Top Left Link Buttons
  • en
  • de
  • ru
  • it
  • el

Daniel GT

Author Archives

9/11 Memorial Concert

 

This concert, held at the Presbyterian Church in Morristown, NJ was the fourth of four “9/11 Living Memorial Concerts” to honor all the victims of 9/11 and its aftermath.

Lynn Yen, the executive director of the Foundation for the Revival of Classical Culture (FFTROCC) opened the event, discussing the importance of the occasion, and why the Schiller Institute chose to perform the four African American Spirituals, the Mozart “Requiem” and the Handel “Amen” chorus at the concert. She also introduced Jose Vega, a student with the Foundation, two Islamic leaders in the audience, and Terry Strada, of the 911 Families and a tireless fighter for Justice. Ms. Strada received a standing ovation for her work.

Lynn Yen introduced Terry Strada, saying,” At this point I would like to introduce somebody very special to all of you. Many of you probably know of her. Her name is Terry Strada. She is the national chairwoman of the 9/11 Families United for Justice Against Terrorism. She and her organization were instrumental in the release of the 28 pages of the congressional report on 9/11. Without further ado, I’m going to turn the microphone over to her.”

Address by Terry Strada: 9/11 Families United for Justice Against Terrorism

Terry Strada addressed the hundreds of concert attendees in the church, which was full: “Thank you! Thank you very much! My name is Terry Strada, and I lost my husband on September 11th, 2001. Tom was 41 years old when he went to work that day, and never came home again. We have three children. At the time, they were 7 years old, 4 years old, and our youngest was only 4 days old.

terry_strada-lynn_yen-morristown-crop

Terry Strada, left, and Lynn Yen

“On September 12th, 2001 I woke up — well, I probably didn’t sleep that night — so when the sun came up, the questions were, “Who did this? Why would they do this?”, and “How could they possibly do this? How could they attack our country like this, and how could they kill so many innocent people in one day?”

“Because I wanted to know the answers, I started to ask the questions more and more. And so did more and more 9/11 families. United to Bankrupt Terrorism was our first title, and now we’re United Together for Justice Against Terrorism. Of course it was the 28 pages that we focused on in the beginning that needed to be released. And when they were released, there were two key things that we learned. One, is that Saudi Arabia has never been fully investigated for the role that they played in 9/11; and two, that it is indisputable that the Saudis played a very important role in 9/11.

The second piece of legislation that I’ve been working on for over four years now, is called the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. This bill is intended to fix a minor problem in our current Foreign Sovereignty Immunity Act of 1976. So, it’s a 40-year-old law that has stood for 40 years, until we looked further into the Saudi’s role in 9/11, found the evidence, and tried to hold them accountable.

“What happened next was that the courts decided to misinterpret the law and dismiss them on sovereign immunity. Make no mistake. No country, no entity, no individual is entitled to immunity — sovereign immunity, any type of immunity — in the case of a terrorist act. This bill is intended to hold any nation accountable for a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that kills United States citizens.

We’ve chosen this path because it’s a peaceful way to fight terrorism. We don’t want to see more bloodshed; we don’t ever want to see more people die over 9/11. And we also want to protect our borders; we want to protect our country; we want to protect you; I want to protect my children. And the way that we do this, is by holding the nations accountable that fund known terrorist organizations, like al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram.

People say, “You can’t fight the lone wolf.” I say, “Yes, we can!” If we cut off the funding, and we destroy their capabilities to recruit and incite, and bring on more terror and to brainwash people, we can eliminate ISIS. And that is our long-term goal. The short-term goal, right now, is to get Saudi Arabia off of this crazy [situation] that they’re not held accountable.

“In May, the Senate passed unanimously this Bill, and on Friday, September 9th, it went to the U.S. House of Representatives. I was in the gallery and was honored and proud to see each and every one of our 435 Members in the House vote “Yes” for JASTA. [applause] Thank you, thank you. I don’t really know how many times this has ever happened on our history, that we have both Chambers of Congress voting “Yes” unanimously. What this means for the President: as of 4:00 today, he was still threatening to veto the Bill. The Bill will be sent over to his office for signature later on tonight, at the latest tomorrow. We’re doing everything we can to convince him to not do this.

You probably hear things in the news — and I’ll kind of wrap this up, because I want to hear the music as badly as you do — but you may hear in the news, things about the Bill. They’re simply not true, if they’re coming from the Administration. Unfortunately, they are the mouthpiece for the Saudis at this point. We just need to point out to them how important this is, to hold them accountable — any nation, going forward — would be held accountable, and how important it is for our country to have that type of security net.

“If the President does decide to veto this Bill, it will be our last hurdle; it may be our biggest. But we plan to overcome it, and override the veto. Hopefully the Senate and the House will fall into line and do that for us.

“If there’s anything that you’d like to do to help, going forward, it’s PassJasta.Org.  That’s our website. It’s updated as often as I can get to a computer and update it. There are usually just simple instructions of how you can reach out to the White House, your Representative, or a co-sponsor of the bill. This is very important legislation. I thank you very much for taking the time to listen to me, and now I’m so honored to have these wonderful musicians. I have heard them practice. You are in for a treat. This is going to be a very wonderful time now for us to just transcend ourselves from the evil, to a higher place — to a place where Good is. I believe Good will win, and I thank you for coming.”

 


Strategic Seminar

June 8, 2016San Francisco Embarcadero Center

The Schiller Institute’s Strategic Seminar in San Franciso on June 8, drew 70 guests and experts to discuss the urgent topic “Will the U.S. Join the New Silk Road? Global Scientific Development or Nuclear War.” That question is to join the One Belt, One Road world infrastructure plan put forward by China, or stick with the collapsing Western economies, whose bankruptcy is fueling the danger of a global nuclear war.







 


Interview with Helga Zepp-LaRouche — U.S., Europe Need New Silk Road Cooperation More Than Asia Does

 

Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, called the “Silk Road Lady” in China and the first promoter with Lyndon LaRouche of this policy in Europe, was interviewed by TASS May 31, 2016 on the decision for a new global war or for economic development and cooperation.

TASS: How would you assess the current international cooperation?

Zepp-LaRouche: There are two completely different dynamics on the planet right now. On the one side you have the convergence of President Putin’s very successful military flanks, such as his intervention in Syria, which created the potential for peace, combined with his various diplomatic interventions in Asia, parallel to the Chinese New Silk Road initiatives.

These efforts represent a win-win perspective for over seventy participating countries already.

On the other side there is an extremely dangerous confrontation from the side of the United States, Great Britain, the EU and NATO against Russia and China, which has brought the world to a multiple crisis, more dangerous than at the height of the Cold War.

TASS: In what areas it is more active and where it is not?

Zepp-LaRouche:In the case of Syria the cooperation between Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Kerry, as well as the Geneva cooperation between Russia and the U.S., is very positive. However, as long as the United States do not abandon their policy of regime change, the situation remains dangerous. President Putin has proven to be a brilliant strategist.

This allows confidence that the warhawks in NATO will not succeed to lure Russia into a trap, giving them a pretext for a preventive attack.

TASS: What are the issues we need to step up cooperation between the West and Russia? Why?

Zepp-LaRouche: The reality is, that the entire trans-Atlantic sector is bankrupt and about to blow up in a bigger way than in 2008. Japanese Prime Minister Abe, after a very important visit in Russia, made that point at the recent G7 meeting emphatically, but was rebuffed by President Obama, who insisted, that “the recovery is improving”, which is absurd in light of the negative interest rates of the central banks and the debate around “helicopter money”.

Therefore the West needs, more than Asia, the kind of economic cooperation of the One Road One Belt/Eurasian Economic Union cooperation, integrating Eurasia from Vladivostok to Lisbon, but also inviting the U.S. to participate in this perspective. The only way a catastrophe can be avoided, is if we succeed to overcome geopolitics and reach a new paradigm, based on a global development partnership and the common aims of mankind.

TASS: Why, despite the obvious threat of terrorism, cybercrime and other international challenges, does the West so hinder cooperation with Russia?

Zepp-LaRouche: Almost all important conflicts derive from the effort of the Anglo-American empire to maintain an unipolar world, at a point, where it has de facto ceased to exist already. More and more forces in the world realize that they have to make existential decisions, and that the interests of their nations are much better served by stopping sanctions and confrontation against Russia and China.

The fact that Russia and China have created a very strong strategic partnership, with India a third partner, has shifted the strategic balance in the world. More and more countries are seeing it as more beneficial to cooperate for joint development, than to be under the yoke of military confrontation. We are at a branching point in history, and at such moments, what counts is leadership of the kind we have seen from President Putin.

Source: http://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/3325807

 

 

 


Manhattan Conference: Building A World Land-Bridge—Realizing Mankind’s True Humanity, April 7th

 

Panel I


Thursday’s Schiller Institute Conference in New York City, “Building a World Land-Bridge—Realizing Mankind’s True Humanity,” marked a success for Lyndon LaRouche’s idea. Although further and fuller reports will follow, and this one only reflects a part of the proceedings, that much can already be said with certainty.

Helga Zepp-LaRouche opened the conference with a comprehensive and inspiring address entitled, “Beyond Geopolitics and Polarity: A Future for the Human Species,” in which she laid bare the immediate threat of annihilating war, and showed that the idea of the World Land-Bridge, which she developed with her husband during the period of the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, provides the only durable guarantee for peace. She went on to outline a dialog of civilizations in which each of the world’s civilizations is represented by the cultural high-points of its history, such as Germany’s Weimar Classic, and the United States as it was first conceived by Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton.

helga-IV-april-VII

Schiller Institute founder, Helga Zepp LaRouche giving the keynote address.

Transcript of Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Keynote

DENNIS SPEED: So, on behalf of the Schiller Institute, my name is Dennis Speed. I want to welcome everybody here today. We have a greeting to the conference I’ll begin with, which is from the Chinese Chamber of Commerce of New York. It says: “Dear friends, On behalf of everyone at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, I extend a warm greeting to all in attendance at the Schiller Institute conference. I truly believe the scientific triumphs of the past century, and the advancements in technology, were not through sheer luck or chance. Rather I believe it is the collective efforts of our species as a whole that allow us to grow and prosper beyond what we could ever accomplish as individuals. Only through cooperation between all nations can we all achieve a greater goal. The conference of the New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge will discuss issues including the designs for the development of Southwest Asia, as well as a path for United States recovery. We sincerely wish the conference will be very successful, and the attendees have a wonderful stay in New York City. Sincerely, Justin Yue, Chairman of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in New York City.”

I just want to say a couple of things in welcome. Of course, what’s referred to in the statement in specific is “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge,” the report that was done at the end of 2014 by the Schiller Institute [sic], and I think everybody has our program so you have the list of our speakers. I just want to say the following in setting us off:

You know, New York City was founded by Alexander Hamilton and George Washington. I’m not talking about the chronological founding, but the fact that as an American city, it was founded on the principle of a single unified government. Hamilton’s role with George Washington in the first American Presidency, was a revolutionary one, which was more important than the victory on the battlefields of Trenton, Saratoga, and Yorktown. His four documents on the National Bank, the Constitutionality of the National Bank, the nature of credit, and the nature of manufactures are the basis for the real United States. It is that real United States that the Schiller Institute seeks to place back on the world stage in collaboration with, particularly, the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, in the pursuit of the policy called the World Land-Bridge.

The danger of warfare which now lurks and pulsates from a collapsed trans-Atlantic system is what brings us here today, in part, and the Schiller Institute has been doing conferences in Egypt, has spoken at conferences in Russia and India, and many other locations, in the past weeks, and in that light, and in that context, I’d like to go directly to introduce the person who has campaigned tirelessly for this policy. Together with her husband, Lyndon LaRouche, back in 1989, the glimmer of this policy was first enunciated as the Eurasian Land-Bridge, shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall. In 1996, in June, a conference was held in Beijing, which put the idea of the New Silk Road on the map, and at that conference, the founder of our organization spoke, and that conference basically precipitated what then became known as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Many other things occurred. And now, on this stage, we are at the point where if our keynote speaker is listened to, there’s a world that can be made, can be created, of cooperation, and not destruction.

It’s always my honor and pleasure to introduce the chairman and founder of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche.

HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, dear guests and friends of the Schiller Institute, this conference is taking place at a very serious moment, and it has no lesser goal than that which has been defined by my husband Lyndon LaRouche with the Manhattan Project: that we have to turn the United States back to its founding principles. We have to get the United States away from its present imperial orientation, and the idea that it must pursue an unipolar world, and turn it back to the identity of a republic, as the Founding Fathers and the Constitution designed it.

This goal is something which almost the whole world thinks is impossible. I can assure you that, outside of the United States, the thinking people think the United States is hopeless, and I can assure you that that is a very common feeling. Many people don’t travel to the United States any more because they think it has become a place of horror. Yet, achieving this goal, to turn the United States back into a republic, is going to determine, in all likelihood, the fate of the entire human species.

There is right now an absolutely eerie tension in the air, because many people who don’t always say it, but know it—that we are right now closer to World War III than even at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis. This has been stated by military analysts and nevertheless, there is no peace movement. There is nobody in the street talking about the fact that we are close to World War III. In the ’80s you had hundreds of thousands of people marching in the streets of Germany against the SS-60 and the Pershing 2. Today, where the situation is more dangerous, and experts have described that if there would be an incident, the warning time to launch general thermonuclear war would be 3 to 6 minutes.

So, only a few people are speaking that, while the vast majority of citizens in the United States and Europe is marching like lemmings towards the cliff.

I want to highlight a case of 78 year old pensioner, a retired teacher from the German city of Kaiserslautern, who, two days ago, was just denied his suit in the third level of the Federal administrative court in Leipzig, where he tried for the third time to sue the German government for allowing the United States to use the air base in Ramstein for a relay system of the drones, without which the drones could not be sent to the Middle East and elsewhere. [He said] that this would be against the German constitution, which does not allow Germany to ever again launch a war of aggression, or help other countries to do so. The judges ruled again that matters of international law can only be taken up by states, and not by individuals, but this pensioner of 78 years old, is planning to take this to the highest Constitutional court in Karlsrühe.

