varsel om en tropisk storm (vindstyrke mellem 39 og 73 mil/timen) over Atlanta. I de næste to dage vil Irma fortsætte i nordvestlig retning, ind i Alabama, Mississippi og Tennessee. Ifølge www.weather.com er situationen i Charleston, South Carolina, »dyster«, og myndighederne har udstedt varsel om pludselige oversvømmelser pga. kraftige skybrud. Flere end 120.000 kunder i hele staten er uden strøm.

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 10. sept., 2017 – Endnu engang vedr. Texas, og orkanen Harveys enorme økonomiske og menneskelige ødelæggelse, finder vi, at virkeligt omfattende infrastrukturprojekter for at forhindre sådanne ødelæggelser blev planlagt i 1960’erne. Dette var JFK-æraen med Apollo og den store »TVA« i det vestlige Amerika ved navn North American Water and Power Alliance, NAWAPA, (Nordamerikansk Vand- og Elektricitetssamarbejde). Disse muligheder blev stoppet, ribbet for pengemidler og forpligtelse, gennem udbruddet af britisk geopolitik i amerikansk politik – Vietnamkrigen. Det, der nu – under Storbritanniens Blair og Bush og Obama – kaldes krige for »regimeskifte«, har lige siden været en fjende af at sørge for det almene vel i Amerika. På grund af manglende dristige infrastrukturplatforme, der ville have kostet et titals milliarder, har vi nu set hele byer hærget af oversvømmelser og tab for hundreder af milliarder i den amerikanske økonomi.

Dette er faldet sammen med Wall Streets voksende dominans over amerikansk økonomisk politik, frem til og inklusive et enormt finanskrak, som vi endnu ikke er kommet os over. Det er ikke naturen, men derimod »grådighed og forsømmelse«, der forårsager orkanernes ødelæggelser.

Med et seriøst lederskab fra præsident Trump har en forståelse for behovet for at genopbygge nu bredt sig blandt amerikanere, sammen med en dybere følelse. Digteren Shelley, der også var en politisk skribent, skrev, at, under kriseperioder, ophørte mange mennesker, folk i stort tal, med kun at tænke på sig selv og deres umiddelbare familie og skifter ret pludseligt over til at rette deres passionerede opmærksomhed mod at hjælpe andre, og mod »det almene vel«.

Dette begynder nu at have en virkning i USA, som det ses i nogle nylige politiske diskussioner og i amerikanernes anskuelse mere generelt.

En del af dette er, at de vil have »Russia-gate« stoppet, og stoppet nu. Denne åbenlyse indsprøjtning fra britisk efterretning af en geopolitisk skræmmehistorie, til stort set at blive en ny McCarthy-isme i Amerika, må nu stoppe.

EIR har bidraget til at afslutte det gennem en betydningsfuld, offentlig begivenhed i New York i lørdags, som begravede svindelnummeret med »Rusland har fikset vores præsidentvalg«. Den særlige anklager, Robert Mueller, som nu endda kræver kommunikationerne fra Air Force One, som om præsidenten var på NSA’s liste over terroristfjender, sker på trods af den overvejende del af det amerikanske folks vilje og fortsætter med forberedelsen til at gennemtvinge en forfatningskrise. Dette må stoppe. Det samme må de gennemskuelige forsøg på at oppiske racekrige, bag hvilke ses George Soros’ og briternes hånd, og Muellers FBI’s hånd og hætte.

Præsident Trump og Kongressen må hurtigt gå frem med en økonomisk genopbygning og besejre Wall Street med en ny Glass/Steagall-lov, samt udstede statskredit for billioner til ny infrastruktur og produktivitet, og nye fremskridt inden for videnskab og varefremstilling.

Dette gør Kina allerede i hele Asien og i Afrika, i klart strategisk partnerskab med Rusland; og Bælte & Vej Initiativet er dér, hvor Trumps USA vil finde partnerskab inden for kredit og udarbejdelse af projekter, samt strategisk samarbejde for at stoppe regionale krige. Det er et nyt paradigme, mod hvilket præsident Trump på visse tidspunkter har været tiltrukket. Det må blive politikken, og »Russia-gate« må ud.

Foto: Præsident Donald Trump ankommer med Air Force One til Ellington Field Joint Reserve Base i Houston, 2. sept., 2017. Trump besøgte lokalsamfund, der var ramt af udbredte oversvømmelser, forårsaget af orkanen Harvey. (Air National Guard photo by Staff Sgt. Daniel J. Martinez.)

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

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 7. september, 2017 – Det er pludselig blevet blændende indlysende, at Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin – ligesom sin forfader i ånden, Frankrigs Ludvig »den Varsomme« XI – har været i færd med at væve og atter væve et spindelvæv af potentielt tæt økonomisk samarbejde mellem Nord- og Sydkorea og Rusland – og med Kina og også andre partnere. Dette var den oprindelige »LaRouche-plan« for fred i Koreahalvøen, der fungerede frem til den dag i 2002, hvor den blev saboteret via »udefrakommende kræfter«, der arbejdede sammen med daværende vicepræsident Cheney, og bagefter med præsident Obama. Putin har arbejdet på dette spindelvæv med uundværlig støtte fra Kina – men tilsyneladende også fra visse kræfter i Washington.

Da Lyndon LaRouche blev opmærksom på dette, sagde han,

»Lad være med at diskutere det. Ikke noget opkog af de forskellige detaljer. Lad være med at spilde yderligere tid – bare gør det! Og ved at gøre det – NU – vil I tvinge dem, der gør modstand mod det, til at bekende kulør. De vil blive afsløret, klar til at blive uskadeliggjort.«

Netop samtidigt hermed har den værste atlantiske orkan, der nogensinde er registreret, med en vindstyrke på180 mil/t, og 300 mil/t på højdepunktet, hærget igennem hele Caribien og efterladt nogle af de britiske koloniøer i ruiner, der er ufattelige for det 21. århundrede. For eksempel sagde Barbudas premierminister, at 90 % af deres bygninger er blevet ødelagt, og 60 % af deres befolkning var blevet hjemløse. De britiske herrer (Barbuda er en del af Commonwealth of Nations, tidligere Det britiske Statssamfund) havde absolut intet gjort for at forberede sig på syndfloden – men hvorfor skulle de også det?

Men den amerikanske regering, ledet af præsident Trump, er opmærksom og up-to-date om situationen og mobiliserer de relevante resurser for Florida og andre truede områder – og dette vil igen gøre det muligt for befolkningen, både de første nødindsatspersoner (redningsfolk, paramedicinere o. lign.) og frivillige borgere, at udvise den heroisme, de så blændede har demonstreret i Houston. Vi vil respondere, som situationen kræver. Vi vil genopbygge så hurtigt, det er fysisk muligt. Alt er forandret siden Katrina og Sandy.

I Caribien må USA tilbyde det fulde program for Ingeniørkorpset, som Lyndon LaRouche og tidligere præsident Bill Clinton foreslog for Haiti efter jordskælvet i 2010. Monsterpræsident Obama skød denne plan ned, så Haiti, der i dag stadig ligger i ruiner, nu arbejder sammen med Kina hen imod en genopbygning af landet.

Men vores presserende nødvendige hastegenopbygning kan kun være et springbræt til et komplet, nationalt infrastrukturprogram, der nu må indledes med udstedelse af massive mængder statskredit, og i samarbejde med Kina. Ikke alene vil vi begrænse omfanget af stormrelaterede katastrofer i fremtiden, men vi vil også transformere hele vores økonomi fra den katastrofe, vi arvede efter Bush og Obama, og til at blive den store, agro-industrielle magt, som verden, og amerikanerne, nu har brug for.

Om dette sagde Lyndon LaRouche igen:

»Spild ikke tiden på at diskutere det. Bare gør det! Og vi får se, hvem, der forsøger at forhindre det – det vil være åbenlyst!«  

Foto: Pressemeddelelser i kølvandet på forhandlinger med præsidenten for Republikken Korea Moon Jae-in. 6. sept., 2017. (en.kremlin.ru)

v/ formand Tom Gillesberg.

lydfil:

https://soundcloud.com/si_dk/oversvommelser-i-usa-fulgt-af-demokratisk-samarbejde-med-trump-vil-usa-fa-en-ny-start

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 5. september, 2017 – Øjeblikket er stadig modent for amerikanere til at lære af de enorme menneskelige og økonomiske tab som følge af orkanen Harvey: Byg den nye infrastruktur, der burde have været bygget for længe siden, for at forebygge, at disse katastrofer berøver amerikanere deres hjem, jobs, ufortalt rigdom og endda livet. Vend det sammenbrud, der finder sted i slow-motion, af forældede infrastrukturplatforme, på hvilke den amerikanske økonomi har arbejdet.