One is almost reminded of the story in the Old Testament where God was about to punish Sodom and Gomorrah for their sinful behavior, and was then convinced that if there would be only ten just men, the punishment would not be carried out. And I must ask: Are there ten honest men to stand up today?

Before I come to the solution, how we get out of this crisis, let me look at the very dire strategic situation. We are now having 12 days of joint military drills involving the United States and the Philippines, Australia, and Japan. The exercise is called Shoulder to Shoulder, and for the first time ever, the U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter will go there to be on the place [on site] next week. Now yesterday, Ash Carter said that the enemies of the United States are first, Russia; second, China; third, Iran; fourth, North Korea, and fifth—oh yeah, there was terrorism.

Parallel, you have the largest ever U.S.-South Korean military exercises until late April, also involving many troops, and the Philippine exercise includes an amphibious landing exercise to simulate taking one of the disputed islands in the South China Sea. The Philippine military also is sending a U.S. high-mobility artillery rocket system designed to shoot down aircraft. And basically it’s the first time that these exercises include Australia and Japan, in the effort to build a quadrilateral military counter alliance to China.

Now other things are taking place in the region. Two weeks ago, the Philippines allowed the United States to have access to five of its bases near the disputed waters in the South China sea, and they renewed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. Now this is against the Philippine constitution, but they bypassed it by allowing the U.S. troops within Philippine bases, so that the Constitution would not apply. Now also Japan has a new national security law, which went into effect last Tuesday, where the national Diet passed a new security bill breaking away from the pacifist constitution of Japan, in order to enhance the alliance with the United States, and with it, the power to exercise the right for collective self-defense.

Now, the whole world watches: Does that mean that Japan is going to go back to its military past?

There is a tendency in Japan right now, to move into alliances with other claimants of the contested territories [in the South China Sea] to contain Beijing.

Now where is all of this leading? China’s position concerning the waters are written in what they call the Nine Dash Line in the South China Sea, and China claims that these are territories which historically belong to China, including the right to reclaim land and build bases on the Spratly Islands. China also says—and that is true—that this does represent a violation of the freedom to the seas, but it will just improve the living conditions of the people living there, give better ways to protect against pirates, and it does not hinder the passage of other ships.

Now the Philippines in 2013 filed a case in the International Court in the Hague, insisting on its right to exploit the South China Sea waters in its 100 nautical mile exclusive economic zone, as defined in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. China did not accept to be in this case, which is their perfect right, but is questioning the legitimacy of the case. The court should have at that point abandoned the case, but they accepted it, and the ruling is expected for the end of April/beginning of May.  The Chinese Defense Ministry said that they have the absolute right to then declare an Air Defense Identification Zone.

Now at the Nuclear Summit in Washington, which just took place, President Xi in a discussion with President Obama, told Obama that China would not accept any behavior in the guise of freedom of navigation, that violates its sovereignty in this region. One day later, exactly one day later, the United States announced a new patrol near the disputed islands in the South China Sea, and Navy officials announced that they plan to conduct more and increasingly complex exercises in the future. So the United States is playing a chicken game against China, increasing the tension over violations of opposite claims, in the forefront [in anticipation of] of the Hague ruling, to create an atmosphere that then, they hope, China would not dare to set up an ADIZ.

But China already said that it will defend its rights in the South China Sea. So the question is, could there be a war between the United States and China over some relatively worthless rocks and reefs in the ocean? Could it be that the United States goes to a war with China on the Philippines’ behalf?

Obviously the South China Sea is of geographical significance for China, but the interest of the United States is geopolitical, and it is the same reasoning as in the TPP, to affirm the right to set the rules in Asia. The United States insists that they will defend a unipolar world, that they are the only superpower, and that they will not allow any other nation to meddle in that. The claim that Russia is only a regional power, which Obama did, is very absurd given the fact that Russia has a nuclear arsenal which is a complete strategic match to that of the United States. And Putin just demonstrated very brilliantly a military flank in Syria against ISIS, that Russia is absolutely needed if you want to have political solutions. Russia played a positive role in the P5+1 negotiations with Iran, and is now helping to end, and making possible, the end of the war in Syria.

There are many leaders in the world who have said, without Russia, you cannot solve existential problems, like terrorism, ISIS, the refugee crisis in Europe. And one should also be reminded that these territorial disputes in the South China Sea are the result of the imperial intention dating back to the Versailles Treaty and the Paris Peace Conference in the aftermath of that in 1919, whereby the former German colonies in the Pacific Islands north and south of the Equator, were given in part to Japan, which at that time caused a tremendous feeling of injustice in China, leading to the May 4th movement. And all the people in China thought the Versailles Treaty was a complete fraud, and as we know from European history, it laid the seeds for World War II.

Now the same game was repeated in the San Francisco Peace Conference after the Second World War, where John Foster Dulles arranged for China to be excluded, despite the fact that China has the highest casualty rate in Asia against the Japanese, and fought the longest. But the Western powers drew the map in Eastern Asia without China, and John Foster Dulles deliberately declared certain Asian frontier territories without owners, an old imperial trick to manipulate then future conflicts, as was the case with the Sykes-Picot Agreement for Southwest Asia, or the 1919 Trianon Treaty for the Balkans.

The fact is that the unipolar world has already ceased to exist. It is a fact that China is rising; the United States is losing its hegemony. China is already exporting much more technologies than the United States. It is educating far more scientists, engineers, and the word in the science community internationally is, if you want to get anything done in frontier science, the place to go is China.

So China, except for a couple of minor corrections in its stock market, is doing very, very well economically—and do not believe what the New York Times is trying to tell you every day. Because China has embarked in the policy of the New Silk Road, the Maritime Silk Road, the One Belt, One Road policy on huge infrastructure projects to connect all the countries of Eurasia through infrastructure development and high technology investments. It is so attractive that already 60 nations are cooperating with China. It has created, together with other BRICS countries, a completely alternative economic system—the AIIB, which has immediately  had 60 founding members, despite the United States making enormous pressure on everybody not to join it; the New Development Bank, which is already operating this year; The New Silk Road Fund and Maritime Silk Road Fund, and many other such institutions.  There is a tremendous attractiveness of this program of a New Silk Road in the spirit of the ancient Silk Road in all of Asia, who are now all talking about increasing Asian connectivity.

The investments of these new banks are going exactly into the areas which were denied for decades by the IMF and the World Bank—namely, in infrastructure—and all of these countries are thirsty and hungry for exactly these kinds of developments. Many countries have recently expressed interest in becoming transport hubs for the New Silk Road and the Maritime Silk Road. Indonesia wants to become a hub. Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Iran. The New Silk Road is moving very, very rapidly in all of Eastern Europe. Just now, when President Xi Jinping was in Prague on a state visit to the Czech Republic, President Zeman praised the New Silk Road and emphasized the role of Prague, the golden city, to be the gateway between Europe and China. The 16+1 countries just met in Riga, and they also—these are the 16 East European and Central European countries—all want to be connected to the One Belt, One Road policy.

So this is moving very, very positively.

You contrast that with the trans-Atlantic sector, the too-big-to-fail banks, Wall Street and London, which are completely bankrupt, and we are in front of an immediate financial crash, much, much worse than what happened in 2008, where the entire two quadrillion outstanding derivatives could blow up any minute. Furthermore the so-called tools of the central banks no longer function. As a matter of fact, every time a central bank does something to correct the problem, it boomerangs and has the opposite effect, as in the case of the Bank of Japan, Norway, or the ECB. When they go to zero interest rates, or even negative interest rates, it furthers the deflationary collapse instead of stimulating the real economy.

Now how desperate the situation in the trans-Atlantic system is you can see by the fact that the head of the European Central Bank Draghi is now talking about helicopter money. Now that is, if you remember, an invention of Ben Bernanke—the idea that in order to avoid a meltdown of the entire financial system, you just fly helicopters over cities, who throw down money, as much as is needed to prevent a meltdown. Now this obviously has caused a complete uproar in Germany, because people in Germany remember what the hyperinflation of 1923 was all about.

Then look at the condition of Europe. The refugee crisis, which is not being discussed much, but the reality is that it’s the result of the wars conducted mostly by the United States and the British in the Middle East, wars which were all based on lies. Iraq—no weapons of mass destruction. The war against Libya was initiated by a lie in the UN Security Council that it would not be a war. Look at Afghanistan: was September 11 really as it was presented? Look at the situation in Yemen and in many African states.

The refugee crisis, which is the biggest humanitarian crisis probably since the end of the Second World War—unbelievable fates of people—has revealed that there is no European Union, because there is no union. There is no unity. There is no solidarity. You have now a situation where children are stuck behind barbed wire, and police are shooting at them, trying to get the back. And then there was this absolutely shameful deal between the EU and Turkey, and Turkey—which, according to documents just delivered to the UN Security Council, is still supporting ISIS.

In Germany politicians are saying, oh, now we have fewer refugees. Yeah, but at what price. They’re being deported on a grand scale from intern camps in Greece, and it is a complete disgrace. Even the UN Human Rights Commission said this is a complete violation of human rights. It violates the Geneva convention on refugees, and all the aid organizations have already left their jobs, because they say, under these conditions they cannot do it. For example, the Doctors without Borders, and many others.

So the world is clearly in a complete mess and disintegration condition, and what is the answer of the leading institutions of the trans-Atlantic sector? Well, they pulled just now a big rabbit out of the hat called the Panama Papers. Now, one year ago, an anonymous source—which is always dubious—gave to theSüddeutsche Zeitung 11.5 million documents, which contained forty years of data concerning the firm in Panama called Mossack Fonseca, which specializes in letterbox firms for the purpose of tax evasion. Now then the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists deployed for one year 400 reporters in 80 countries, financed by whom? By George Soros. And then targeting politicians and industry leaders and sportsmen and others.

Immediately, naturally, the focus was on Putin, even though his name is nowhere to be found in these documents, and Xi Jinping. The New York Times did not waste a day since the beginning [inaudible 27:00] this of  Xi Jinping.

Now, let’s look at this operation: What is this? Jürgen Mossack, one of the founders, his father was a member of the Hitler Waffen SS; Ramón Fonseca Mora, the other guy, was the ex-president of the Panameñista Party, a party founded by the open Hitler supporter Arnulfo Arias Madrid; and the son was actively involved in the overthrow of General Noriega. Now the old Mossack was a member of the Nazi Waffen SS, and then offered his services after the war, to the U.S. government as an informant. Now that is entirely the profile of the Dulles brothers’ famous rat line, by which they transported Nazis from Germany via the so-called rat line, to South America, to deploy them there for other purposes.

The focus on Xi Jinping is obviously especially ridiculous, because if there is one political leader in the world who is conducting an anti-corruption campaign in a completely ruthless fashion, then it is him. So, what is the purpose of this? Obviously, it’s part of the present trans-Atlantic hybrid warfare against Russia and China, with the aim to have regime change, by a variety of means: by color revolutions, by NGOs which are financed from foundations which are probably in this tax-exempt scheme; sanctions, and now the Panama Papers with the obvious hope to steer an uproar among their own populations.  And it almost worked in the case of the Icelandic President, where now people are in front of the residence of President Olafur Grimsson, but the m.o. of this is really not a new one. The way this has been functioning for a very long time is, you use certain assets owned by the governments, or secret services, and allow criminal operations and behavior to go on for a very long time. And then, at a convenient moment, you blow it up, and you cause a shake-up.

Now this was done very efficiently in the 1990s in Italy, with an operation called “Clean Hands” where you had a national juridical investigation into political corruption.  And then they blew it all up, and it caused the end of the so-called First Republic of Italy, because all the parties got involved.  And anybody who ever travelled to Italy knows, that the entire postwar system of Italy was based on a principle called “amici di amici.” You may not approve of it, but that’s what it was, that you couldn’t get a job done without some kickback, public works would always have some bribes, and the whole operation was called Tagentopoli, or in English, “Bribesville,” meaning these kickbacks for public works.  It Italy, at that time, it involved 5,000 public figures; half of the Italian parliament; more than 400 city and town councils were dissolved, and the annual bribe rate in the ’90s was estimated to be $4 billion.

Now, Bloomberg recently reported that the Brazilian “anti-corruption” campaign against Dilma Rousseff, one of the BRICS leaders, is based on the Italian model.  It is called “Operation Carwash.”

So what they do, is they operate by a system of plea bargains, turn mafia bosses into snitches, and that way, you can roll up the whole political system.  Now what comes out there is very interesting, because it reveals the total criminal character, of the entire trans-Atlantic financial system.  In the case of Mossack Fonseca, which is only the fourth largest of such firms, so one has to assume that there are many, many more such cases, it turns out that the HongShang bank [Honkong and Shanghai Banking Corp., HSBC] is responsible for 20% of these letterbox firms, and then comes UBS (Union Bank of Switzerland), Crédit Suisse; almost all the German banks are involved.

So what do you do when you have such a problem? The only solution to stop this, is, obviously, what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in 1933, when he declared Glass-Steagall with separation of the banks, by simply bankrupting the fraudulent parts and that is exactly what is required today:  That you need to separate the banks, protect the commercial banks, and close down the derivatives, the toxic waste paper; and then, you need a Pecora Commission to look into who committed what crime, and for what purpose.

Now, the funny thing is that when the British cabinet member [Chancellor of the Exchequer] Osborne was asked, what about the fact that the father of [Prime Minister] Cameron is also now a target in the Panama Papers, he said, “oh that is a private matter”!  You know, so it is quite amazing what nerve these people have.

So, the FDR solution for the United States.  Then, we need to put down all of these crises, and I think it is absolutely feasible, but one has to take the path as it was now demonstrated by the negotiations between Secretary of State Kerry and Foreign Minister of Russia Lavrov, in the case of Syria.  There has to be a political agreement.

But then, you need a huge development program.  You need to do exactly what President Xi Jinping offered when he was in Iran, namely, to extend the New Silk Road, the One Belt, One Road policy into the entire Middle East.  Because you will not stop terrorism by dropping more bombs!  If you launch more drones and drop more bombs, one every killed terrorist you will create 100 new ones who hate the West even more than before.

So this is no solution. Obviously, ISIS has to be fought, and has to be gotten rid of, but you need a development perspective for the entire region, from Afghanistan to the Middle East, to the Mediterranean, from the Caucasus to the Persian Gulf. And we need to have a war on the desert:  We have to have new, fresh water, which is eminently possible with peaceful nuclear energy and desalination of large amounts of ocean water. We need to build new cities, agriculture, industry, so that the people of Syria, and Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Yemen, and Tripoli in Libya, and many, many African countries, that they have a future!

Why can we not take the offer of Xi Jinping to enter into a “win-win” cooperation with the large neighbors of the Middle East, Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, and build up the Middle East in a Marshall Plan/New Silk Road fashion.  The only reason why I’m mentioning the Marshall Plan, is because it reminds people that you can rebuild war-torn regions with a crash program.  I know that China doesn’t want to use this word, because the Marshall Plan has such a Cold War connotation; but we need to have a New Silk Road perspective.

Now, the same goes obviously to settle the Ukraine crisis. You probably heard that yesterday, the Dutch people voted in a referendum against the EU Association Agreement for Ukraine. This is very, very good:  Because it means that this horrible EU is one step further to its dissolution, because if you remember, it was the EU Association Agreement which was supposed to be signed by Yanukovych in late 2013, in the summit in

that started the whole Ukraine crisis.  Because Yanukovych, in the last moment realized, that it would have totally have given the territory of Ukraine access for NATO; it would have totally made possible economic warfare against Russia, because of the border and the agreements between Ukraine and Russia.  So he did not sign it in the very last moment.  And then, you had the color revolution, the Maidan, all of these things develop.  And if you look at the chronology of these events, it was not Russia acquiring the Crimea; Russia in every single instance, reacted to a provocative action by NATO and by the EU, including a fascist coup in February 2014 [in Ukraine].

So if you want to solve this problem now? Well, this is now the idea moment, because the EU Association Agreement just detonated, and it cannot be implemented, even if only 32% of the Dutch people voted on it, there were 64% in favor, the government in Holland does not dare to go along with it, because there are many people in 70% who did not vote who don’t like the EU, because remember Holland and France were the only two countries who voted against the EU Constitution in 2005.

So the ferment against this dictatorship which the EU has become, is just too big, and the lament today in the European media about the failure of this agreement is just absolutely loud and noisy.

OK. Let’s use this situation, where, and if there’s one veto, this agreement cannot go through, let’s use it to say: “Stop the confrontation with Russia!”  Extend the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union of Russia into one Eurasian area from the Atlantic to the Sea of China.  Let’s extend the Silk Road perspective, to include Ukraine and develop it!  Because Ukraine is economically absolutely finished!  The people are living a horrendous life, as the result of that happened in the last three years.

Let’s do the same thing for Africa.  Do people really think that we can sit there, and the 1% of the rich become richer and richer, by means which we now get a better window with the Panama Papers, and the majority of people lose everything.  The middle class become the poor, the poor have shortened lives; the gap between rich and poor worldwide is becoming bigger and bigger; and 1 billion people go hungry every day.

Klaus Schwab, the director of the Davos Economic Forum a couple of months ago said, that if the present trends do not change, it is expected that 1 billion people will come as refugees to Europe in the next years.  Well, if it comes to that, and you have the effort to use NATO and Frontex, military ships and fire at the refugees to try to deter them, what remains then of the “European values”? What about our humanism?  What about any value?

So why don’t we take the New Silk Road  and say “well, we have now a very attractive economic model which is already functioning already very well in 60 nations of the world, and let’s join hands, the United States, and Russia, and China, and European nations, and develop Africa.  This is the moment, where we have to have a grand vision, to change the plight of so many people.

Now, in Germany, there is one minister, the Development Minister Gerd Müller who traveled a lot in Southwest Asia and in Africa, and he is mentioning now, which is a big step forward, every time, “we need a Marshall Plan, we need to develop these countries, because otherwise, they will bring all their problems to Europe.”

And let’s convince Japan that it is not in their favor to be drawn into military adventures against China.  Japan is a country, very much like Germany which has almost no raw materials, and achieved a very high living standard because of high rates in science and technology, and exporting.  And for Japan, the natural export market is all of Asia, is Africa, and they should be part of such a new world economic system; and not go the way the Bank of Japan is now going to zero interest rates, negative interest rates, and plunging deeper and deeper into the deflation.

The United States:   Is the United States so much above the need for a New Silk Road?  I mean, if you travel through either roads from Washington to New York, or even on the roads in New York, I don’t understand why the citizens are not in an uprising against these roads!  I mean, they are so bad, that the roads at the end of G.D.R., East German before it collapsed, they were smooth compared to what you have here!  So, what the United States would obviously profit from is to join the New Silk Road, to build infrastructure!  China built 20,000 km of fast train system by the end of last year, and they plan to have 50,000 km by the year 2025 or 2030, in any case, a very short period of time.  And the United States has built how many kilometers or miles of fast train?  Zero!

So what we propose, is that the United States, rather than wasting its industrial capacity in an ever-growing military-industrial complex, trying to militarize the whole world, you can transform these industries and build fast trains, build maglev trains, or import the Chinese fast train system — which is excellent.  It’s smooth, it’s quick, it doesn’t shake at all, like the European fast trains.  So build 50,000 miles of fast train in the United States!  Fight the desert in the Southwest of the United States!  Build a couple of new cities, you know: large parts of the United States are completely undeveloped.  Basically, after Teddy Roosevelt, no new cities were built in the west.  Build some “smart cities,” modern cities based on modular systems, but make beautiful cities!  That would be a real challenge, to build beautiful cities, and not more Houstons.  [applause]

So, we have put this program on the table: The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.

And the reason why we have proposed a development for the entire world, is because also, multipolarity is not the answer to a unipolar world.  Because the idea that you have multipoles, that you have groups of nations which still maintain their interests against other groups of nations, still has the seed of geopolitics.  And geopolitics is what caused two world wars in the 20th century, and if we would come to a new world war, it would be the annihilation of all of mankind.  Because the idea that you have a limited war somewhere in the Pacific or somewhere in Europe, is complete bunk, and all the military experts we talked to, top-level military  in Europe, the United States and elsewhere, are convinced that it is the nature of the existence of thermonuclear weapons, that it would come to a general, global war, if you start a war somewhere.

What we need to have is the replacement of geopolitics through a new paradigm; a new paradigm which must be as different as was the Middle Ages separated from what is called “modern times.”  The Middle Ages being, scholasticism, superstition, Flagellants, people just going crazy, believing in Aristotle; and when the Renaissance happened with Nikolaus of Cusa and some of the great thinkers of the Italian Renaissance, they designed a completely new paradigm which defined the role of the individual in a completely different way; it established the sovereign nation-state devoted to the common good for the first time; it made scientific and artistic progress possible in ways absolutely unknown before.

And we need, today, a completely new paradigm.  If we cannot lift our thinking above the present, petty, so-called self-interest, so-called “national interest” or interest, really, of the big corporations and Wall Street, then we will not make it as a human species.  What we need is an image of man, which is man as the only creative species, in our knowledge so far.  In the Chinese Confucian philosophy, there is the word, or the notion of ren, which is almost the same thing as in Christian humanism, the word agapë, of love.  That you have to have love and harmonious relation with your family, your neighbor, your nation and the international community of nations.

Now, the human species has come a very long way in a very short period of time.  If you think about the last 10,000 years, we have produced quite a number of great minds:  Confucius, Plato, Mencius, Nikolaus of Cusa, Kepler, Leibniz, Bach, Schiller, Beethoven, Tagore, Vernadsky, Einstein, just to name a few; and that is how people should be.

Now, you say, “these are people who are so extraordinary, they only come one in a century”; but I don’t think so.  I think that if we go now for the kind of reform which we are talking about, and you would eliminate poverty, that no more child, and no more person on the entire planet would be deprived of his or her basic needs.  I think if you then give all the children of this planet a universal education, to give them access to the great discoveries of the past, that you teach them Classical art, that you give them the kind of morality which used to be associated with Christian humanism, or with Buddhism, or with Confucianism, or other great cultures of this planet, well, I think the elimination of hunger and poverty would do the best for human rights you can do!  Because being poor and being hungry does not allow you to exercise your human rights.

So if we go on the other road, and say, let’s have a plan of global development, let’s stop geopolitical wars, let’s join hands to work together, so that every child of the future can have a perspective to become a scientist, to become a teacher, an artist, to become basically an astronaut or some other beautiful thing developing the human mind. Then, I think what we need, is, we have to go back to our own high traditions of our own cultures.  The Americans have to become republicans again, like Benjamin Franklin, or the Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy.  I think  in Germany, we need to go back to the German Classics.  In other nations, we have high points of culture, which we have to revive.

And then we have to relate to each other from the standpoint of the actual highest form of our culture, and relate to the highest form of the culture of the other nation.

And then we will have a human world.

I think we should not give up on the idea that mankind is human! And that is what we have to fight for right now.  So I think that, if we do that, and to speak in modern English, the “new normal” will be that every person will be a genius. [applause]


Helga was followed by former U.S. Attorney General (1966-67) Ramsey Clark, who wove his own long experience into an account of recent world history which underlined the alternative to the war policies of most of the post-Kennedy U.S. Administrations.

The next speaker was a truly unique figure from China, that nation’s leading professor of journalism and the leader of much else as well, Li Xiguang. Professor Li has led a decades-long pilgrimage on behalf of the Silk Road,—across Central Asia, and down each of the three North-South routes, and back again. He has led no fewer than 500 of his students on this pilgrimage with him since 1990, and has written two volumes on the New Silk Road. Although his goals for the Silk Road are not religious goals—they are the same as those of the LaRouche movement—Professor Li models himself on the great Chinese cultural heroes, the Buddhist monks Xuanzang (602-664) and his predecessor Faxian (337-422). Both made extensive and arduous trips along the Silk Road, and brought back the first real knowledge of much of world civilization to China, including most especially Sanskrit language and culture and Buddhist scriptures in the original.

Xuanzang spent no less than 16 years on this voyage, and returned with 600 Indian texts. In 646, at the Tang-Dynasty Emperor’s request, he completed his 12-volume work, “Great Tang Records on the Western Regions,” which has become one of the primary sources for the study of medieval Central Asia and India, and the basis for the Sixteenth Century novel “Journey to the West,” one of the Four Great Classical Chinese Novels.

The afternoon session which highlighted the space program, which Kesha Rogers opened with a vivid presentation, will be reported later. The climax of that session was a question-and-answer session with Lyndon LaRouche by Skype connection. LaRouche led most of the questions back to the cardinal question that changes in the physical system, and in the future of mankind, are created by the thinking human mind itself; no animal can do this. Mankind is organized by his own acts of this type; it is these which lead either to failure or to success. This is the mind of the true scientist, of which Einstein is an example. But this account is only a characterization; the actual answers should be studied in detail.

panel-II_0

Attendance exceeded 200, not including the core membership. About a dozen foreign countries were represented from Europe, Asia and Africa, whether through diplomats, cultural associations or in other ways. Many musicians attended, and at least five people from the Brooklyn church where we performed the Messiah during Easter. This may have been the largest conference we have ever held.

Panel II Q&A Session with Lyndon LaRouche

DENNIS SPEED:  So, the first thing I’d like to do, is go to Lyn, since we haven’t heard him live; and he’s been listening the entire time.  So, do we have an audio on Lyn?  OK, we’re trying to bring you up here.

LYNDON LAROUCHE:  Aah, I am now speaking.

SPEED:  OK, very good.  So, you just want us to go right to questions, Lyn?  Or do you have anything you’d like to say at this point?

LAROUCHE:  No, just let the questions out; I think that’s the best way to do it.  I’ve been listening to things all the way through; now I want to hear some from you.

SPEED:  OK, so anybody who has questions, there are two microphones here in the center.  Just come down; and let’s just take the first question.

Q:  I have a question for Dr. Hsu.  Dr. Hsu, I understand terrestrial photovoltaic is actually, if you calculate all the energy required to manufacture panels, that it’s actually a net energy loss; that it takes more energy to manufacture the panels than you ever recover from the solar energy captured and converted to electricity in a terrestrial photovoltaic.  Are the efficiencies of space-based solar better than that?  And can you also talk to, to the extent you have knowledge of the terrestrial photovoltaic, is there optimism about the levels of conversion, or the efficiencies of conversion such that we might at some point have a net energy payback?  Or will it continue to be the case that the more solar we get, the more old solar — fossil fuels and things — we have to burn to get that, and that’s actually a negative result?

DR. HSU:  To answer your first question about terrestrial solar, there’s a lot of study, to answer your question, the reality is the efficiency of the solar cell has continued to improve.  And 5-10 years ago, you can hardly see 15%;  I talk about the solar cell efficiency.  And right now, you can easily see over 19%, even 20% poly-crystalline based solar cells. There’s also new type of material we call the synfilm; and there’s a different type of technology.  And those are not energy intensive to produce.  There’s First Solar, a U.S. company, and they produce the synfilm solar cells right now.  Based on their claim, their study exceeded 20-21; it’s approaching the 25% range.  So, as production process techniques improve, you’re going to see continued improvement on the efficiency.  So, the higher the efficiency, the better you return.  And also, sometimes people don’t realize the poly-crystalline solar cells, mono-crystalline solar cells, are made of dirt basically; silicon sand.  So, we understand 40% of Earth’s composition is this silicon sand, so they can really be made dirt cheap.  So, as technology improves, that question will be obvious to be answered.  There’s a lot of study.  One report came out of the NRL — the National Renewable Laboratory — in Colorado; and it has some dedicated study on the payback of terrestrial solar.