For henved 50 år siden lavede staten Texas et udkast til planer for et omfattende system til vand- og oversvømmelseskontrol, som ville beskytte statens Golfkyst-byer fra oversvømmelse – og dens yderste, sydøstlige kyst og øvre sletter fra tørke – ved at koble mange damme og reservoirer sammen via en lang kanal langs kysten, der kunne flytte overskydende vand mellem flodbassiner. Dette var i det samme årti, hvor JFK og RFK arbejdede for en vandmanagementplan i det vestlige USA ved navn North American Water and Power Alliance – det Nordamerikanske Vand- og Elektricitetssamarbejde – et dusin gange større end Tennessee Valley Authority – til overvindelse af ørkendannelse og til kunstig vanding af landbrugsjorder.

Behovet for at bygge sådanne nye og højere teknologiske infrastrukturplatforme mindskes ikke, fordi en økonomi, der køres af Wall Street, og mange krige har blokeret for dem. Der kommer et nyt, historisk øjeblik, hvor de må udføres. Vi er nu blevet bragt til dette punkt, med tre, store amerikanske byer, der er blevet fuldstændig ødelagt af orkaner på lidt over et årti, og med økonomiske tab, der langt overstiger prisen for at bygge disse store projekter.

Dette kræver mere end blot store udgifter, der vedtages af Kongressen til katastrofehjælp – selv om FEMA’s katastrofemidler vil være brugt ved slutningen af denne uge, med endnu en alvorlig orkan, Irma, der nærmer sig. Det vil blive nødvendigt at udstede statslige kreditter for billioner til infrastruktur i de kommende par år, noget, der kun kan gøres gennem statslig bankvirksomhed efter Alexander Hamiltons model og gennem den form for storstilet kredit til projekter, som blev udstedt af præsident Franklin Roosevelts Reconstruction Finance Corporation.

Kongressen må hurtigt skabe begge dele, som det er angivet i LaRouche PAC’s Erklæring om en Nationalpolitik af 30. aug. Kongressen må ligeledes genindføre Glass/Steagall-bankopdeling for at sikre, at private banker trækkes ud af Wall Street-spekulation og er med i en genopbygning af finansiering. NASA må genoplives og spille en førende rolle, som denne udviklings videnskabelige drivkraft.

Dette betyder, at vi må mobilisere for de »Fire Økonomiske Love for at redde nationen« fra 2014, forfattet af EIR’s stiftende redaktør, Lyndon LaRouche. Og Kinas og BRIKS-landenes Bælte & Vej Initiativ for globalt samarbejde om finansiering og byggeri af nye, storstilede infrastrukturprojekter, er den ramme, vi må tilslutte os.

Betænk, at USA konfronteres med tre kriser: Wall Street, som trækker det hen imod endnu et finanskollaps; truslen om atomkrig over Koreahalvøen; og sammenbruddet af fundamentet for dets økonomiske liv, infrastrukturplatforme. Præsident Trumps oprindelige plan for sit præsidentskab, som var at samarbejde med Rusland og Kina og koncentrere os om at genopbygge Amerikas infrastruktur, ville have ført til en anden og bedre situation end disse kriser. Amerikanere må skride til handling, og handling nu, for at komme til denne plan.

LaRouche PAC må gå i spidsen for at få denne påtrængende nødvendige politik; andre vil følge efter.

Foto: Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin, Kinas præsident Xi Jinping og hans hustru Peng Liyuan før receptionen, hvor formand Xi Jinping var vært for BRIKS-ledere og lederne af de inviterede staters delegationer. 4. sept., 2017. (en.kremlin.ru)

4. sept., 2017 – Mens verden med bæven ser på Nordkoreas magtfulde demonstration af atomvåben og USA’s trusler om krig, mindede Lyndon LaRouche verden om, at det var sabotage af hans politik for »fred gennem udvikling«, først fra George Bush’ og Dick Cheneys, og dernæst Obamas, side, som forårsagede den nuværende krise. »Rammeaftalen« fra 1994 under Bill Clinton arbejde på at afslutte Nordkoreas atomvåbenprogram, med inspektører fra IAEA på stedet, til gengæld for økonomisk samarbejde, da Bush og Cheney skrottede den til fordel for miltære trusler og konfrontation. Igen i 2002, da den sydkoreanske præsident Kim Dae-jung, med opbakning fra Rusland og Kina, genoptog sin »Solskinspolitik« med at åbne for økonomisk samarbejde med Nordkorea, afviste Bush og dernæst Obama samarbejde, alt imens de beskyldte Nordkorea for at »snyde«.

Kendsgerningen er, at briterne og deres neokonservative kohorter i USA ikke ønsker en løsning, eftersom krisen i Korea retfærdiggør deres bestræbelser på at ramme Kina, økonomisk og militært. Dette bliver klart i dag gennem Washingtons respons til den opfattede trussel fra Pyongyang.

USA’s inkompetente ambassadør til FN, Nikki Haley, sagde i dag ved hastemødet i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd, at Nordkoreas leder Kim Jong-un »tigger og beder« om krig og sagde, at USA er i færd med at udarbejde et udkast til en resolution, der skal til afstemning i næste uge, og i hvilken »USA vil anse ethvert land, der gør forretninger med Nordkorea, som et land, der hjælper deres hensynsløse og farlige atomare hensigter« – dvs., at målet er at ramme Kina, såvel som også Rusland. Finansminister Steven Mnuchin, Wall Streets aktiv i Trump-administrationen, sagde søndag til Fox News, at han arbejdede på sanktioner, der ville medføre, at »enhver, der ønsker at handle eller gøre forretninger med [Nordkorea], ville blive forhindret i at handle eller gøre forretninger med os«. Han taler formentlig om at udelukke visse kinesiske banker og selskaber af USA’s finansielle system – hvilket er sindssygt.

Dette gør det ligeledes klart, at målet også er at ramme Trump, mere bestemt hans bestræbelser på at opbygge et arbejdsvenskab mellem USA og både Kina og Rusland, og som er baggrunden for den igangværende »farvede revolution« imod ham af forrædere i begge partier.

Selv tweetede Trump, at Kina »forsøger at hjælpe, men uden meget held«, og beskyldte Sydkorea for at »formilde«, når det på nogen som helst måde ønskede at indgå i en relation med Nordkorea. General Mattis udstedte en erklæring, der sagde: »En hvilken som helst trussel mod USA eller dets territorier – inklusive Guam eller vore allierede – vil blive mødt med en massiv militær respons, der både er effektiv og overvældende.«

På den anden side udstedte den sydkoreanske præsident Moon Jae-ins kontor en erklæring, der sagde: »Korea er et land, der har oplevet en krig mellem brødre. Krigens ødelæggelser bør ikke gentages i dette land.« Moon har udtrykkeligt erklæret, at præsident Trump har forsikret ham om, at der ikke bliver nogen militæraktion imod Nordkorea uden Seouls godkendelse. Ikke desto mindre optrapper Moon-regeringen tempoet for deployeringen af THAAD-missiler i dets land (på trods af stærk opposition fra Kina og Rusland) og diskuterer med Washington, deployeringen af amerikansk, strategisk militærudstyr i Sydkorea, inklusive et atomarmeret hangarskib og strategiske bombefly.

Både Kina og Rusland fordømte kraftigt Nordkoreas atomtest, men gjorde det klart, at Washingtons afvisning af forhandlinger med Pyongyang, eller af at indskrænke sine militærøvelser, der truer Nordkorea, ligeledes er ansvarlig for krisen. »Det er min personlig opfattelse, at der slet ikke ville have været nogen konflikt, hvis USA var holdt op med at bevare konflikten«, sagde den russiske vice-premierminister og præsidentielle udsending for Fjernøsten, Yuri Trutnev, til TASS. »Hver gang, Nord- og Sydkorea synes at være ved at komme overens, og spændingerne begynder at lette, begynder der straks nogle flådeøvelser, der endda understreger en plan for øvelser, hvis formål er at angribe Pyongyang, hvilket er en direkte provokation«, sagde Trutnev.

Talsmand for det Kinesiske Udenrigsministerium, Geng Shuang, sagde mandag til reportere, at Nordkorea må være meget klar over, at FN’s Sikkerhedsråds resolutioner forbyder sådanne aktiviteter. Men Geng tog også afstand fra truslerne mod Kina. Han sagde, at Kina anså det for uacceptabelt »med en situation, hvor vi på den ene side arbejder for at løse dette spørgsmål fredeligt, men hvor vore interesser på den anden side udsættes for sanktioner og sættes på spil. Dette er hverken objektivt eller rimeligt.«

China Daily skrev i en leder: »Der er ingen tvivl om, at handlingerne fra den Demokratiske Folkerepublik Koreas side … er grov overtrædelse af relevante resolutioner i FN’s Sikkerhedsråd og har voldt alvorlig bekymring i området og globalt. Men det hjælper ikke situationen, at Trump tweeter angreb på DFK og kritiserer Sydkorea og Kina.« Lederartiklen fortsætter med at fremføre, at »den fundamentale fiaskofor Trumps strategi er, at den sætter for store håb til en stramning af sanktionerne, en strategi, der i årtier har vist sig at være en fiasko«. Lederartiklen fortsætter »Hvis Trump har ret, når han siger, at Kina ’forsøger at hjælpe, uden meget held’, så skyldes det, at USA ikke har lyttet til Kinas råd, såsom at genoptage sekspartsforhandlingerne og direkte kontakter mellem USA og DFK og acceptere den ’tosidede suspendering’, hvor USA og Sydkorea stopper deres militærøvelser og DFK suspenderer sine atomtests.«

Putin, Xi Jinping, Abe, Moon og andre vil mødes i denne weekend, nogle på det igangværende BRIKS-møde i Xiamen, og dernæst på det Østlige Økonomiske Forum i Vladivostok, hvor Korea vil stå højt på dagsordenen.