As regarding your question on space solar; the study based on the late 1970 NASA/DOE, it’s contracted to Boeing study.  The report at that time, the solar component, solar elements is based on, of course, the old poly-silicon technology.  But right now, I was in close communication with the Swiss Institute of Technology; a professor in his laboratory has achieved more than 23% efficiency on synfilm.  Those are not very hard to produce, and also are radiation-proof and can be utilized in a space environment.  I recommend there’s a study group called the Solar High Study Group; it’s a group of people like myself and NASA retired engineers and some of the people who were project managers in the Apollo era back in the 1960s.  It’s a volunteer group; they probably should report answering like safety, conversion efficiency, payback, and cost of space solar.  So, a lot of countries already have programs for doing that; like the governments of Japan and China, and also NASA has some small programs they’re working on, on the transmission, we call WPT technology — wireless power transmission.  So, it’s called solarhigh.org; and if you google the material, you can see. Originally, I was going to give a much detailed, technical presentation; but on the flight from Houston I changed my mind. I said probably for this audience, maybe I should talk first and most; a lot of people haven’t heard about the space solar concept.  So, I have another presentation I did not really select to present it here.

SPEED:  Let me just say the following:  What I want to do is, I want to take some questions for Mr. LaRouche, because as I said, we’ve heard from people here.  Let’s do that first, and then other questions that follow.  So, does anyone have a question directly for Lyn?

Q:  Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche.  My name is R— K—; I’m from Old Towne, Maine.  And I’ve been following you for decades; and I’m glad you’re still here with us.  God bless you.  I’m 65 years old, but when I was going to school in 1971 in Wichita State University, a lot of things were happening in education. And that was the beginning of where we started studying the future.  Our textbook in that class about future change was about the dynamics of change.  And keep in mind that 20-year olds in that class were told that in 20 years’ time, we were going to have 4-day work weeks; gerontology work as a job creator; leisure activities — people should major in those, so that when people get older …  Pollution problems were going to be solved; everything was going to be great.  Twenty years later, I’m in a class at Bangor at the University of Maine, and I heard the same thing.  Well, now I’m 40 years older, and I’m not 20 years old anymore and naïve; and I’ve had a little experience.  Greed and corruption stops it every time.  And when we’re talking about talking about greed and corruption with all of this — space and whatever — it comes down to the petrodollar Ponzi scheme scam that has been foisted on this world.  And everybody who takes part in that, people think oil is just fuel; it’s textiles, it’s pesticides, herbicides, it’s pharmaceuticals, it’s everything. Everybody who’s making money off of that system wants it to continue; especially the ones at the top.  All this fighting that’s going on, the gas lines that wanted to go across Syria; blow Syria up.  The Libya, the gold dinar —

SPEED:  Excuse me, could you ask a question?

Q: cont’d:  They wanted to have a real, solid currency. Murder him.  If you don’t want to trade with the petrodollar, murder Saddam.  It just goes on and on.  We have to —

SPEED:  Excuse me, could ask a question?

Q: cont’d:  — attack the corruption of the Federal Reserve petrodollar Ponzi scheme scam.

SPEED:  Excuse me.

Q: cont’d:  The central banks are private banks; people don’t realize that, and we don’t talk about it.

SPEED:  Sir, you’re simply speaking.  Would you ask him a question?  [Q2 continues on, but mike is cut off.] Let me simply make a — hold on; let me just say something here.  Hold on.  Let me simply say something here.  We’ll have to shut the microphone down if you continue.

Let me say something to the audience, please.  This is a very serious gathering.  It’s not a circus.  If you have a question, please ask it; and ask it respectfully and be short, and hopefully have a thought when you get up to the microphone. Then, allow the speakers to respond.  OK, so Lyn?

LAROUCHE:  Yes, first of all, on this whole problem that was presented; what he was presenting in the course of his blast. First of all, these considerations are really irrelevant; that is, the types of considerations that he has defined are absolutely irrelevant.  But it’s based on an assumption which is a false assumption about the nature of mankind.  Now actually, mankind is a unique specimen; unlike any other known living creature.  Because only the human mind can create a new system of the physical system; and the physical system is to be determined by the action of the mental system.  That’s the way science actually works.  There are other interpretations, but they are mistaken.  It is the human mind, and the human mind alone, that is capable of generating a new physical state in the practice of the Solar System or any other such system.  Therefore, the idea of trying to make deductions from phenomena is a mistake.  There are relationships of phenomena to these kinds of things, but they are understood only in terms of their being an effect; not as being a cause.

Q:  Hi, Lyn; this is D— from Montreal.  I’ve been a full-time member for five years.  I just wanted to, based on what the organization has accomplished in terms of bringing people together in different parts of the world, bringing governments together; there was mention of the LaRouche Youth Movement, which to my knowledge was started in the year 2000 or something.  And we’ve obviously observed that we’re not getting younger, and the LaRouche Youth Movement is gotten older; but there’s always a new generation.  There’s always a new set of younger people.  The idea of who will be the next LaRouche Youth Movement generation, or whatever metamorphosis that takes; if you could say something about that.  And I just hearken back to what I know to be the history of when you started giving classes at Columbia University; where you were going to the school and actually addressing the students.  But with the idea — and I would give credit to the person if I remembered who it was — the idea that although we’re organizing people and we’re organizing them; it’s as important to see the people we’re organizing as organizers. And rather than us organizing them, we’re a tool, we’re a resource that they can come to, to help them organize in the schools, etc.  So, if you could say something on that.

LAROUCHE:  It’s wrong; there are aspects to that thing that are relevant.  But the principle that you present is wrong.  The character is, the humanity of mankind, is that the human individual, who has a voluntary creative power, in order to understand processes, is the individual, who actually efficientlydefines the destiny of the human species; not just in one person, but in terms, of the way of the practice of mankind among persons.  The usual interpretation of cause and effect in human behavior is wrong; it is the human mind’s creative powers, and the human mind has a very specific kind of creative powers.  And the creative powers of mankind are the source of the discovery of the principles of discovery, in themselves.

Otherwise, no; it doesn’t work.  You get all kinds of recipes, all kinds of stories; but none of them really work when you go down and test the matter in detail.

Q:  I’d just like to kind of bring up the subject of global warming and climate change.  Just in this sense:  I wonder if you, Mr. LaRouche, would agree that fossil fuels are comparatively — compared to where we are now — a very primitive form of energy generation.  And that as the population of the Earth increases, it’s hardly better than burning wood; we will simply not be able to sustain an advancing scientific civilization based on burning fossil fuels.  I think maybe you might agree with that, and that instead we have to look at the energy flux density; and say that we have to move on to something more advanced, such as nuclear fission, fusion, etc.  And how about something like this?  Pollution really is a big problem. Over there, they’re using coal fuels over in Beijing, and the smog is so horrible people can hardly live.  So, we do need to move on to something more advanced.

SPEED:  OK, so your question is about fossil fuels?

Q: cont’d:  Yes, but my other question is, can we avoid conflating that with this bizarre theory of global warming?  In other words, even if global warming is false — which I believe it is — nevertheless, don’t we need to progress to higher forms of energy generation?

LAROUCHE:  No, that’s not the way it works.  Take the case of human behavior first of all; and that simplifies what the issues are possibly.  First of all, all creativity of mankind is generated from the primary source of the creative powers of the human individual; not from some external source.  See, that’s what the difference is; what we call creativity in human behavior is the basis for the idea of what the principle of the human mind is.  The human mind is driven by a noetic power; that is, a creative power which is independent of the individual per se. But which some individuals are capable of discovering and using to develop new things.

For example, Einstein.  Now, Einstein is the only man who has succeeded so far in the past 100 years, in really understanding what is the basis of human behavior.  Einstein was unique in this respect; and in fact, in the recent 100 years, it has become obvious that he was right and the others were wrong. You see, the way society is organized, mankind is organized by mankind’s own actions; it is mankind’s generated actions that create the failures or successes of human behavior.  It is not something which you accept and experience by something that flew by you.  Very few people understand this; most people are wrong. They don’t understand how the human mind works.  The human mind is a creative process which is unique; and it is the human mind’s insight to principles, the discoveries of principles by the human mind, which creates the progress of mankind.

SPEED:  Very good.  That’s what I like to see; a man who’s been completely confused by the right answer.  [laughter]  We have another question over here.

Q:  Mr. LaRouche, I come from Queens.  My question is, what is the future of magnetic energy?

SPEED:  Negative energy?

Q:  Magnetic energy.

LAROUCHE:  This is not the way to look at it.  Everything that mankind does, accomplishes, everything that mankind as a species does, which no animal does.  See, no animal can replicate the role of the human mind; no animal can do that if the animal is functional.  And in fact, all of the greatest creative forces in the history of mankind are governed by those principles.  But the idea that you’re getting a practical approach to solutions is a mistake.  For example, the other kind works; it bounces.  You have people who are intrinsically themselves creative people; they discover principles.  They discover the experience of a principle, which may be their own achievement.  If they’re teased adequately, they will become more excited about what they have discovered; they will then turn around and try to lead an audience to recognize what they have discovered as a creative principle.  Now it’s the people who think creatively, successfully, who actually make everything good about the human species; the others tend to be not so good.

Q:  Hi, Lyn.  This is Ian Brinkley here, from Boston.  I was just thinking about how you’ve been responding to some of the questions here this afternoon, and it made me think of a particular problem which everybody who tries to engage in effective political organizing runs into.  Which is a certain kind of fear and anxiety which blocks the intention to convey a truthful idea when you see that you’re encountering an individual or a group of people who don’t understand something which they really need to understand.

LAROUCHE:  Yeah, most people have that problem; most people do have that problem.  And when you want to find out where the solution comes to, you have to look at the one case which is the most brilliant case of all:  Einstein.  Every physicist except Einstein was wrong on the crucial issues.  And only recently have people begun to admit that Einstein was right on the question of gravity.  So therefore, what you’re talking about is a principle of gravity; and it’s a principle of gravity whose characteristic is that it’s peculiar to mankind.  Einstein made discoveries which changed the course of the human species and change the course of history.  His mind did it.  It is the human mind, which when it is capable, which generates all of the great achievements of humanity.  And it’s often a minority of the human species which has the power to do that.

Q7:  Hello, Lyndon; this is A— from Montreal.  We all know that there’s a strong anti-growth movement; and they’re scared that if we use up all our material, we will gradually die.  And we know — Jason Ross gave us a great presentation on how our creativity can actually create new resources; like before nuclear power, it was not readily available.  We discovered that.  But this anti-growth movement will tell us, “Well, maybe our creativity will fail at one point.  Is there a limit to our creativity?  Is there one point where we will not be able to discover new things to replace our new technologies?”  To that, I usually answer, “Well, I prefer to believe that we will continue to discover; and I prefer not abandoning.”  But I wanted to know what would you say?  Do you have a better answer to that?

LAROUCHE:  I would say the point is, the truth of the matter is collectively, individually, all useful developments — expressions of the human mind — are peculiar to the human mind. Anything that’s valid, belongs to that category of human mind. Now what happens, this is not a perfect process; because you have a lot of people who make a lot of mistakes.  So therefore, the answer is, the effective result, the competent resultof the human mind’s work is to inspire a creativity which can be generated only by the human individual mind.

SPEED:  Let me just take a moment and ask if there’s anyone from the panel, who has anything that they want to add or say.

JASON ROSS:  I can say something; I hope you can hear me OK. One specific thing on — I’m at a real press conference, now. So, ladies and gentlemen, to answer the one thing about whether we’re going finish discovering things or not; I think that this goes to a theme that Mr. LaRouche has been bringing up a lot recently over the past couple of years.  Which is the approach of Bertrand Russell, and the 1900 shift in science; where, away from discovering totally new things, the practice of science increasingly became — at least officially — put in terms of “Can you derive your new thought in terms of what we already know?”  Where, what Russell tried to do in mathematics, to turn mathematics into logic, got also applied then to science in general.  And the opportunity to say, “Hey, we just don’t know everything yet; there is more to know,” got put aside.  Bertrand Russell had said in the 1890s, implicitly, that space couldn’t possibly be curved; and that properties of matter couldn’t be any different when you get into the very small.  So, in the 1890s, he said that the big discoveries of the 1900s would never happen; he said that there couldn’t be a quantum, and that there couldn’t be relativity.

So, in terms of the example of Einstein as having made a major discovery that overthrew what existed before; that didn’t add to it, but overthrew what had currently existed.  I think what he did as a personality was very important for thinking through what should science be?

KESHA ROGERS:  I think what is important to think about in this discussion that we’re having right now is, that we’re not dealing with a practical political debate.  It’s not about up and down votes, and opinions and whether or not you agree or disagree on a political view.  But you have to understand that this conference and this panel in particular, is so important, there’s very dividing issues on this panel, because Mr. LaRouche had something much more fundamental, on the question of, this is a human debate!  And I just think about the fact that you take Krafft Ehricke, and I mentioned him earlier, had a very profound concept of this idea of closed world system, versus an open world system.  And right now we’re still debating and living in a closed world system, that cannot achieve the type of creative goals and breakthroughs, and which is necessary for mankind to foster its true creative potential.  That’s what you have to get at.  So if you don’t think your questions are being answered, it’s because you are still stuck in that closed system, and you have to get out of it! [applause]

And so, when I called for a space — and I hope to accomplish this — an international space panel, I wanted to take up this very fight, this very question that doesn’t exist in our political arena right now!  And I ask the scientists, where are the politicians?  They are not responding to real science; that’s why I’m up here.  That’s why Mr. LaRouche and I are collaborating and working on this fight.

And so, just the last thing I want to say, is, Mr. LaRouche is bringing up the genius of Einstein, and he more recently talked about the creative genius of Brunelleschi, and I’d like for him to expound on that a little bit more.  Because when we’re talking about the process of creating these new cities, beautiful cities, creating a commitment to space, I think that’s the example we have to use.  And the point being, is, Mr. LaRouche is talking about fostering a conception which most people don’t think of, most people don’t think of themselves as having, which is, genius, being genius, creating genius, having your children become genius.  You can’t do that in this society!  It doesn’t foster it.  And we have to do that here, today. [applause]

TOM WYSMULLER: I could piggyback on something Jason talked about.  He talked about Bertrand Russell saying that basically most of the science is behind us.  When Einstein applied for a job at the patent office, and he worked as a patent clerk for a while, his boss told him, “there’s no future here, because everything that’s going to be invented already has.”  [laughter] So — that’s the truth.

Now, these days, you’re hearing a lot of stuff on the climate, and I want to address one of the questioners, that “the science is settled”!  Well, guess what?  It’s not settled! We’re getting new data every day about climate!  We’re learning things, we’re learning relationships that we didn’t know.  And you need tolook at the data.  And that’s one of the things that NASA’s been pretty helpful in, is provided the data.  It’s the people who areinterpreting it, and saying that there’s no questions left to ask, that are on the wrong side of that issue.

So, keep your minds open, keep your target toward Mars, and I do want to apologize:  because I was trying to cut my presentation short, I didn’t tell you how to avoid the parking ticket.  [laughter]  But! What I have in the back window of my car is a sticker and it says, “Get Your Ass to Mars!”  [laughter] I was overtime in a parking zone in New York City, they have alternate side of the street parking;  and the policeman’s walking up behind the car, looks at the sticker; he’s about to write me a ticket.  But then he engages in a conversation about it, and he finds out why I had the sticker there.  And he didn’t give me a ticket.

Q:  Hi, my name is A—.  I feel very honored to be here. I’m from Brooklyn.  Something that I do want to say that’s always stuck very close to me, was, an instructor once said to me, while studying Buddhism, “to a beginner, there are many possibilities, but to an expert there are few.”

Now I’m a beginner, and I’d like to keep a beginner’s mind. I know nothing; I come open, but something I did come to understand from NASA’s data, is that there is space junk.  For the past 60 years, we have been throwing manmade junk into space. Is there a way to pick up where we left off and make use and harness this space junk?

LAROUCHE:  Science.  Actual, efficient science!  And you may not be able to get a perfect correction of what the scientific principle is, but you can get closer and closer to it by experiencing your own errors, in judgment.

But the point is, nonetheless, that it is the human individual mind which is the only competent authority for solving these problems.  Now, some people are not as efficient in making these discoveries or development, but nonetheless, the human being is not an animal.  And the usual interpretation of human behavior, is based on the presumption, that mankind is an animal.  And that’s when the mistakes are made.

Q:  I completely agree by the way, with Lyndon LaRouche about the human mind.  But for the same reason, I don’t understand why such names is Tesla, for example, who is at least, maybe in my eyes the same level as Einstein; the great inventor of free energy.  Nobody spoke about, by the way, nobody spoke about numerous free energies, carry energy; we never hear about it.  The latest has to do with cold fusion and [inaudible 37.47] — you know, my memory’s not very good about it.  It’s a major breakthrough, but nobody mentioned it.  And I don’t know why, because, although it’s not very widely publicized, but it’s accessible.  I mean the majority of these guys  — same destiny: two or three people appeared in the whole — [crosstalk] against the United States of America, and they can be put in prison unless they turn over the discoveries.  [inaudible] turned over, and then they were closely watched and maybe something could happen to them.

SPEED:  Excuse I think we’re going to have to have your question repeated so we can all understand it.

DIANE SARE:  You’re asking about the cold fusion?

Q: [follow-up] Cold fusion is not basically it, but that was not mentioned either.  But there are so many new and newer inventions which were mentioned by LaRouche, and you know, people may believe that that’s all that’s available, that was presented

SARE:  I think he’s asking about many inventions that have been discovered but have not been made available because there’s a kind of Gestapo that prevents this from being allowed to be known.

Is that the idea?  Yeah.

Q: [follow-up] And among them is Tesla’s inventions…

LAROUCHE:  I don’t think in a functional way, this is not a proper question.  But however, there are cases where the individual who’s trying to follow something, may not be able to make the efficient connection between the two facts of relationship.

But all creativity, of mankind, that is of mankind as a social process, is based on a principle which is unique to the human individual mind.  Now some people don’t have an adequate development, of the human mind, but if they’re educated properly they can.  The case of Einstein is clear.  Einstein is, as you know,  an entire century has passed; Einstein has proven that his way of thinking, on the basis of his way of thinking, — not on the basis of some design, but on the basis of his way of thinking, made a discovery, which has proven and upset everybody.

So the point is, you have to understand that the source of creative powers of the human individual, lies within the human individual not within that nature.

SPEED:  Let me say before we go to the next question; someone on the dais here, pointed out that questions begin with words like, “who, what, why” [laughter], “which?”  You know, the problem of the age of Donald Trump has apparently visited the United States with a vengeance!  So, please:  Use the interrogative when you come to the microphone!  Thank you.

Q:  Mr. LaRouche, my name is K— S—, I’m from Baltimore, Maryland.  I was really overwhelmed by [Egyptian Consul who spoke in the morning panel] Mr. Farouk, and, Egypt, and the way they handled getting into the Land-Bridge thing.  Why can’t we do that as Americans?  Start our own fund, instead of waiting for the United States to turn around and say, “let’s get on board?”  Why can’t we do this like Egypt did [in financing the New Suez Canal] and tell the United States or our government to back out and let us just take it on ourselves?

LAROUCHE:  Well, you know the problem is, most of the members of the establishment in the United States today, are crooks.  And they have strong opinions!  And they believe in those opinions, or they pretend to believe in those opinions. And they do it, and they’re scattered all over the place.

So you’ll need something a little bit better than that.  And you’ve got to understand one thing:  The question is, is the mind of a scientist — specifically a scientist — is the mind of a scientist, or an especially good scientist, is his opinion or her opinion, is it or is it not, the source of the discovery of a principle which is otherwise not discovered?  That’s the issue.

Now, some people are better at that business and others are less good at that principle, but that’s the principle. The entirety of mankind’s success, as mankind, depends upon the creative powers, specific to some specific, individual human beings, —  or else they’re wrong!  That’s your alternative.

The medicine that is presented, is it correct or is it not? And all the important things in science, all the important things in human individual knowledge, depend upon the validity of these kinds of discoveries.  Without that, maybe we’ll get accidentally lucky or something, that does happen;  but the question is, when it comes to an actual principle, the creative principle, an efficiently creative principle, is actually generateduniquely by the mind of a human individual.  Now that individual may make mistakes; but the question of that individual’s ability, to make a discovery of that type, is what’s crucial. And some people are good at it; some of them are not perfect at it.  But the whole basis of the human process of human progress, depends upon that principle.  Otherwise, you’ve got nothing but animals!

SPEED:  We have 15 minutes left for questions, so please be questionable.  Try to state very clearly what is on your alleged mind.  [laughter]

Q: I’m very questionable.  This is more of a social scientific question, I guess.  We have many enemies to genius, and you’ve come up against your share in your lifetime, so I guess this is more of a social science question in terms of, do you have any insight, or principle we might use to overcome this fear-based life that we were brought up in? I mean, where we’ve seen genius thwarted time again.  So we’re here to bring something home where we can begin to instigate change. Any insights on that?

LAROUCHE:  The only insight is, that the educational system of the United States is lousy.  It could be improved!

Q:  Hi, Mr. LaRouche, I’m A— S— from Baltimore, Maryland. I totally agree with your creative moment and the individual. What is your position on synchronization of individual creative effort [crosstalk] in terms of a mastermind community?

LAROUCHE:  Oh, the problem is what happens is often we’ll find, we don’t know which end starts first sometimes.  You sometimes get a child who turns out to be a genius, and that’s a discovery.  And then you find somebody who is supposedly a leading scientist who’s a bum!  So therefore, you have to understand that there are categories that you have to learn to be familiar with, in order to discern which person is probably likely right, or at least right to have an opinion.

And that, the important thing, it’s very important for all mankind, to have access to human minds which are able to deliver maybe not just from the start, but from somewhere in the process; who are able to actually understand something which is tantamount to an original human principled discovery.  That’s what the whole thing is based upon.  That’s what every scientist does who’s competent.  The scientist will work and sweat and do all these kinds of things they do, in order to achieve something which is truth.  And what they’re trying to do is understand what the truth is of the matter.

And the whole system, of success of society, and cultures as such, depends upon the ability of some people, to make progress in discovery of human principles, absolute human principles, which are uniquely human.  In other words you cannot fake it; you cannot fake that. You cannot fake any kind of principle; you have to actually work, and fight your way through and find out, what the truth is.

And Einstein, for example, is an ideal example of the kind of person in society, who is capable of making those kinds of discovered things.

Q: Hey, Mr. LaRouche, my name is M—.  So, I just want to address some things that this gentleman said and a couple other people said, in regards to what’s kind of going on out there in the world.  I do have a question, I just have a few statements beforehand.

SPEED:  Make them very few.

Q: [follow-up] This lady here [rogers], I’m sorry I don’t know your name, on the panel.  You’re beautiful.  You said something along the lines of thinking outside the box, and we don’t want to get into this other stuff that’s going on.  But the fact of the matter is, it’s real.  There is a Gestapo like organization, there are these banks, there are these stuff going on, and in my humble opinion, I disagree that we shouldn’t be focussing on it, because I think it’s possible, and not just possible, I think it’s probable, that the fire out there, that these people, these greedy, corrupt, — I’ll just call it the fire — will eat us alive, and burn us alive before we have the chance to go out to Mars and do these things.  And that’s just my opinion, I think we need to really focus on that.  So my question is why would we not focus on that?  Why would we not get down to the bottom of that and really address these criminals and these thugs?

LAROUCHE:  Because the influence of the society’s culture, destroys the ability of the human being, the individual, in many cases, to be responsible.

We should educate our people better and treat them more kindly.

SPEED:  Kesha has something she wants to say.

ROGERS:  Just quickly, in response to the young man’s question. I think the point is, we are addressing it. We’re addressing it directly and we’re going after the enemy of humanity and human progress, by getting you to first recognize that the threat is to your humanity.  And yeah, the discussion has already been had, that we have a Wall Street criminal apparatus; the imperial powers of the London British Empire that stands in antithesis to that creative power and threat.

So, until you’ve destroyed that, until you’ve rid society of that threat, but you have to know what you’re going to rid it with, which is, with this conception and understanding of who we are as human beings, you’re right, we do have a problem. [applause]

Q:  Hi my name is R—M— of Goshen, New York.  I just wanted to ask you, if you could mention a few things on Louis Pasteur? On understanding and curing diseases and stuff?

LAROUCHE:  It’s a similar kind of thing.  Louis Pasteur was a genius.  He was a genius in terms of biology, and many other ways.  He actually was very variegated, in terms of his disposition for discovery.  And he’s really a great figure.  And he’s a most honorable figure.

Q:  I think you’re absolutely right, that people have to understand that even Einstein took a role of the threat of nuclear warfare, or warfare as such.  And I think your comments of direction of learning what Einstein knew, I think that’s pretty much the aspect that I’m taking on, myself.  So obviously, it’s a role that I think you’re playing very well.  I wanted to see if you could promote in some way, or form — to tell people basically, this is the only way that mankind will save itself.

LAROUCHE:  Well, no, you know, I’ve had quite a history in my lifetime, coming from  a fairly obscure background from military service, and going into all kinds of prestigious positions.  And therefore, my family, my wife and others, represent a part of a circle which is very important, and which is quite valid and which is very influential in many parts of the planet.

We have these skills, we don’t usually just go running around and talking about “I’ve got a skill, I’ve got a skill.” But you know that you have some skills, and you have proven them, as I have done many times.  And therefore, when I say I know something and argue it, I’m not fooling around, I’m just stating that I know on the basis of proven facts.  And that’s what I stick to.  And I’m also quite a fighting person; I’m a little old now, for fighting purposes, but I have done a lot of that sort of thing, in terms of political terms.  And this is part of what I do.

But I know, from my own standpoint, that I know what I’m doing in terms of science, insofar as I present a claim on science, I’m correct, because I’m experience; and a lot of other people aren’t.  So they should get some advantage in that.

Q: It’s an honor to be here, and Mr. LaRouche, it’s an honor to get a chance to ask you a question.  I’m from Boston, Mass., and my question is, how do we pursue new technology without losing the reliability of old technology?  Because it seems like all around the world, people are kind of stuck in a comfort zone with things that they know work, and don’t necessarily make the leap to newer technologies because of the lack of understanding and the lack of reliability being that it’s new technology.

LAROUCHE:  Your reference to a lazy mind, not coming up to a standard, is really the appropriate thing.  People will say, “I feel more comfortable, with what I think and the smell I exude, than I would anything else.”  And therefore they like to smell themselves and feel that that smell is the good smell; and they’ll just walk away from everything with that, without considering what the proper smell of the animal should have been. And if it runs into a skunk, well, that’s what the result is. [applause]

SPEED:  [laughs]  We’re going to take a final question, and then ask for summaries from the panel. And then we’ll be concluding.  Sir?

Q:  Hi Lyn, how’re you?  I have two questions:  Number 1: Do you write your goals down with pen and paper? And number 2, would be: What are those goals that you still have left?

LAROUCHE:  I do not.  I don’t need to.  If I thought I would, if there are occasions when somebody tries to give me a passage and essentially explain for it, then I’ll probably investigate and find out what the principle is.  But in the normal course of events, no, I don’t have any problem with that.