… denne orkan Harvey, der virkelig er uden fortilfælde mht. ødelæggelser … dette må være momentet for at initiere en fuldstændig ny holdning hos amerikanerne og vores nationale regerings skifte til en helt anden politik, og det er formålet med den nøderklæring, vi har udstedt.

… det må genkalde en holdning, som vi mistede i dette land, der går tilbage til mordet på John F. Kennedy, men faktisk går tilbage til Franklin Roosevelts død. Og den måske mest signifikante case study, vi kan anvende, er TVA, som du nævnte, Tennessee Valley Authority.

Vært Matthew Ogden indleder webcastet med at oplæse Lyndon LaRouches erklæring, »Ikke flere Houston-katastrofer: Lyndon LaRouche siger, hvad det er, der må ske ’lige med det samme’«

Det efterfølges af en rapport fra repræsentant for LaRouche-bevægelsen i Texas, Brian Lantz, om den aktuelle situation i Houston og en analyse af de nødvendige forholdsregler, der må tages.

Herefter vises et klip fra en film, der blev produceret under Franklin Roosevelts præsidentskab, om det store infrastrukturprojekt, kaldet TVA – Tennessee Valley Authority.

Her følger en dansk oversættelse af dette videoklip og Matthew Ogdens kommentarer.

Efter dette følger komplet engelsk udskrift af hele webcastet.

Min. 31:20 (FDR-klip minuttal 35:15):

Brian Lantz (slutning): Hvor skal pengene komme fra? Det er selvfølgelig det forkerte spørgsmål at stille. Spørgsmålet er, hvad er det for institutioner, vi må skabe? Det er præcist, hvad LaRouche foreslår: Glass-Steagall, statslig kredit, en nationalbank, der kan finansiere strømmen af statslig kredit til at bygge de nye TVA’er, de nye projekter, der kræves for at sikre ikke alene kysten her, men også for at påbegynde en stor, økonomisk genrejsning af USA til dets position i verden.

Matthew Ogden: Netop, og denne orkan Harvey, der virkelig er uden fortilfælde mht. ødelæggelser, som du gjorde det meget, meget klart, Brian – dette må være momentet for at initiere en fuldstændig ny holdning hos amerikanerne og vores nationale regerings skifte til en helt anden politik, og det er formålet med den nøderklæring, vi har udstedt.

Og, som du sagde, så må det genkalde en holdning, som vi mistede i dette land, der går tilbage til mordet på John F. Kennedy, men faktisk går tilbage til Franklin Roosevelts død. Og den måske mest signifikante case study, vi kan anvende, er TVA, som du nævnte, Tennessee Valley Authority.

Hvis vi går tilbage til før Franklin Roosevelt og før New Deal, havde vi hele områder af landet, der var underkastet såkaldte naturkatastrofer, og som simpelt hen var forsømte. Det måske mest signifikante område i landet, det mest bemærkelsesværdige, var den såkaldte Tennessee-dal. Det er meget ironisk, at Tennessee-dalen, der er et helt område ikke blot i Tennessee, men omfatter alle disse tilgrænsende stater, er det område, der har den største totale regnmængde på det amerikanske kontinent.

Og hvad er så den årlige regnmængde i Tennessee-dalen? Den er på 51 inches (ca. 130 cm) om året; det, vi netop har oplevet i Houston, er 51 inches på fem dage eller mindre. Det er simpelt hen en svimlende mængde vand, der kom ned fra himlen! Men Tennessee-dalen var også udsat for meget lange perioder med voldsomme regnmængder, for det meste som følge af orkaner, der spredte sig – virkningen af orkaner, der kom op fra Golfkysten (den Mexicanske) og så fortsatte ind over denne centrale, sydøstlige del af USA.

Hvad skete der? Franklin Roosevelt, der blev citeret i vores nøderklæring, sagde, at det, der behøvedes, er »handling, og handling nu. Nationen kræver handling«. Han sagde: Vi vil ikke tillade denne ødelæggelse, som Tennessee-dalen oplever år efter år, og som skaber et af de mest forarmede områder i hele verden: Dette var Appalacherne – evnen til at læse og skrive var i bund, malaria, det øverste jordlag, der blev vasket bort. Man havde virkelig vilkår som i den Tredje Verden, lige midt i kontinental-USA. Roosevelt sagde, nej, vi vil gøre noget, som ingen før har gjort, og vi vil ikke blot forsøge at kontrollere en enkelt flods strøm, men vi vil tage et helt flodbækken, og vi vil ikke alene kontrollere dette vand hydrologisk, men vi vil indsamle energien fra dette vand og sætte det til at arbejde til gavn for de mennesker, der bor dér.

Jeg har en video, jeg gerne vil vise vore seere, et ca. 4 min. langt klip, som blev lavet af Roosevelt-administrationen. Den blev ironisk nok produceret det år, Roosevelt døde, i 1944. Men den viser, hvad Tennessee-dalen var udsat for, og det bør faktisk minde jer om de videoklip, I netop så fra Houston; men den viser også, hvad der blev gjort fra Roosevelt-administrationens side og filosofien, der lå bag TVA. Her kommer klippet:

Fortæller: Ødelæggelse fra himlen. Sådan var det, år efter år, i et glemt område af USA. Dette var den ødelæggelse, der var forårsaget af grådighed og neglekt, med mænd, der arbejdede alene og uden hjælp mod naturens kræfter. Landbrug, byer, industri – smadret; hundreder druknede, tusinder blev hjemløse. Flodens energi, der gik til spilde – og menneskenes energi ligeså.

[Landmand] Henry Clarks problemer var 3 millioner amerikaneres problemer i Tennessee-dalen. Det blev 130 millioner amerikanere i 48 staters direkte anliggende, en udfordring for demokratiet og dets evne til at drage omsorg for sine egne folk.

Tennesseefloddalen [kort] ligger i det sydøstlige USA. Det dækker et område på 40.000 kvadratmil, næsten lige så stort som England. Det var et problem, der handlede om genopbygning; genopbygning af land og af mennesker. Demokratiet bestod prøven: Det fandt mændene, der kunne overvåge jobbet – James P. Polk, national senator fra det vestlige USA; Harcourt Morgan, præsident for Tennessees Universitet, og som havde udarbejdet et landbrugsprogram for hele området; David Lilienthal, administrator og fortaler for en lov om kooperativ elektricitet; George Norris, en stor, amerikansk statsmand, der længe havde drømt om regional planlægning, om at etablere et nationalt eksperiment i én region, der kunne fungere som målestok for alle regioner. Dette var planen [kort over progressiv udvikling], at tøjle floden gennem en række gigantiske dæmninger, der kunne kontrollere oversvømmelserne, og åbne floden for sejlads fra dens udspring til dens bifloders tilstrømning; at lade fordelene ved moderne videnskab og forskning komme farmerne til gode; at hjælpe dem til at kontrollere vandet på deres jorder og genoprette jordens frugtbarhed, at genbeplante millioner af acres med skov på de hærgede bjergsider, at udvinde områdets mineralresurser; at bruge elektriciteten, skabt af dæmningerne, til at udvikle og rehabilitere industri i byerne, at føre elektricitet til landbrugsejendommene gennem et landligt kooperativ; og frem for alt, at bevise, at menneskelige problemer kan løses gennem fornuft, videnskab og uddannelse.

Tennessee-dalen skulle atter engang blive en fremskudt grænse, denne gang for at blive udviklet, ikke udplyndret; denne gang ikke til fordel for de få, men for de mange, som boede dér. Disse mennesker var de nye pionerer, arkitekterne, forsknings-kemikerne, landbrugseksperterne, elektricitetsfolkene, ingeniørerne, der designede vandkraftværker: Deres metode var at kontrollere naturen, ikke ved at trodse den som i den ødsle fortid, men ved at forstå den og tøjle den til gavn for menneskeheden …

(Slut video)

Ogden: Det var sådan, amerikanere plejede at tænke; dette var Franklin Roosevelt-administrationen, dette var New Deal. Lad mig blot lige gentage for jer, hvad I netop har hørt: Fortælleren sagde, hvad var formålet med Tennessee Valley Authority, dette projekt over alle projekter? »Frem for alt, at bevise, at menneskelige problemer kan løses gennem fornuft, videnskab og uddannelse. Tennessee-dalen skulle atter engang være en fremskudt grænse … for at blive udviklet … ikke til fordel for de få, men for de mange … Disse mennesker var de nye pionerer … Deres metode var at kontrollere naturen, ikke ved at trodse den … men ved at forstå den og tøjle den til gavn for menneskeheden …«

Det er sådan, amerikanere tænker.

Engelsk udskrift:

HOUSTON, WE HAVE A SOLUTION’: WHAT MUST BE DONE NOW

MATTHEW OGDEN:  Good afternoon.  It’s September 1, 2017.  My
name is Matthew Ogden, and I’d like to welcome you to our Friday
evening webcast here on larouchepac.com; our strategic overview
for the end of this week.
This has been a very dramatic week, and I’ve asked Brian
Lantz, who is a LaRouche PAC organizer in Houston, Texas to join
us for our broadcast here today.  He’s been on the ground; thank
you Brian.  Welcome.  He’s been on the ground there in Houston.
He survived Hurricane Harvey, and he has seen firsthand the
devastation.  Those of you who were on the LaRouche PAC Fireside
Chat last night, got to hear a preliminary overview report from
him.  Also, Brian Lantz will be the featured guest at the
LaRouche PAC Manhattan Town Hall meeting tomorrow afternoon in
New York City on Saturday.  But we’ve asked Brian here to review
with us the extent of the devastation and the necessary solutions
that Hurricane Harvey should prompt us to usher in for the
nation.
Before I get to Brian, I am going to read to you in full the
emergency policy statement that has been issued by LaRouche PAC,
which is available at the LaRouche PAC website.  You’ll see the
text here right on the screen from larouchepac.com [Fig. 1].  The
title of this statement is “No More Houstons!  Lyndon LaRouche
Says What Must Happen Right Now!”  So, the statement reads as
follows:
“The catastrophe in Texas is a man-made disaster
accomplished by the criminal negligence of this nation’s elected
officials, who have continued to support Wall Street’s
speculative economy and imperial ambitions while arguing that the
nation cannot afford to rebuild and replace its ancient and
broken-down economic infrastructure. For the third time since
2005, major American cities have been flooded and their people
devastated, because the plans for new infrastructure to protect
the people, requiring tens of billions in investments, have been
ignored and turned down. Hurricane Harvey now looms as the worst
national disaster in our nation’s history and it is a disaster
which did not have to happen.
“In 2005, Hurricane Katrina killed nearly 2,000 people and
wreaked $130 billion in economic losses. Only then, slowly, new
flood-control and sea gate infrastructure was built — at last —
for New Orleans, at a fraction of the human and monetary costs of
the damage inflicted by the storm. How many unnecessary deaths
and suffering could this project have averted?
“Four years later, the American Society of Civil Engineers
met in Manhattan to discuss several storm surge barrier options
for the New York City region. The estimate for the largest of
these was $9 billion. The government decided to do nothing. Then,
in 2012 Superstorm Sandy killed more than 100 people and caused
$65 billion in economic losses. New York area residents now are
going through a ‘Summer of Hell’ as the 100-year-old regional
transportation system, flooded and damaged five years ago, also
was not repaired or replaced at the necessary pace.
“The staggering economic and human suffering caused by
Hurricane Harvey in the Texas and Louisiana Gulf region are not
yet known, and will grow in magnitude as the water recedes; but,
what has been known for many years, is that Texas Gulf cities are
flood-prone, and have repeatedly flooded. Yet, no flood control
or storm protection infrastructure has been built since the end
of World War II. Plans for a new system for the Houston area had
been drafted, but their $25 billion cost was deemed ‘too high’ a
price tag for our Wall Street-dominated agencies and elected
officials. Now, hundreds of billions of dollars, and priceless
human lives, are lost.
All of these disasters, and others in the recent period, could
have been averted for a fraction of their eventual cost in lost
wealth, let alone in lost lives. The media insist to Americans
that each city’s disaster is caused by its particular economic
habits, its choice of location, its squabbling jurisdictions, its
ignoring of climate change, or its being close to water! This is
nonsense. Wall Street, which has been bailed out repeatedly to
the tune of trillions of dollars, with nothing but increased
impoverishment of the American people to show for it, must no
longer be allowed to dictate the economic policy of the United
States of America.
“|’The nation calls for action, and action now!’ in
President Franklin Roosevelt’s words. During his presidency, and
through the 1940s, the new infrastructure to prevent such
‘natural disasters’ — such as the Tennessee Valley Authority —
was funded by national credit, as through the Reconstruction
Finance Corporation and the Works Progress Authority.
“Hurricane Harvey drowning cities in East Texas should be
the national alarm which ends 70 years in which the country has
been without any such national credit institutions.”
The next subhead is titled “A Sea Change Is Required”.
“Lyndon LaRouche on August 30 called for a ‘sea change’ in
policy ‘right now.’ He called for the immediate creation of a
national credit institution for new, high-technology
infrastructure, like that employed by Franklin Roosevelt when the
vast majority of our current infrastructure was built. There is
no alternative to creating a national credit institution, like
that employed by Alexander Hamilton and in accord with our
Constitution, to fund the necessary trillions in new
infrastructure investment.
There must also be action on reinstating Glass-Steagall banking
separation right now, as a new financial crisis looms and Wall
Street speculation continues to prevent actual productive
investment. Allowing Wall Street to eliminate the Glass-Steagall
Act in the 1990s led to a crash that caused {$10 trillion} in
lost wealth, mass unemployment, and untold loss and shortening of
human lives.
“LaRouche insists that his ‘Four Economic Laws To Save the
Nation’ must be implemented right now if this country is to
recover from Hurricane Harvey and prevent similar disasters
stemming from our rotting physical economy now ticking like a
time bomb:
1. Re-institute Glass-Steagall: break up Wall Street and its
power;
2. Create national credit institutions based on FDR’s
Reconstruction Finance Corporation and Alexander Hamilton’s
national banks;
3. Invest the credit in new infrastructure with frontier
technologies, including high-speed rail, fourth-generation
fission and fusion power technologies, and modern storm
protection and water management systems;
4. Adopt a fusion-driver ‘crash program’: Let a great
expansion of NASA space exploration provide a driver for
productivity and productive employment.”
Then, the final section is titled “A New Paradigm Takes
Hold”.
“China’s Belt and Road Initiative, an international program
of new rail ‘land-bridges’ and great projects of infrastructural
development, offers immediate cooperation for the credit and the
building of a new infrastructure in the United States. This
initiative is now moving on great projects they have long
identified as absolutely essential, such as the Kra Canal in
Southeast Asia, and the revival of Lake Chad in sub-Saharan
Africa; projects long championed by Lyndon LaRouche and his wife,
Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
“Helga and Lyndon LaRouche are leading a national
mobilization focused on moving President Trump to immediately
bring America into the China-initiated Belt and Road Initiative
of worldwide building of new infrastructure. That ‘win-win’
initiative, and the United States joining in its worldwide
projects and also building its own new infrastructure, means the
revival of the United States as an industrial power.”
The statement goes on to quote Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her
speech to the Manhattan conference on August 26th.  Then, after
that quote, it concludes by saying:
“LaRouche PAC has taken the responsibility to drive
President Trump and the Congress into this action. But this is
also the responsibility of all Americans that think of themselves
as citizens: those who have been actively supporting the
President, or supporting Sen. Bernie Sanders; those who supported
no one, out of disgust at the manipulation, and continued
manipulation of the election, but who have wanted a drastic
change in the deindustrialization and Wall Street speculation
policy ruling the country; those who know people killed, or made
homeless and impoverished by Wall Street’s induced ‘natural
disasters.’ All must now act and make their voices heard.
Because, watching what is happening, again, to great American
cities, leads anyone sane to the same conclusion: {There is no
alternative}.”
So, that statement, which is available in full on the
LaRouche PAC website, again, under the title “No More Houstons!
Lyndon LaRouche Says What Must Happen Right Now!” is available
for you to circulate.  That is our call to action, which we’re
here to discuss today.
So Brian, I’d like to just introduce you and give you a
chance to give us an overview of what the conditions are on the
ground in Houston; what the impact is on the national economy,
and what must be done.  While you begin, we’re just going to play
some drone footage that was taken and was posted on Facebook by a
user chaseboogie; and we thank him for the permission to use this
footage.  It will just give our viewers a very visceral
on-the-ground sense of what exactly the conditions look like
there in Houston as you speak.  So, Brian, thank you for joining
us here today.