SPEED:  OK, let me ask if there’s any summary remarks?  If anybody from the panel first of all, wants to say anything, and then we’ll go to Lyn.

WYSMULLER:  Kind of paraphrasing in answer to the young lady who said when she was young, everything was possible, and then as she got older she found it wasn’t.  Well, the truth is, as you get wiser, you find out again, that there is much more to find out in the universe than you’ve ever dreamed of.  And I’m going to  close with a quote from Isaac Newton, I’m paraphrasing, but he said:  My life has been like a child walking along the beach, picking up one colored rock of sand and examining it and finding out something about it; and then finding another — while the great ocean of undiscovered truth lay before me.

We have a lot more to learn.  We have a lot more to learn.

SPEED:  OK Jason!  OK Jason!  [laughter]

ROSS:  Well, you know.  To be honest, I didn’t have any — I had a lot of specific thoughts on some of the specific questions. The only general thing I think would make sense, I imagine as a contribution would be, that, it’s just really important to develop a culture in this way. I mean, this evening, we’re going to be having a panel on musical — what we typically call “culture.”  Music, poetry, etc.

There’s also a culture to science. And it’s very easy to look at the fruits of science, or its effects, or what it does for you, and neglect the fact that there’s a whole culture to the practice of science:  How did it get made?  What were the people who figured things out like?  How did they think?

And I think that there’s as much  —  I won’t compare — there’s a great deal of beauty and insight that we can gather from that, just like we do with typical culture.  And that we need to have both of those, culturally, living in us.

SPEED:  Kesha?

ROGERS:  Well, I think I will end by saying that most of you came here today, because you know that our society is in grave danger, and we’re facing a grave threat to our existence as human beings, and want to do something about it.  And so, I think if you take the discussion that we’ve had here today, and will continue to have, you know, this idea of fostering a Renaissance for mankind, what is the requirement of mind, to truly bring that about?  And I think that — I just want to say that, for those of you who will be staying, and I encourage you to do so, the next panel discussion and presentations, gets at that very fundamental question.  As we look at what is necessary to inspire beauty in our society, we have to actually rid ourselves of this — as Jason said — of this culture of degeneracy, of ugliness, and that’s why, when Mr. LaRouche brings up Einstein, you know, you think about, Einstein knew that the fostering of his creative mind was also the participation in the beauty of great art, of great Classical music.

And the way that you dumb down a society is to take away that potential for what makes us human, what makes us beautiful. And so that’s what you should take from this conference.  And be inspired to go out there and organize your communities.  Because we have people represented here, of all different backgrounds, that in other countries, wouldn’t be sitting together at all! But we have a responsibility, here in the United States to foster something that is what the United States was actually organized and created around in the first place.  What our Founding Fathers had intended.

I was out in the hallway just a moment ago and someone said, “You know, it’s nice to hear all of this discussion about the great things that China and Russia, and various other countries are doing — but, you know, what about the United States?”  Well, that’s up to you!  What about the United States?  What are we going to do?  How’re we going to make the United States represent the greatness of who we are, as what we have fostered from the standpoint of, why China looked to the United States at one point in time as a great beacon of hope, under President Franklin Roosevelt?

And so, the United States has to join in this new mission, as I said, in fostering this new Renaissance, and this has to be taken as something real in all of our minds. [applause]

SPEED:  So, Lyn do you have any final remarks?

LAROUCHE: Just the fact that I’ve learned a little bit from what people do as opinions, again from this experience here; which is highly variegated, of course, in terms of the composition of the whole.  But some people get really fretful, about protecting their something-or-other, and that is a little bit problematic at times. But I think it’ll clear its way out.

SPEED:  OK.  I’d like to say to everyone that may be here for the first time, for some of you, who have never been in a dialogue with Lyndon LaRouche before:  This is the LaRouche experience! [laughter, applause] He may not even like the fact that I call it that, but for those of us who’ve been doing this with Lyn for 45, or 46 years as I have, it’s always new, it’s always challenging; it’s always fun, and it’s always damned irritating.  [laughter]

That concludes our panel for now.


What must be said in conclusion is that this conference marked a victory for an idea of Lyndon LaRouche’s: that of the Manhattan Project which he unveiled in October, 2014. Yet at that time, as Einstein famously wrote of Kepler in 1930 at the third centenary of his death, he was “supported by no one and understood by very few.” Lyndon LaRouche, the inventor of the Strategic Defense Initiative, and later the inventor, with his wife, of the Eurasian Land-Bridge, had once more invented a new and wholly different original idea. Again it has proven true.

Panel II


Panel III


Manhattan Project

Building a World Land-Bridge – Realizing Mankind’s True Humanity

Visit the page


 

 


EIR Seminar in Frankfurt on New Silk Road for Mideast and Africa

The seminar, “Solving the Economic and Refugee Crises with the New Silk Road!” organized by EIR in cooperation with the Consulate General of Ethiopia in Frankfurt, was attended by an audience of 75, consisting of representatives of several diplomatic offices, of subscribers and contacts of EIR in the region, and about 10 Syrians (students as well as refugees waiting for enrollment at universities). Several contacts even came from as far away as Berlin, and cities in Switzerland. Extending over the entire afternoon, the seminar featured presentations by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, chairwoman of the Schiller Institute; Hussein Askary, EIR Arabic Editor, Stockholm; Mehreteab Mulugeta Haile, Consul General Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia; Marcello Vichi, former Director, Foreign Department Bonifica company, author of the Transaqua concept; Andrea Mangano, Vice President, Italian Association of Water Engineers and contributor to the Transaqua outline. The speakers were joined by Mohammed Bila, Lake Chad Basin Commission, and Ulf Sandmark, Schiller Institute Stockholm and Swedish-Syrian Committee for Democracy, for an expanded panel in the second part of the seminar. The seminar was moderated by Claudio Celani of the EIR‘s European center in Wiesbaden.

In her keynote, Helga Zepp-LaRouche stressed that this would not be an academic seminar but rather a discussion about the fact that in this existential crisis of mankind, shown by the refugee crisis, the wars and the financial crash, solutions are within reach and must be realized now. In the wake of the terror attacks in Brussels yesterday, it is more than appropriate to recall former U.S. Senator Bob Graham’s statement of mid-November last year after the terror attacks in Paris then, that had the classified 28 pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 been made public, such atrocities could and would have been prevented.

It is beyond any doubt that the Russian military intervention in Syria changed the rules of game, that it exposed the role of that pro-IS alliance of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United States, and United Kingdom, and particular that of Turkey, whose policies have been attacked harshly by two former U.S. ambassadors to Ankara. The EU agreement with Turkey on the refugees is a travesty which fits in the general picture of Western and U.S. human rights violations which have just been exposed in a Chinese dossier. Whereas the West is talking about an insanity like “helicopter money” to save its own speculative banks, the Chinese “One Belt, One Road” initiative presents a real-economic offer for a win-win strategy; that is, not just in the interest of China but also of the other nations–and real development only will help to dry out terrorism. Either Europe works with Russia, China, India, Iran, Egypt, and other nations to launch a Marshall Plan for Syria and Africa, or its bankrupt economies will crash against the wall, Mrs. Zepp-LaRouche said.

askary-frankfurt

Hussein Askary from EIR, Arabic translator of “The New Silk Road becomes the World Land-bridge”.

Presenting the EIR World Land-Bridge report in its first Arabic translation, Hussein Askary reported that as this seminar was being held in Frankfurt, an event presenting the Arabic report was also taking place in Yemen today under conditions of continued Saudi airstrikes of Yemeni cities. The idea of the New Silk Road is more than just building a few roads and railroads; it is a concept of development corridors improving the life of some 450 million people in the Southwest Asian region, with Syria being at the center. This involves mega-projects of rapid development, financed by national development banks free of the obligation of paying the debt as demanded by the Western monetarist institutions. Like Egypt, Syria will focus on industrial zones, transport corridors and agricultural development, with China showing the way with its massive infrastructural engagement for instance in East Africa.

The Ethiopian Consul-General followed with a presentation on the economic strategy of his country, characterized by policies that have greatly improved the per-capita income, literacy rate, and public health care since the 1990s. With an envisaged annual GDP growth of 11%, Ethiopia wants to become a middle-income level country by 2025, made possible by opportunities for Ethiopians to set up a farm or shop at the price that many pay today to human traffickers to be brought to Europe as refugees. Ethiopia, itself, is the largest refugee host in Africa, with 800,000 refugees from South Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea taken in–a fact that nobody in Europe talks about. Ethiopia will be transformed from a primary-products exporter to a nation with high-value production and infrastructure, and the country’s cooperation with Russia, China, India, and Brazil in rail projects is important in this context.

Marcello Vichi then gave a review of the history of the Transaqua Project discussion during the past 35 years, from the first proposals presented by Italy’s Bonifica company 1982-1985, to African governments as well as the United Nations, pointing to a transfer of water from the giant Congo River as the only viable option for refilling Lake Chad. The proposal has largely been met with disinterest or pessimism as to the chance of its realization, has been discarded as allegedly “megalomaniac,” but the recent refugee streams have made Europe rethink its views, and Transaqua, which has always been more than just water for Chad — rather the broader framework for the development of entire Central Africa — is the only option that can attract the young generation of African labor force not to become refugees.

vichi-frankfurt

Marcello Vichi reviews the 35 year history of the Transaqua Project.

mangano-frankfurt

Marcello Vichi introducing Andrea Mangano as a leading proponent of the Transaqua project.

 

Andrea Mangano then gave an overview of what Lake Chad was 35 years ago and what it is now, with 90% of its water lost. It shares the problem with other evaporating inland lakes in the world that are no longer supplied by their traditional tributaries–the Aral Sea, Lake Urmia, Lake Turikana, the Dead Sea. The only thing that improves the situation is water transfer and reduced consumption by irrigation via new technologies. This is done by Transaqua, which will tap 5% of the water from the upper tributaries of the Congo River, which is otherwise flowing away unused into the Atlantic Ocean at volumes 14 times the water of Germany’s biggest river, the Rhine. Refilling the lake will be done with infrastructure construction that will give the entirety of Central Africa hydropower, irrigation for agriculture, and waterway transport, and relieve the region from its present land-locked situation.

Mohammed Bila elaborated on the Transaqua issue in the expanded panel, pointing to the big and ongoing migration wave southwards from Chad, since the huge drought of 1973 during which the Lake Chad already lost 40% of its water. The farmers and their cattle that have migrated to the south, will not return to Chad unless the lake is refilling, and unless the terrorist movement of Boko Haram has been crushed.

Ulf Sandmark reported on his two visits to Syria in 2014 and 2015, during which it became evident that the reconstruction of Syria actually implies the development of the entire Southwest Asia region, making it an integral part of the New Silk Road–to which he found the Syrians open-minded, and when the “Phoenix” reconstruction plan drafted back in Stockholm was presented to the Syrians during the second visit, it received broad coverage in the country’s media.

The discussion between the audience and the panelists featured more aspects of what was said in the presentations, ranging from the genocidal tradition of the British Empire which has sabotaged real development in Africa and Mideast, the hopelessness of the monetarist system, and the increased threat of a thermonuclear world war if the chance of changing course in the direction of cooperation with the New Silk Road is not taken by Europe and the United States; that it is a race of time to enter a new paradigm before the total collapse destroys everything. Also, that contrary to Western black propaganda, China is not engaged in Ethiopia for raw materials, since Ethiopia has none, but instead is a real partner for development. Zepp-LaRouche repeatedly insisted during the discussion that the participants of this Frankfurt seminar take home with them the commitment to set fire to the behinds of the policy-makers to get things fundamentally changed, that a real mass movement for development has to be created. Vichi made a passionate appeal to be optimistic as a must for people so that things can be changed. A new and creative image of man, as it was developed in the great Italian Renaissance, is required also today, Celani pointed out. Sandmark also insisted that the New Silk Road is not just for engineers but for everyone to study at more seminars and chapter meetings. The first chapter meeting on the Arabic language report in Yemen today was actually being presided over by the leading poet of that country, Askary added.

 

 

 


Egyptian Transportation Minisitry sponsored launching of Arabic version of EIR’s “World Land Bridge” Report

EIR‘s Southwest Asia specialist and Arabic editor, Hussein Askary, has concluded a very successful one-week trip to Egypt to launch and promote the Arabic translation of EIR‘s Special Report The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge, and the ideas within the report. The report and the presentations made by Askary were enthusiastically welcomed by top government officials, economists, and media.

The highpoint of this intervention was the very high-level and well-attended launching of the Report under the auspices of the Egyptian Ministry of Transport in a seminar on March 17 at the headquarters of the Ministry, presided and introduced by Minister Saad El Geyoushi personally.

trans-minister

Egyptian Ministry of Transport Minister Saad El Geyoushi.

The other highpoint was the reception awarded Askary on March 20 by the Chairman of the Suez Canal Authority, Admiral Mohab Mamish, the man who oversaw the breathtaking building of the New Suez Canal. Mamish received Askary at his office in Ismailia right on the Suez Canal, and attentively listened to a detailed briefing on the importance of this achievement not only for Egypt’s economy, but also for the region and the global economy, too, if it is utilized as a development zone and hub for the development corridors stretching from China through Southwest Asia to Africa, and also as part of the Maritime Silk Road.

hussien-egypt_0

Hussein Askary with Admiral Mohab Mamish, Chairman of the Suez Canal Authority.

Askary’s meeting with Mamish, in which the latter received a gift copy of the report, was preceded by a presentation to the team working under Eng. Nagy Ahmed Amin, Director of Planning, and Research Studies Department at the Suez Canal Authority. Askary was later offered a private guided boat tour of the New Suez Canal.

At the launching seminar at the Transportation Ministry, Dr. Saad El Geyoushi personally presented Askary, as the Southwest Asia specialist of EIR and representative of the Schiller Institute, and in both his introductory remarks and commentary on Askary’s presentation, Dr. El Geyoushi expressed total concordance with the idea of the New Silk Road, and his government’s plans to integrate Egypt’s transportation networks into the New Silk Road dynamic. He also took the opportunity to announce that the Egyptian government intends to invest one trillion Egyptian Pounds (100 billion US$) in roads and railways, not only to develop Egypt’s transportation network, but also to connect Egypt to Asia, and, most importantly, to Africa to the south, in a 50,000 km network.

The packed hall at the Ministry hosted top experts and advisors of the Ministry and other institutions, and several Egytian TV networks and newspapers. Interestingly, the Chinese Arabic TV channel CCTV-Arabic, was present, and recorded an interview with Askary. Two other TV channels also interviewed Askary.

Two other seminars were organized: one by the Egyptian Society of Engineers (founded in 1920), which was held at the Cairo Great Library, and attended by former Egyptian Prime Minister Dr. Esam Sharaf (also a former Minister of Transport in several Egyptian governments), who was the main commentator on Askary’s presentation of the New Silk Road concept. Sharaf expressed his agreement with not only the economic and scientific aspects of the presentation and the report, of which he received a copy, but also with the political, strategic and cultural aspects, too.

seminar-egypt

Hussein Askary At Cairo Great Library.

sharaf-hussein

Hussein Askary With Egypt’s former Prime Minister Esam Sharaf at the Cairo Great Library.

He stated that he had just returned from a long visit to China, and that he deeply believed that the New Silk Road is the foundation of a new and more humane World Order, unlike the current order which has degraded human existence and dignity. He also emphasized the point raised in the report, that the New Silk Road and any other such projects are not mere trade routes, but development corridors that can transform all societies where they reach, along with the nations that decide to participate in them. He highly recommended that the current Egyptian government take this project seriously, and integrate it in its developmental plans and visions. Sharaf expressed his gratitude to EIR and the LaRouches personally, whom, he said he has taken note of, with their ideas and activities for a long time.

In addition to these events, Askary was invited to three TV shows (CBC Extra, Nile Cultural TV, and Nahdha TV) to present the report and the New World Order it represents.

The events taking place this week and all the discussions and debates that followed, clearly indicate that the idea of the New Silk Road and World Land-Bridge, and the utilization of these ideas for the development of Egypt, the Arab World, and Africa, is regarded as a way to save the Egyptian economy, which has been suffering the terrible consequences of submitting to the Transatlantic system and its institutions, such as the World Bank and IMF. Egypt is still suffering economically and socially, in addition to the security aspect that has been worsened by NATO’s unleashing of the Jihadist terrorist hordes in the region. The urgent demands of the people for reform and betterment of the living conditions are pushing the President Abdel Fattah El Sisi and his Prime Minister to resort at times to crisis-management policies. At the moment this report is written, the Egyptian government is facing a new reshuffling, with eight ministers reportedly being replaced. But the clarity of vision regarding the solutions to this crisis, and the resilience and determination shown by the Egyptian people and their leadership, represent a great hope for this nation and the region.

EIR-Arabic-Chinese-English-snap

EIR Special Report “The New Silk Road Becomes The World Land-Bridge” available here >>


Egyptian Transportation Minisitry sponsored launching of Arabic version of EIR’s World Land Bridge Report (Initial Report)

Cairo, March 17 — The Egyptian Transportation Ministry sponsored an event to launch the Arabic translation of the EIR Special Report “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land Bridge” today at the headquarters of the Ministry in Cairo. Transportation Minister Dr. Saad El Geyoushi personally headed the seminar and presented Hussein Askary, as the Southwest Asia specialist from EIR (Executive Intelligence Review) and representative of the Schiller Institute. Both in his introductory remarks and commentary on Askary’s presentation, Dr. El Geyoushi expressed total concordance with the idea of the New Silk Road, and his government’s plans to integrate Egypt’s transportation networks to the New Silk Road dynamic. He also stated that the Egyptian government is intending to invest EGP 1 trillion Egyptian pounds ($100 billion) in roads and railways, not only to develop Egypt’s transportation network, but also to connect Egypt to Asia and most importantly to Africa to the south.

179

175

Hussein Askary, introduced as the Southwest Asia specialist from EIR (Executive Intelligence Review) and representaive of the Schiller Instutute, seated to the left of the Minister.
source: soutalomma.com

A packed hall hosted top experts and advisers of the ministry and other institutions, and several Egyptian TV and newspapers. Interestingly, the Chinese Arabic TV channel CCTV-Arabic, was present and taped an interview with Askary. Two other TV channels also interviewed him.

There are still few media reports, as the event took place in the evening.

178

Official website: http://www.soutalomma.com/158464

 


Arabic Daily Hails Zepp-LaRouche’s Role In New Silk Road

The Arabic-language newspaper Al-Ittihad in the United Arab Emirates published a column by Mohammed Aref, a science and technology consultant, on Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran, congratulating the New Silk Road Lady—Helga ZeppLaRouche—and the Schiller Institute for this new visionary policy.

The column, titled “China’s 51st Century” (according to China’s record of its history), gives a poetic and exciting image of the tour by President Xi to the region and of China’s emphasis on the New Silk Road and economic development in its policy declaration.

In 1997, Aref was the first Arab journalist to write a full-page review of EIR’s first Eurasian Land-Brige Report, in the London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat, of which he was the Scientific Editor.

After debunking the argument that China’s economy is in decline, Aref states: “China is redrawing the map of the world, turning the seven continents into six by making Asia and Europe one continent. ‘Let the world be, for no one can succeed in conquering the world and changing it,’ as the Chinese saying goes, and as expressed by the Chinese Foreign Ministry Arab Policy Paper which was issued last week, in which is revived the Silk Road, which used to link Chinese with the Arab world for more than 2,000 years. The road of Chinese wisdom is like the a ‘Silk Road’ which connects the greatest continental AsianEuropean landmass, and extends to the shores of the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic oceans through infrastructure for agriculture, industry, trade, technology, science and culture.”

In his concluding paragraph, Aref reports ZeppLaRouche’s historic role:

“‘The Arab-Asian Land-Bridge: The Pulsating Heart of the New Silk Road’ was the title of my report in a London newspaper in November 1997, and I never imagined then that this project, which was designed by the Schiller Institute, would be adopted by China and that the Chinese President would bring it with him to the Arab region this week. Last September, Beijing celebrated the release of the Chinese translation of the new report, ‘The Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge.’ In the next month the Arabic translation of the report will be published, and is prepared by Hussein Askary, the Iraqi member of the Schiller Institute, which was established by the German Academician Helga LaRouche, who is called by the Chinese ‘The Silk Road Lady,’ because she paved the way for the New Silk Road through hundreds of conferences and scientific and political seminars, and she ‘established the concept of the Eurasian Land-Bridge as a war prevention tool,’ according to the Chinese Scholar Deng Yifan. Helga LaRouche and China are like the woman, about whom the Chinese proverb states: ‘The female always surpasses the male by her calmness, and she becomes fruitful even in her silence.’ And the other proverb: The Great Country is like the lower part of the river, where the earth of the world meets the female of the world [Daodejing, Chapter 61—ed.].”

Aref’s column can be found here (in Arabic).


Ukrainian Government in Chaos, Leftist Opposition Appeals against Police-State Repression

by Rachel Douglas

23 Feb.—With Russian President Vladimir Putin’s dramatic Feb. 22 announcement of agreement between Russia and the United States on joint enforcement of a ceasefire in Syria, it is natural to ask: but, what about Ukraine? There is more than one potential trigger point for a global showdown and world war, and in recent weeks, the United States and NATO have announced plans for a huge build-up of forces in Eastern Europe, keyed off Ukraine as allegedly exemplary of “Russian aggression.”

As Ukraine marks twin anniversaries this month, that “What about…?” question remains wide open. Ukraine, and not its eastern regions alone, could explode in violence at any moment. The night of Feb. 21-22 was the second anniversary of the 2014 coup d’état, when elected President Victor Yanukovych fled Kiev in fear for his life, as crowds dominated by openly fascist armed bands threatened to storm his offices. One year later, on Feb. 11, 2015, all-night negotiations in the Belarusian capital among Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, French Prime Minister Francois Holland and German Chancellor Angela Merkel led to the “Minsk-2” accords, calling a halt to the civil conflict in eastern Ukraine, the Donbass region, in which thousands had died and more than a million became refugees. The Minsk accords, coordinated with “contact group” talks among representatives of the Kiev regime and the eastern Ukraine regions that had rejected the coup, set forth a schedule for a ceasefire, force withdrawals, prisoner exchanges, and a longer-term settlement involving Constitutional changes to give semi-autonomy to the Donbass districts.

The force disengagement happened, but the Constitutional changes, recognition of autonomous status, and the planned subsequent return of control over the Donbass-Russia border to Ukraine, have not. Dr. Gordon M. Hahn of the Middlebury Institute for International Studies at Monterey (California), in an assessment published Feb. 19 under the headline “Who’s More in Violation of Minsk-2—Kiev or Donbass?” (http://gordonhahn.com). He concluded was that “Kiev is significantly more in violation of the agreement than the Donbass rebels and/or Moscow”, with the Ukrainian regime being “in violation of no less than seven articles and nine obligations” it committed to in Minsk-2.

The chaotic post-coup universe

On Feb. 3, Lithuanian banker Aivaras Abromavičius, imported by Poroshenko in Dec. 2014 to serve as Ukraine’s minister of economics, abruptly resigned. He stated, “My team and I have no wish to be a cover for open corruption or puppets,” citing alleged influence-peddling by Ihor Kononenko, an MP and businessman close to Poroshenko. Within a week, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde warned, “I am concerned about Ukraine’s slow progress in improving governance and fighting corruption,” hinting that the release of IMF funds pledged for stabilizing Ukraine might not be forthcoming.

Next, Poroshenko demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Arseni Yatsenyuk, the infamous “Yats” who was handpicked by U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland for his job in January 2014. On 16 February, the Supreme Rada (Parliament) condemned the performance of the Yats government, but several minutes

later failed to pass a vote of no-confidence. The sudden exit from the hall, before the second vote, of dozens of MPs, including opposition members and members of Poroshenko’s party, triggered rumors of bribery and dirty deals.

Yats remains PM, but two parties left the ruling coalition the next day. Either he forms a new coalition, or early elections could be called. Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, whose party has risen from barely over 5 per cent of the vote in late-2014 elections to now polling 20+ per cent, and who was one of those exiting the coalition, visited Washington in early February, evidently to curry favor for a comeback bid.

The main issue in Ukraine, however, is not parliamentary scuffles. It is ungovernability, and economic breakdown. A major reason for non-performance of the Minsk-2 accords is that neither Poroshenko nor Yats could secure Parliamentary approval of the Constitutional changes required for Donbass autonomy. Meanwhile, in a country that saw the highest inflation in Europe (30 per cent in 2014, 45 per cent in 2015), people nationwide struggle to survive on wages that barely suffice for their home heating bills. The free trade arrangement with the EU, over which the Euromaidan coup was supposedly staged, has brought no boom for the Ukrainian economy.

The political problems are far deeper than the faction fights of the mid-2000s, when the victors in the 2004 Orange Revolution, Tymoshenko and then-President Victor Yushchenko, had a falling out, and that revolution “ate its own children”. This time, matters are complicated by the role violent neo-Nazi, ideologically fascist radical Ukrainian national groups played from the outset of the “Euromaidan” coup process of November 2013-February 2014. That role was revisited and confirmed this month in French filmmaker Paul Moreira’s documentary “Masks of the Revolution” (http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/finally-masks-revolution-maidan-documentary-full-eng-subs/ri12759), which aired on French TV despite protests by Kiev, while the Hollywood nominated a rival documentary, a Kiev puff-piece called “Winter on Fire”, for an Oscar.

Rostislav Ishchenko, an insightful Ukrainian analyst currently exiled in Moscow, wrote 18 February that the country is experiencing not “dual power”, as there was during the Russian revolutions of 1917, but anarchy. The latest example, he said, is the blockade initiated by Right Sector and other viscerally anti-Russian paramilitaries, again Russian long-haul trucks crossing Ukraine to and from Slovakia and Hungary. In retaliation, Russia blocked Ukrainian trucks, forcing them to take circuitous routes to destinations like Kazakhstan, travelling south of the Caspian Sea through Turkey and Iran. This disruption of routine Eurasian trade is of no benefit to Kiev, but the government is powerless to override the radicals.

Fascist-style measures are found not only on Ukraine’s highways. There is another part of Ukraine’s political body politic, which receives little to no attention in the Western press. The Communist Party, which won 13.18 per cent of the vote and 32 seats in Parliament in 2012, was banned last year from running candidates for office, under new laws forbidding “communist symbols”. On Feb. 4 Dr. Natalia Vitrenko, leader of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine and co-chairman of the Left Opposition bloc, and 18 others released an appeal to UN and EU human rights officials, on the suppression of their fundamental rights and freedoms in Ukraine. The full text of their petition follows.


PETITION: from the All-Ukraine Public Association of Left and Center-left Political Parties and Public Organizations — “The Left Opposition”

to the United Nations and the Council of Europe Commissioners for Human Rights concerning the obstruction of the activities of opposition political parties and public organizations by the Ukrainian government, and need to start large-scale international verification of whether human rights and freedoms are being honored in Ukraine

Editorial note: The document below was sent on 4 February 2016 to United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra ‘ad Al Hussein and Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Nils Muizniek, with copies to Ukraine’s President, prime minister, chairman of Parliament, chairman of the Constitutional Court, and parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights. Official copies exist in Russian and in English. The English text below has undergone literary editing for clarity.

After the 2014 “Revolution of Dignity”, the organizers and ideologists of the Euromaidan, together with its active participants, came into power in Ukraine. But instead of the promised European standards of human rights and the rule of law, a totalitarian dictatorship has been established in our country.