BRIAN LANTZ:  Good to be here.  I think first of all, I
should emphasize that this hurricane and hydrological disaster is
still unfolding.  Just a matter of a few hours ago, this is
Friday; Mayor Sylvester Turner requested more evacuations from
the Atticks Reservoir area, the Atticks Dam area, because of the
continued releases of water in the spillway.  Uncontrolled
releases into the area, which are necessary to relieve pressure
behind these dams.  These dams are in Houston on the Buffalo
Bayou.  Here today, the sun is out; but that doesn’t change
really the picture you’re seeing in this video, this drone
footage.  Just the extent, and what you’re seeing really is only
a small portion of Houston; the devastation extends over 50
counties — {50 counties}.  An area encompassing some 11 million
people.
Now, besides continued rising water on the Buffalo Bayou —
slowly rising; which runs through Houston itself, right through
the downtown area and so forth.  That’s what this footage largely
covers is the area around downtown.  You also have rising water
still coming down the San Jacinto River, but also from the
broader San Jacinto Basin, draining into the San Jacinto River
and on down to the ship canal.  You have the Brazos River and the
Colorado River on the west side of Houston; these are still
continuing, particularly the Brazos, to rise.  There’s been
ruptures of the levees along the Brazos River; that’s something
they’re combatting.  There are mandatory evacuation orders and so
forth that have been placed in parts of that for days.
This all continues to unfold.  Smaller towns, over 300
smaller towns and cities are dramatically affected.  Off to the
east, roughly let’s call it two hours east of Houston down I-10,
going towards New Orleans, is Beaumont and Port Arthur.  You may
have been seeing some footage from there.  Beaumont lost its
water supply.  This is a city of 120,000 people; they’ve lost
their water supply.  They’re now evacuating their evacuation
centers because of the rising Natchez River.  This is a disaster
that’s still unfolding.  Beaumont is largely under water.  Port
Arthur, next door, is under water.  Rescue efforts are ongoing.
Here in Houston, we have over 30,000 people registered in
various evacuation centers around the city.  But of course, far
more are staying with neighbors or relatives.  You can imagine,
hotels and so on and so forth.  Also, out of some of the
surrounding areas down by the coast; Dickinson, for example.  You
had military cargo planes flying people out of the area through
Galveston up to Dallas.  This is still all unfolding.
I guess I could give a couple of just simple examples.  It’s
thought that at least 500,000 cars are lost in the flooding.  I’m
sure that’s an underestimate when you take in the broader area.
I think those figures are regarding Houston itself.
I think also to go to the heart of this, you’ve got to go to
the industrial side of this picture.  So, I’ll do that in just a
second.  But first, I want to just bring forward the other side
of this; which there has been reporting on.  That is, the
outpouring of aid that Houstonians and Texans have provided to
their fellow citizens and our neighbors from as far away at least
as New York.  I believe the first responders who came into
Houston were from New York City; fire teams from New York City to
take part in the rescue.  So, we have them here from Kansas, we
have them of course Fort Worth, Texas; 4.5 to 5 hours to the
north.  We have them from Dallas.  Hundreds of police have now
come in, arriving really as brigades into the city to relieve
policeman who, up until yesterday, hadn’t slept for days and
days.  A tremendous rescue effort; you might have heard about the
“cajun navy”; loosely organized, bringing over their boats, their
high-rise trucks and behind them pulling their boats.  This is
thousands of people, and hundreds and hundreds of boats coming
in, that have been playing a critical role at the request of law
enforcement, of the mayor, or the first responders here in
southeast Texas.
So, if you go to some of the slides, just the first [Fig. 2]
you have a still of some of the damage in downtown Houston.  I
think if you follow that up, you’ll see what Hurricane Harvey
looked like coming in [Fig. 3].  Partly I’m putting that up just
to give you a sense of the extent of this hurricane in terms of
its length and breadth.  Those outer bands — that picture was
taken basically at landfall down near Rockport, which is just
close to Corpus Christi to the south.  Those outer bands,
particularly as you see them on the east side; this is the “dirty
side” as they say, of the hurricane.  This was coming in
simultaneously more or less into the rest of the coast to the
east of landfall there in Rockport; which was, of course, this
small town just devastated along the coast.
If you go to the next picture [Fig. 4], I’m putting these up
partly to give you a sense of the geography in terms of where
we’re talking about relative.  You see there the state of Texas
off to your left, the broader state of Texas.  You see the swath
of area; that was a prediction early on. You see the top of the
monitor there, the peak they’re expecting is 15 inches [of rain].
Well of course, we got between 30 and 50 inches in rainfall in
the course of just a few days.  The next slide [Fig. 5] gives you
a sense of how this process has then trailed off to the east up
through Louisiana; now moving off into Arkansas and Tennessee.
But again, that’s to give you just a kind of sense of the
geography of this.  And all along there, you’re talking about,
across the bottom, you see the Gulf Coast.
So, having spoken a bit about the tremendous effort and so
forth, I want to return to the physical economic impact of this,
if I can.  Think of a compromised human body from disease or
aging, you name it.  Then think of that body being slammed by
some new effect, a shock to the system.  You have to ask, how
many shocks can that person take?  Well, think of our US economy
and the world economy in a different way, but related, in that
context.  For example, as some of you know, the Colonial
Pipeline, which is the largest pipeline in the United States,
which carries oil and gas and so forth; that an other pipelines
have stopped because the refineries are shut down.  20% to 30% of
the nation’s refining capacity is right now shut down here along
the Gulf Coast.  Particularly in Houston, but extending over to
New Orleans, Baton Rouge, the South Louisiana port — which is
the largest port by tonnage in the United States.  All of these
are affected to varying degrees.
That means that New York right now is not getting oil from
the major pipeline serving the New York area; but also serving
Atlanta, Washington DC, and so forth.  Gas prices are spiking and
so forth and so on as a result of this.  That pipeline, the
Colonial Pipeline, is not going to be back online until at least
the end of the weekend.  So, this is not disconnected; we’re
talking about one systemic process here, already weakened by the
horror stories of the Bush and Obama years, the financial
blow-out of 2008, Wall Street’s predatory speculation. The
British Empire’s choking off of the American System increasingly
since the passing of Franklin Roosevelt in 1944.  So, this is
having consequences across the United States.
Just to give you a sense of this, if you skip forward to the
last slide [Fig. 6], you’ll see a map of the ports along the Gulf
Coast.  Just so you have a fair assessment of this, eight of the
twelve largest ports in terms of tonnage are along this coast,
the third Coast, the Gulf Coast.  You see those in red, but also
now of course, Port Arthur; those ports are all still closed,
including the little barge port of Victoria, Texas.  Corpus
Christi is a major port.  You see Houston, it’s also next to it
in that same block as Texas City, which is a separate port also
on the Galveston Ship Canal to Houston.  So, those ports are all
closed down.  This is a long-term disruption.  Rail lines are
disrupted, the Union-Pacific Corporation, Berkshire Hathaway’s
BNSF — Burlington Northern Santa Fe — they are currently closed
for operations.  Likewise Kansas City Southern or regional
railroad.  This is going to have follow-on repercussions, not
only in terms of cargo moving out of the United States, but cargo
moving into the United States.  The Port of Houston just opened
up today for truck traffic; but this is not easy.  You can
imagine the amount of muck they’ve got to clean out of there.
Containers have shifted; they’ve got to be restacked.  This is
not an easy process to put some order back into this chaotic
situation.
The ship canal itself, the currents coming down the ship
canal are such that that itself interferes with the possibility
of ships coming in.  That’s coming down from the San Jacinto
River and the San Jacinto Basin and so on and so forth.  There’s
debris in the ship canal.  How much has shifted underwater?  The
Army Corps of Engineers has got to go in; they’ve got to make
sure that the ships can get up that canal safely.  Is there going
to be emergency dredging required?  All of these things have to
be worked out.
Corpus Christi has opened up to small traffic today; smaller
ships.  But at last report, you still have a major obstruction at
the port there in Corpus Christi.  A ship that broke loose.  Not
some sailing skiff or something; but a major merchant ship broke
loose and is blocking part of the harbor.  So again, these have
knock-on follow-on effects; and I’m hoping that I’m giving you at
least some sense of that.
In terms of the ranking of ports, the port of South
Louisiana, which is 54 miles long, the breadth of it, between New
Orleans and Baton Rouge, is the largest port in the United
States.  The second largest is Houston, Texas — by tonnage.
Third is New York-New Jersey.  Fourth is Beaumont, Texas; that
wasn’t even on that map.  That’s now also shut down.  Then comes
Long Beach, California; then Corpus Christi, which we mentioned.
New Orleans; Baton Rouge; Mobile, Alabama; Plaquemines,
Louisiana; a little bit further down, Texas City.  So, this is
enormous.  This whole area, this entire area is lowlands; people
live on coasts because it’s close to cheap transport and
communications and all the rest.  If you ask people to move, as
some Greens would like to say, “Well, people should move away.”
Well, excuse me, where are they?  Montana?  What are you
suggesting? The lifeblood of the country, its arteries of its
body are still largely these three coasts; and then of course,
the river systems and the canals and so on, including the Great
Lakes and all the rest.  This is what what’s left of the entire
US economy depends on today.  The compromise that’s been made,
the disastrous bloody compromise that’s been made has been to
withhold the resources to build the kinds of systems that would
protect from storm surges and hurricanes like Hurricanes Sandy,
Katrina, Ike and so forth.  That’s one issue; we can take that
up.
But also what we’re talking about here is not simply
meteorology and storms and hurricanes coming in.  Most of the
damage from Hurricane Harvey has been from rainfall; as we
mentioned, 30-50 inches of rainfall in the course of a few days.
All of these low-lying areas — the high point in Houston is 50
feet above sea level.  A dam built here, say on Lake Conroe on
the San Jacinto River, it holds 14% of what the Oroville Dam
holds in northern California; because it’s built on flat land.
It’s a low-lying dam; broad, but shallow.  The capacities of
these dam structures are limited.  What’s required is an enormous
investment in canal building, retention ponds, and a whole
hydrological approach; which the Army Corps of Engineers has
engaged in, but under increasingly tight budget restrictions.
And of course, with this blind-sided approach of politicians and
policymakers looking the other way and ignoring the consequences.
Well, the consequences are now here.
Maybe I should stop there, and we can have some discussion
on this.  But I hope that gives people an essential overview of
what we’ve got to deal with now as a nation; with the Four Laws
of Lyndon LaRouche, with national credit.  This storm is going to
cost more than Katrina that hit New Orleans in 2005.  That was
$130 billion simply in terms of Federal funds; simply in terms of
Federal funds essentially after the fact.  This is going to
outstrip that by far.
Where’s that money going to come from?  Well, obviously,
that’s the wrong question to ask.  The question is, what are the
institutions we have to create? And it’s exactly what LaRouche
has proposed: Glass-Steagall, national credit, a National Bank to
finance that flow of national credit, to build out the new TVAs,
the new projects required to safeguard not only the coast here,
but to begin a major recovery of the United States to its
position in the world.

OGDEN:  Yeah, exactly, and this Hurricane Harvey, which is
really unprecedented in its devastation, as you made very, very
clear, Brian, this must be the moment of initiating an entirely
new attitude among the American and an entirely new change in the
policy of our Federal government, and that’s the purpose of this
emergency statement that we put out on
https://larouchepac.com/20170831/no-more-houstons-lyndon-larouche
-says-what-must-happen-right-now.
And, as you said, it must recall an attitude which we lost in
this country at least going back to the assassination of John F.
Kennedy, but really going back to the death of Franklin
Roosevelt.  And perhaps the most significant case study that we
can use would be the TVA, as you mentioned it, the Tennessee
Valley Authority.
Going back to before Franklin Roosevelt and before the New
Deal, you had whole regions of the country which were subject to
so-called natural disasters, and which were just neglected.  And
perhaps the most significant region of the country, the most
notable, was the so-called Tennessee Valley.  And what’s very
ironic is the Tennessee Valley, which is an entire region, not
just in Tennessee, but it’s all of these bordering states, is the
area of the highest annual rainfall total of any watershed in the
continental United States.
Now, what’s the annual rainfall in the Tennessee Valley
watershed?  It’s 51 inches per year; what we just experienced in
Houston was 51 inches in five days or less.  It’s just
mind-boggling the amount of water that came out of the sky!  But
the Tennessee Valley was also subject to very extended periods of
high rainfall, mostly because of the dissipating hurricanes —
the effect of hurricanes that were coming up off the Gulf Coast,
and then going into this Central Southeast region of the United
States.
But what happened?  Franklin Roosevelt, who as we quoted in
this emergency statement, said what’s necessary is “action, and
action now.  The nation calls for action.”  He said:  We’re not
going to allow this devastation that the Tennessee Valley
experienced year-in and year-out, creating one  of the most
impoverished areas of the entire world:  This was Appalachia —
literacy was through the floor, malaria, top soil was washing
off.  You had a really Third World kind of conditions, right
there in the continental United States.  And Roosevelt said, no,
we’re going to do something that has never been attempted before,
and we’re going to not just try to control the flow of one river,
but we’re going to take an entire river basin, and we’re going to
not just control that water hydrologically, but we’re going to
harness the power of that water, and put it to work for the
benefit of the people who live there.
I have a video I just want to show our viewers, a roughly
four minute excerpt, a video that was put out by the Roosevelt
administration.  Ironically, it was produced the year before
Roosevelt died in 1944.  But it shows you what the Tennessee
Valley was subjected to, and it should actually remind you of the
video footage that you just saw from Houston; but it also shows
you what was done by the Roosevelt administration and the
philosophy that was behind the construction of the TVA.  So,
here’s a clip from that video
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfJt-W7fwTY]:

[BEGIN VIDEO]
NARRATOR:  Destruction from the sky.  This is the way it
was, year after year, in a forgotten part of the United States.
This was the havoc caused by greed and neglect, and men working
alone and unaided against the forces of nature.  Farms, towns,
industry — smashed; hundreds drowned, thousands made homeless.
The energies of the river running to waste,  — the energies of
the people, too.
[Farmer] Henry Clark’s trouble was the trouble of 3 million
Americans in the Tennessee Valley.  It became the direct concern
of 130 million Americans in the 48 states, a challenge to
democracy and its ability to care for its own.
The valley of the Tennessee River [map] lies in the
Southeastern United States.  It covers an area of 40,000 square
miles, nearly as large as England.  It was a problem of
reconstruction, reconstruction of land, reconstruction of people.
Democracy met the test: It found the men to supervise the job —
James P. Polk, United States Senator from the West; Harcourt
Morgan, president of the University of Tennessee, who had worked
out an agricultural program for the whole area; David Lilienthal,
administrator and champion of legislation for cooperative
electric power; George Norris, a great American statesman who
long had dreamed of regional planning, of setting up a national
experiment in one region which could serve as a yardstick for
every region.  This was the plan [progressively developing map],
to chain the river through a series of giant dams, checking the
floods, to open it to navigation from its mouth to its
headwaters; to give the farmers the benefit of modern science and
research, to help them control the water on their land and
restore the fertility of the soil, to reforest millions of acres
on the ravaged hillsides, to exploit the mineral resources of the
area;  to use the electric power generated by the dams to develop
and rehabilitate industry in the cities, to electrify the farms
through a rural cooperative; above all, to prove that human
problems can be solved by reason, science, and education.
The Tennessee Valley was to be pioneered again, this time,
to be developed, not plundered, this time not for the benefit of
a few, but for the many who lived in it.  These were the new
pioneers, the architects, the research chemists, the agricultural
experts, the power men, the designers of hydroelectric dams:
Their method was to control nature, not by defying her as in the
wasteful past, but by understanding her and harnessing her in the
service of humanity….
[END VIDEO]

OGDEN:  This is how we as Americans used to think, this was
the Franklin Roosevelt administration, this was the New Deal.
Let me just repeat back to you, what you just heard:  The
narrator said, what was the purpose of the Tennessee Valley
Authority, this project above all other projects?  “Above all, to
prove that human problems can be solved by reason, science, and
education.  The Tennessee Valley was to be pioneered again … to
be developed … not for the benefit of a few, but for the
many….  These were the new pioneers… Their method was to
control nature, not by defying her  … but by understanding her
and harnessing her in the service of humanity….”
That’s how Americans think.
So Brian, what lessons can we learn from what Franklin
Roosevelt did?  What do we have to do right now, what should have
been done before this disaster of Harvey, but what do we have to
do now to rebuild the United States?

LANTZ: Well, we’ve already touched on it in terms of Lyndon
LaRouche’s Four Laws, and that’s what’s required. But
specifically, it is up to us, we Americans who understand
ourselves to be citizens of the United States, to now mobilize at
this moment where there’s a receptivity among Americans to face
what has been building as a crisis across the nation, in many
dimensions,  — the opioid epidemic, the crises generated by
continuing storms — not the storms themselves, but the
inadequacy of our ability to respond and defeat them; all of this
and more requires that we step up to the plate and create a
future looking 50 to 100 years into the future, beyond our own
life spans.
I think we have, in the example of China, China that’s
lifted 700 million people out of poverty in the last three
decades.  Looking at the TVA dam footage, obviously, the Three
Gorges Dam that China built on the Yangtze River, an enormous
project exactly to continue the process of taming that river for
mankind, and the upcoming projects for Lake Chad and related
projects throughout Africa.  This should be an inspiration:  We
can unite with the Belt and Road Initiative  of China.  This is a
very important element.
We now have, with the Trump administration, we have a sea
change, at least relatively speaking, from what we have with Bush
and Obama.  Think back to Bush’s response to Katrina in 2005.
Ike hit here in Texas in 2008.  Trump, working with the governor
of the state, Governor Abbott, enormous resources have been
mobilized.  There’s at least 12,000 National Guardsmen in here,
now; there’ll be as many as 24,000, Governor Abbott has stated in
the coming weeks. I spoke earlier about the influx of first
responders as well as volunteers.
That’s a start, but we cannot allow the United States to now
dish out on itself the Haiti treatment:  Look at the island of
Haiti.  What was proposed there by the Joint Chiefs of Staff at
the time, by the LaRouche organization, by Mr. LaRouche himself,
was a massive mobilization of the Army Corps [of Engineers], C-5
cargo planes to rescue Haiti, move people out of the flood areas,
the earthquake areas in 2010, get them onto high land.  Build new
cities, build new infrastructure that never existed there, and
pick up where Roosevelt had left off with his projects in Haiti
among other nations.  Instead, a cold shoulder was given to
Haiti. Obama turned his back on Haiti, and instead, all we had
was NGOs and various private relief efforts — band aids applied
to Haiti, and it’s arguable that the situation in Haiti today is
no better off, fundamentally, than it was before the 2010
earthquake, perhaps worse.
We have to rectify that.  We have to rectify the situation
in Puerto Rico.
So this is a wake-up call to mobilize a national effort.  If
this is left to sports figures and Hollywood stars and a few
billionaires to wave around their largesse in millions of
dollars, and we have “GoFundMe” accounts and the Red Cross and
that’s the extent of it, the whole nation will be further
damaged!  New Orleans has never recovered, has never been allowed
to recover, much less develop.  So we have to address that, as
you said, Matt:  We have to address this now, the American people
have got to mobilize now:  Our congressmen, our senators,  and
President Trump have got to hear very clearly from the American
people that the Four Laws have to be implemented now.

OGDEN:  Well, the truth is that there is a development
dynamic which is already sweeping the globe and you mentioned it,
it is the Chinese New Silk Road: It’s the Belt and Road
Initiative, which frankly was something which was originally
initiated and conceptualized by the LaRouche movement, going back
30 years.  But this is now the policy of the most populous nation
on the planet, and not only are they using it for the development
of China and for the development of the Chinese people, but it’s
also being something which is for the general welfare of the
people of the planet as a whole!
You mentioned the Three Gorges Dam, this really could be
characterized as the Chinese TVA, but if you look at the history
of China and the amount of devastation that the Chinese people
have suffered because of flooding, exactly what you saw in that
drone footage which is happening right now in Houston, exactly
what you saw in that eerily familiar footage from the Tennessee
Valley, prior to the TVA, that we showed just now  — going back
hundreds of years you had that kind of devastation in China.
There’s a very famous flood in 1954, which was the flood of the
Yangtze River, and you’ll see on the screen here a memorial to
the victims of that flood. [Fig. 7]  The Yangtze River flooded,
and killed 33,000 people and displaced 18 million people!  The
city of Wuhan, which is where this memorial is, was a city of 8
million people, and it was literally under water for over three
months.  So, 1954, that was only ten years after that video that
we just saw about the TVA was made.  But this was an absolutely
unprecedented natural disaster.
There was another flood in 1998 in China, which killed over
1500 people and was equally devastating in terms of the flooding
of the Yangtze River.  But the next item that I just had on the
screen there, this is an image of the Yangtze River, before
[1987] and after [2006] the construction of the Three Gorges Dam,
[Fig. 8]. You can see the extent of the engineering marvels that
the Three Gorges Dam is: This is a picture from space.  There was
another flood of the Yangtze River in 2010, but that time, the
Three Gorges Dam and the reservoir created by it was able to
absorb that excess run-off, and in fact, not only did it
alleviate the flooding and the effects of the flooding
downstream, but it was able to hold that run-off for later to be
distributed downstream during the dry months of the year.  So at
the time there was a drought and a necessity for water, the water
was available, and not only was it available for farming and for
use in the cities downstream, but it was also available to
produce electricity, through this magnificent hydroelectric dam
that’s been built there.  The Three Gorges Dam produces almost
100 terawatts of electric power.
So you’re harnessing the power of this river, which before
was a menace, and you’re putting each one of those little water
droplets to work. There’s no unemployed water in the Yangtze
River any more.  Every single water droplet has a meaningful
purpose to its existence.
But that’s what China has built domestically, and then look
at abroad.  You also mentioned what’s being done in Africa.  I
have a slide here from the proposal which was put together by the
Schiller Institute for the Transaqua program. [Fig. 9]  You’ll
see here, this is the Transaqua water transfer project which
would refill Lake Chad, which has been drying up over the past
several decades, by transferring 100 billion cubic meters of
water, a distance of 2,500 km from the Congo River, all the way
northwest to Lake Chad and replenish Lake Chad.  So this is not
just on the books, but in fact, we’ve had the really optimistic
news over the past few weeks that a deal has been reached by a
Chinese corporation, PowerChina, which was involved incidentally
in building the Three Gorges Dam, and an Italian firm, Bonifica
Spa.; they’re going to conduct the feasibility studies, they’re
going to get started with making this Transaqua project a reality
on the ground.  Again, this is something that the LaRouche
movement has been fighting for for decades.
So these are the kinds of projects that are already ongoing.
We could also take a page out of Japan’s book:  There’s a
wonderful project in Tokyo, which is called the Metropolitan Area
Outer Underground Discharge Channel, and Tokyo is very similar to
Houston, in the fact that urbanization has created a very dense
population, but there’s monsoons which creates these flooding
conditions.  So you’ll see a picture here [Fig. 10].  This is one
of the engineering marvels of the world:  This is Tokyo’s
underground floodwater diversion facility.  You could say it’s
the Notre Dame cathedral of flood-water control infrastructure.
There’s some videos you can watch, but it’s the magnitude of what
Tokyo has built underground, under that city, is amazing.  You
have five concrete containment silos, each one of them
distributed at various strategic points around the city; each one
of them could fit the Space Shuttle inside, or the entire Statue
of Liberty. Those containment silos are then connected by 6.5 km
of underground tunnels that are buried 50 meters under the ground
level of the city and then all of those empty into that chamber
that you just saw, which you could see the proportions of it,
with the human being standing in there; it’s 65 meters high.  And
the magnitude of this kind of containment tank has caused every
storm since it was built in 1992, to be something that could be
— they were still devastating storms, but they could be
controlled, through the powers of science and the powers of this
engineering marvel.
So why hasn’t something like that been built in Houston?
Why hasn’t something like that been built in New York City?  Why
hasn’t something like that been built in the various areas of the
continental United States, which are just as much under threat as
Tokyo was?  So all of these projects, the Three Gorges Dam, the
Transaqua water transfer project, which really should be the
model for what we do with the NAWAPA project — the North
American Water And Power Alliance — which is an equal
water-transfer project; and then this Metropolitan Discharge
project in Tokyo, these are things that can be built!  We’ve
already built them!  This is the power that engineering and
mankind have if we just put our minds to it, and if we direct the
necessary national credit to the construction of these.
So you know, President Trump has called for $1 trillion in
infrastructure in the United States. The magnitude of the
investment should be far beyond that, $8, $9, $10 trillion is the
estimate that some people have given, but it’s not a problem, if
you use Hamiltonian credit.  The question has to be asked, could
we have already built some of these necessary projects and
mitigated the disaster, if you hadn’t had 16 years of failed
presidencies, with the Bush/Obama years, and if you hadn’t had
the full-scale mobilization for a political coup against this
current Presidency, in his six months in office up to this point.
But this is now the point of decision:  We have to make the
decision now, this is a sea change in U.S. policy.  Let’s now get
onboard with the great development dynamic which is sweeping the
planet, and {join} with this One Belt, One Road initiative, not
only to build projects abroad, for the benefit of people across
the planet, such as in Africa, but also to build these great
projects right here at home.
So Brian, is there anything that you want to say just in
terms of maybe the specifics of what could be done in Houston,
but also just some of the broader, actual physical projects that
could be built here in the United States?

LANTZ:  First, thanks for correcting me on Three Gorges as
being on the Yangtze, not the Yellow.  But I wanted to say, this
is what great civilizations do, reaching back to the Grand Canal
that connected the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers back 600 A.D. or
thereabouts.  You can go back further to Egypt.  This is what
great civilizations do as opposed to empires, the defining
distinction, this question of the development of mankind.  When
we look today, at the United States, why not build, as Helga
Zepp-LaRouche has proposed, 50 new cities in the United States,
rather a sprawl of concrete that only increases the dangers?  It
does the opposite, by mitigating the danger of these hurricanes
and storms.  For instance, why not build the equivalent of the
Tokyo facility for the greater Houston area?  Why not really
conquer this problem?  We can channel water, we can store it, but
we’ve really got to move it off the area, fast. And what Tokyo
has done is an exemplar.
Likewise, as we’ve discussed on prior programs, Hurricane
Sandy and what has to be done, not just for New York City, but
for essentially a 100-mile diameter area reaching down to
Philadelphia as one great, mega-city of development, modeled on
similar projects in China.  Their process of building mega-cities
and transforming regions into mega-cities.
This is some of what’s occurred.  All of this requires
energy:  It requires nuclear energy, it requires the development
of fusion energy.  And I just wanted to conclude, if Kesha Rogers
could be here today, she would stress the role of science, as you
brought it up in regard to the approach to the TVA project, but
also brought up otherwise.  This hurricane — just think about it
— this hurricane would have been far worse, if we didn’t have
the kind of satellite capacity that we have, the kind of
resolutions in terms of cameras and all of that:  The whole space
program gave us a capability.  Just imagine if this had hit
without forewarning.
And that leads into the broader question of the broader
development of the U.S. space program and our cooperation again
with countries, including the leading country of China, in
advancing mankind’s knowledge of our relationship to our
planetary system, but beyond that to the galaxy, to these larger
processes that we know are at work, that man needs to gain
control of.  And really, it’s from that standpoint that we can
really begin to measure the projects we need to build now.

OGDEN: And that’s reminiscent of the point that was made in
exactly that video produced by the Roosevelt administration on
the TVA, that our human problems can be solved by “reason,
science, and education,” and we can harness nature, control
nature, not by “defying her, but by understanding her,”  and
harnessing those powers for the benefit of mankind and the entire
planet.  So this is done not just through infrastructure on the
ground,  — which absolutely must be built, the hardcore physical
infrastructure on the ground — but also through, as you
mentioned, understanding what are these meteorological processes,
what are the atmospheric processes, how do you direct these
atmospheric water flows?  Is that possible through ionization and
other ways?  And also, how do you understand how Earth’s weather
is created through our interface with the cosmic environment that
we exist in.  And how does this impact the actual large changes
in cycles in terms of our climate and how climate changes over
time, and the relationship that mankind plays to that, in a
positive way?
And we can see instances of that positive power of mankind
to improve nature, in the Tennessee Valley, in the Yangtze Valley
with the Three Gorges Dam, and now what’s happening in Africa
with the Transaqua project:  That’s mankind’s nature and I think
that’s the ultimate point here:  When will mankind recognize what
we are as a species, and change our view of ourselves, in order
to harness the full powers of that unique creative quality that
mankind as a species possesses, which really lies at the core of
all of the science of economics as Lyndon LaRouche has defined
it.
So I would recall for people, these Four Economic Laws,
which are contained in the emergency statement which I read at
the beginning of this broadcast, this is embedded in a larger
policy document that Lyndon LaRouche wrote in which he explores
exactly this question:  What is the noëtic characteristic of
mankind?  How have we progressed over our history as a species?
How have we harnessed the powers of nature, not just through
water control, but also through different forms of fire and
energy; and what is this Vernadskyian idea, the ideas of Vladimir
Vernadsky, of the planet as a “noëtic planet” — the noösphere —
shaped by the creative powers of man?  How can we initiate that
noëtic age of man through these types of great projects which are
typified by the One Belt, One Road initiative out of China, but
which we must now initiate here in the United States, in the wake
of this {horrible} devastation, wrought by Hurricane Harvey.
So, thank you so much Brian for joining us here today.  I’m
glad that you could join us from on the ground there in Houston,
and give us this very visceral picture  of what’s happening, but
also what must be done.  And I’d like to ask all of our viewers
to take this as your call to action, as was said in the statement
on the LaRouche PAC website:  “No more Houstons.”  We must now
initiate this revolution in U.S. economic policy, we cannot watch
and wait for the next Harvey to happen, but we must act now.
“There is no alternative.”
I’d like to invite people to tune in to the broadcast of the
Manhattan Town Hall meeting tomorrow, where Brian Lantz will also
be the featured guest, and it will be the opportunity for some
dialogue with him if you’re there in person in New York City.
And otherwise, please stay tuned to larouchepac.com, as we
issue marching orders over the coming days and weeks.
So thank you one more time, Brian for joining us.  And we
give our condolences to the family of Kesha Rogers, who lost her
father and her stepmother, tragically, in the floods there in
Houston, in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, and we dedicate our
future mission to the memory of not only her father, but also all
who have been lost in these preventable manmade, natural
disasters.
Thank you for joining us and please stay tuned to
larouchepac.com.

2. sep., 2017 – Kernekraft er den eneste energi, der er immun over for alle ekstreme vejrforhold, som orkanen Harvey endnu engang demonstrerer. Alt imens sol- og vindenergisystemer blev afbrudt, gasledninger lukket og olieraffinaderier slået ud af drift, forsatte kernekraftværkerne, der er specialbygget til at modstå vind af orkanstyrke, tornadoer og ekstrem varme og kulde, med at summe løs. South Texas Project-reaktorer i Houston-området blev bygget inde i landet i 29 fods højde over havet, for at beskytte dem mod oversvømmelse. Men bygningen og dørene er alligevel vandtætte.

Udover det faktum, at de to reaktorer blev designet og bygget til at forblive i drift under ekstreme forhold, er det lige så vigtigt, at, da orkanen Harvey ramte, havde værket fuldført sine beredskabsforberedelser til orkan, som omfattede et depot af forsyninger til et mandskab på 250 arbejdere under stormvejr, som kunne blive lukket inde på værket i flere dage.

Meteorologerne advarede flere dage i forvejen om den kommende storm. Hvorfor var en beredskabsplan på samme niveau som på kraftværket, samt sikring mod vejrforhold for at beskytte infrastruktur, ikke til rådighed for resten af Texas, der notorisk har risiko for oversvømmelse? Det kan tydeligvis gøres.

Foto: De to kernekraftreaktorer på South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company nær Houston, Texas, har været i fuld drift fra tirsdag og igennem den historiske oversvømmelse og de kraftige vinde, forårsaget af orkanen, og siden den tropiske storm, Harvey, på trods af vindstød, der nåede op på 130 miles/t, da Harvey ramte. Værket er bygget 16 km inde i landet i ca. 8,8 meters højde over havet. 

Jeg talte med nogle mennesker i Europa i de seneste par dage i forskellige lande, og de siger alle: »Jeres politik vinder. Det kommer. I ved, I var en meget vigtig indflydelse. Dette er jeres politik.« Så folk, der har kendt os længe, ved dette, og derfor skal I blot sikre jer, at mange folk kender til dette alternativ, for når folk først ved, at der er et helt andet system, begynder de at tænke på en helt anden måde, og de bliver vrede over, at man fortæller dem løgne, eller at sandheden holdes tilbage fra dem. I øjeblikket er det væsentlige, at være overbevist om, at, når folk først kender til dette, så forandrer de sig. Jeg mener, vi har et fantastisk moment, for det eneste, der behøves, er, at præsident Trump annoncerer noget stort, som Roosevelt gjorde med New Deal. Jeg ville ikke forsværge, at Trump ikke kan gøre det. Jeg mener, at Trump har karakteren til det, han har temperamentet til at overraske sine modstandere, og jeg mener, at vi skal skabe betingelserne i landet, der kan tilskynde ham til at gøre dette. Vi må øge presset på befolkningen for, at Trump skal satse på et overordnet design for USA, som er større end presset fra Wall Street på ham, for at blive inde i kassen. De ønsker at inddæmme ham. De truer ham; hvis han ikke kapitulerer, så vil de dræbe ham eller impeache ham.

Download (PDF, Unknown)

Leder fra LaRouche PAC, 30. august, 2017 – I de næste 48 timer vil LaRouche PAC Politiske Aktionskomite udstede en politisk hensigtserklæring om de nødvendige handlinger, der må tages skridt til af USA – dets folk og dets regering – for at adressere den eksistentielle krise, som er blevet bragt i forgrunden af den hen over flere stater eksistentielle krise, som orkanen Harvey og dens følgevirkninger har forårsaget. USA kan ikke længere leve i vrangforestillingernes domæne med skyhøje spekulative værdipapirer og kollapsende, fysisk økonomi. Vi kan ikke længere agere, som om vi på en eller anden måde kan overleve uden at kere os om at investere i broer, dæmninger, jernbaner, kernekraft, kanaler, diger … og mennesker.

De fornødne politiske forholdsregler blev fremlagt af Helga Zepp-LaRouche i hendes bemærkninger til Manhattan-mødet den 26. august, og de omfattes helt af Lyndon LaRouches Fire Love. 

Det er nødvendigt med en kursændring i nationaløkonomisk politik, og det må ske nu.

Bælte & Vej Initiativet bringer allerede en håbefuld fremtid til nogle af de mest formørkede og krigshærgede områder på planeten. Transaqua-projektet i det centrale Afrika har fået grønt lys, og det vil blive udført med deltagelse af det samme, kinesiske selskab, der stod for byggeriet af de Tre Slugters Dæmning. Ligeledes har Kra-kanalen fået grønt lys, et af de store projekter i Verdenslandbroen, der behøves for at skabe et samlet verdensocean for handel og udvikling, som Lyndon LaRouche længe har forklaret. Og i Syrien – hvor russisk militærhandling og/eller diplomatisk handling, i kombination med Kinas Bælte & Vej-initiativer er begyndt at vende tidevandet bort fra folkemorderiske krige og terrorisme – er Schiller Instituttet nu i færd med, i sin fulde udstrækning, at bringe LaRouches politik for Verdenslandbroen til det højeste niveau af dette lands regerings- og uddannelsesinstitutioner, som vi rapporterer andetsteds.[1] Dette er et ægte bevis på principperne i LaRouches politikker og metoder.

Hvis Centralafrika, Thailand og Syrien kan vågne og handle, kan vi så ikke gøre det samme? Er det ikke orkanen Harveys virkelige budskab og lektie? Ved at få USA til at vedtage LaRouches Fire Love og fuldt ud samarbejde med Bælte & Vej Initiativet, kan vi kaste nationen – og med den, verden – frem på et fuldstændig andet niveau. Nu.

Foto: Agenter fra U.S. Border Patrol Mario Fuentes, venstre, og Marc Gonzales undersøger et ødelagt mobilt hjem for evt. overlevende i kølvandet af orkanen Harvey nær Rockport, Texas, 27. aug., 2017. U.S. Customs and Border Protection photo by Glenn Fawcett

[1] Se Ulf Sandmark fra det svenske Schiller Instituts rapport her: http://www.larouche.se/artikel/ulf-sandmark-atervande-till-syrien-med-sidenvagsboken