This regime is flagrantly trampling our citizens’ right, provided for under international law and the Constitution of Ukraine, to political and public association in political parties and public organizations, including opposition organizations, for the purpose of organizing society on principles of political, ideological, and economic diversity.

The aforementioned rights are violated by means of:

* prohibition of unwanted political parties;

* wrongful interference in the affairs of political parties by government agencies such as the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the Security Service of Ukraine, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs;

* obstruction of the activity of parties and public organizations;

* criminal prosecution of opposition political activists;

* information blockade;

* defamation of opposition political parties and public organizations and their activities through the dissemination of false information;

* dissemination of wrong information for purposes of inciting to the physical elimination of opposition activists and shaping public opinion to support the banning of opposition organizations.

We believe that in regard to our activity the government of Ukraine is in violation of: Articles 18, 19, 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Articles 10, 11 and 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; Articles 3, 8, 15, 22, 24, 34, 36 and 68 of the Constitution of Ukraine; and the Law of Ukraine “On Political Parties in Ukraine”.

Today, Ukraine as a state is based on the dangerous principles of an effectively Neo-Nazi ideology, which tolerates no democracy whatsoever. The institutions of state deal with their ideological and political opponents using illegal means.

In order to organize political repressions. the Ukraine government adopted two laws: i) “On the condemnation of the Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) totalitarian regimes in Ukraine and the prohibition of propaganda of their symbols”; and ii) “On the legal status and the memory of fighters for Ukrainian independence in the twentieth century”. On the basis of these laws, the authorities have toughened up regulations and job instructions for government ministries and agencies.

Let us make you aware of following facts:

1) The government of Ukraine initiated a criminal case to discredit communist ideology and to ban the Communist Party of Ukraine. People who profess communist ideology and were not involved in any repressions or crimes of the “totalitarian regime”, are thereby deprived of the possibility of uniting into a political party and participating in the political life of the country, including participating in elections;

2) The Ministry of Justice refuses to register the Official Decision Note of the Extraordinary XXIX Congress of the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine (PSPU), unlawfully interpreting the Charter of the PSPU in a distorted fashion. The Ministry of Justice thereby blocked issuance to the PSPU of a receipt of amendments to its Charter and Program, and thus deprived this political party of the possibility of full-fledged participation in the political life of Ukraine, including participation in elections;

3) The Ministry of Justice of Ukraine illegally refuses to register amendments to the Charter and Program of the Labor Party of Ukraine (Marxist-Leninist), and thus obstructs its activity and violates the rights of party members.

Moreover, Mr. Alexander V. Bondarchuk, the leader of the Labor Party of Ukraine and editor-in-chief of the newspaper Rabochy klass (Working Class) was arrested on the basis of accusations made by a pro-regime political opponent; he was held without grounds for 10 months at a pre-trial detention center, and continues to be the target of a cynical, politically motivated court case;

4) The activity of the Russian-Ukrainian Union Party is obstructed by the regime’s connivance in a “raider”-style takeover attempt against it and artificially drawn-out court proceedings;

5) Mr. Anatoliy A. Mayevsky, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Raboche-krestyanskaya Pravda (Workers’ and Peasants’ Truth), chairman of Central Bureau of All-Union Communist Party-Bolsheviks (ACPB) for Ukraine, Moldova and Transdniestria, and Secretary of the ACPB, was falsely accused and imprisoned for more than one year, before receiving three years probation;

6) From April 2014 until the present time, the Аll-Ukraine Women’s Public Organization “Gift of Life” has been subjected to criminal prosecution on trumped-up charges of supporting separatists and terrorists (for no other reason than the intention to carry out human rights work). The bank account of this organization was frozen and a campaign conducted to discredit the organization and its leader, Dr. Natalia M. Vitrenko.

7) The government of Ukraine illegally interferes in the affairs of the canonical Orthodox Church and abets the seizure of Orthodox churches by armed gangs and schismatics.

The law enforcement agencies of Ukraine and the neo-Nazi groups of armed fighters they patronize act in concert to obstruct peaceful opposition political gatherings and activities. Here several instances:

* On May 2, 2014, forty-six members of anti-fascist groups were brutally burned and killed during an action at Kulikovo Field in the City of Odessa;

* On May 9, 2014, a peaceful demonstration in the City of Mariupol in the Donetsk region was fired on;

* On September 1, 2015, in the City of Kharkov, armed bands physically prevented the Progressive Socialist Party from holding a peaceful rally under the slogan, “Peace and love for children, not war and hatred”;

* On January 29, 2016, in the City of Kiev, members of the volunteer Azov Battalion forcibly disrupted a conference of the Public Movement “Ukrainian Choice”, breaking into the premises and in effect starting a session of mob justice. The armed fighters’ action, which grossly violated the rights and freedoms of the conference participants and flouted the presumption of innocence, was overtly supported by Mr. Z. Shkiryak, advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs.

Acts of vigilante justice and physical obstruction of the activity of oppositional political parties and public organizations, threats (including of physical violence), political murders and driving people to suicide (the cases of Mrs. V. Semenyuk-Samsonenko, Mr. O. Kalashnikov, the Priest Roman, A. Peklushenko, Mr. Walter, О. Buzina, and the editor of newspaper Khochu v SSSR [I Want to Go Back to the Soviet Union] Mr. S. Dolgov), are all being committed in Ukraine. The perpetrators are gangs of right-wing radicals under slogans such as “Ukraine above all”, “Ukraine for the Ukrainians”, “Glory to the nation—Death to the enemies”, “Knife the Muscovites, hang the Communists!”, “Bandera will come and bring order”. All of this is happening with the full legal, information and political support provided of the Ukrainian government.

According to information at our disposal, about 4,000 people are being held in Ukrainian prisons because of their political opinions, while 2.6 million citizens have been forced to abandon their homes, become refugees, and have left Ukraine, including some because of their political convictions.

We, the leaders of the political parties and public organizations, united in the Left Opposition, DECLARE:

The representation of our country by the Ukrainian government as being democratic and as respecting and defending the human rights and freedoms guaranteed by above-mentioned norms of international law and by the Constitution of Ukraine, does not correspond to reality. In fact, a totalitarian state is being built in Ukraine, with all the attributes of a neo-Nazi dictatorship. In is impossible, in such a political environment and using such methods of fighting against the opposition and intimidating the people, to build a democratic state, to ensure compliance with human rights and freedoms in Ukraine, and to conduct democratic elections.

We ask you to take this Petition under consideration and to organize a large-scale verification of compliance with to human rights and freedoms in Ukraine.

Natalia Vitrenko, Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine

Victor Silenko, Kiev Rus Party

Alexander Bondarchuk, Labor Party of Ukraine (Marxist-Leninist)

Alexander Luzan, Slavic Party of Ukraine

Vladimir Marchenko, All-Ukrainian Labor Organization “Ukrainian Confederation of Labor”

Lyudmila Drobyazina, Public Organization “Assembly of Orthodox Women of Ukraine”

Irina Kravchuk, All-Ukrainian Public Organization “Eurasian People’s Union”

Tatyana Ploshkina, All-Ukrainian Women’s Public Organization “Gift of Life”

Nikolai Lavrinenko, Slavic Committee of Ukraine

Valentin Lukiyanik, Public Organization “Union of Orthodox Brotherhoods of Ukraine”

Yelena Mazur, All-Ukrainian Public Organization “For the Union of Belarus and Russia” (ZUBR)

Gennadiy Selivanov, Public Organization “Union of Soviet Officers of Ukraine”

Evgeniy Pavlov, All-Ukrainian Union of Workers

Amar Al-Anni, Public Organization “St. Sergius of Radonezh Orthodox Brotherhood”

Rudolph Povarnitsyn,

Vladimir Yatsenko

Pyotr Tsybenko, Council of Veterans of Ukraine

Mikhail Kononovich, Komsomol of Ukraine

Georgy Buyko, Anti-Fascist Committee of Ukraine

 


To Top

 


ZEPP-LAROUCHE: THE NEED OF GLOBAL PUBLIC WORKS–THE NEW SILK ROAD BECOMES THE WORLD LAND-BRIDGE

Schiller Institute founder and chair Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed two Tokyo events on Dec. 2, delivering a clear message to 400 Japanese business leaders that the World Land-Bridge is the only way to end the tyranny of war and geopolitics and solve the ongoing Middle East crisis.  In the morning, Ms. Zepp-LaRouche addressed the seventh annual Asia Innovation Forum, attended by 300 young Japanese entrepreneurs and hosted by Nobuyuki Idei, former Chairman and CEO of the Sony Corporation and now the founder and CEO of Quantum Leaps, as well as the founder of the Asia Innovators’ Initiative. Video proceedings of the two events will be available soon. The slides used below are the slide Zepp-LaRouche used in her presentation and are for reference only.



Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

The sheer number of explosive crises around the globe make previous pre-World War situations look calm by comparison. The recent downing of the Russian fighter jet by Turkey, which qualified American sources say Turkey would never have done without tacit support from the White House, and the subsequent support given by both President Obama and NATO to the Turkish action demonstrate—given the launch-on-warning-readiness of the nuclear arsenals of the US and Russia, with a decision time of mere minutes—how close we are to the present, new Cold War turning into a hot war.

1_0

Slide one

The fact that Russia and China correctly regard the US Ballistic Missile System in Eastern Europe, the Prompt Global Strike and Air Sea Battle Doctrines as First Strike Doctrines directed against their nations, has already led to a new arms race. Transatlantic military experts warn, that the situation is more dangerous than during the height of the Cold War, due to the lack of any codes of behavior or reliable “red telephones” between the US and Russia.

Behind this is the overriding dynamic which arises from the insistence of the United States that a unipolar world be maintained, while rising Asia is, by its mere weight, creating a multipolar world. The warnings of experts, such as former US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, General Martin Dempsey, that the West should not fall into the Thucydides Trap, seem to go unheard.

In addition, the crisis situation in Ukraine, the tensions in the South China Sea, and the satanic degree of barbarism demonstrated by ISIS and Boko Haram underline the mortal danger humanity is facing.

Equally existential, is the prospect of a new crash of the transatlantic financial system, more dramatic than the 2008 Lehman Brothers collapse, while no coping instruments are left to the central banks.

Are we condemned to continue down this road, when all signs speak to the likelihood that these conflicts will escalate either to global chaos or to a global thermonuclear war and the likely annihilation of the human species? Is the human species too stupid, indifferent or degenerate to abandon policies, even when their failure is overwhelmingly clear?

2

Slide two

Already in the 15th century, the famous German philosopher Nikolaus von Kues stated that solutions for complex problems cannot be solved with a heterogeneous assortment of partial solutions; rather, one must find a solution on a higher level, on which the contradictions of the lower level are resolved. He called that method of thinking the “Coincidentia Oppositorum,” the thinking of the coincidence of opposites, the idea that the One is of a higher order than the Many. It is that method which must be applied to define a new paradigm in the evolution of the human species. And it is eminently possible to define a new paradigm which represents the true interest of all nations and all groupings.

Generally, the willingness to entertain such new ideas only exists when people realize that the assumptions which have been taken for granted for a long time are suddenly shaken in their foundations. And that is precisely the moment in which we find ourselves, around the globe.

This is most acutely true for Germany, where a qualitatively new debate is taking place about the need to reassess the strategic situation in many circles, guided by a growing perception that continuing the present policies will lead to a full-speed crash against a brick wall.

3_0

Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa, the father of modern science.

In particular, the refugee crisis shattered the illusion that the country is an island of stability and wars far away. All of a sudden, there is a public discussion about the root causes of the refugee crisis, which is detonating the unity of the EU: the Anglo-American wars based on lies, the Saudi financing of terrorism, Turkey buying oil from ISIS, etc.

All of this is creating an openness to the necessity of a dramatic change of policy! If terrorism is to be permanently eradicated and the refugee crisis overcome, the operations against ISIS must take into account its decentralized structures in many countries, but military means are not sufficient: what is needed is real development!!!

It is necessary to put a comprehensive reconstruction program for all of Southwest Asia and Africa on the agenda. Only if young people, and there especially the young men, have the perspective of a future, the chance to raise a family, to become scientists, doctors or architects, can the environment for the recruitment of the Jihadists be dried out.

4_0

Slide four

Presently, the only realistic perspective to accomplish this goal is the extension of the policy of the New Silk Road into both the Near and Middle East, as well as into Africa. The outline for this is presented in the study “The New Silk Road becomes the World Land-Bridge,” which defines basic preconditions for a global reconstruction program.

5

Slide five

Much of Southwest Asia has been “bombed back into the stone age” or was already a desert. A comprehensive infrastructure program for the entire region from Afghanistan to the Mediterranean, from the Caucasus to the Persian Gulf must be put on the agenda. War must be declared against deserts, large amounts of new fresh water be created through the desalination of ocean water with the help of nuclear energy, ionization of moisture in the atmosphere, the creation of new rain patterns through the development of agriculture and reforestation. Infrastructure corridors, with integrated fast train systems, highways, and waterways, have to be built in order to provide conditions for the location of industries and new cities.

All major neighbors of Southwest Asia have a fundamental security interest to participate in such an approach, and therefore must join forces in this project: Russia, because of the tight connection between ISIS and the Chechen terrorist networks as well as the influx of heroin from Afghanistan into Russia; China, because of the connection of ISIS to the Uyghurs; India, since they have a Muslim population of 120 million people and already had Wahhabi-Salafist-sponsored terror attacks in Mumbai and other places. Iran, Egypt, but also Germany, France and Italy, and, clearly, in real terms, also the United States, have a fundamental interest to solve this problem.

Every nation and every region would benefit from the World Land-Bridge:

6

LaRouche plan for Eurasian Land-Bridge.

1. Japan: For Japan, the participation in great projects of the World Land-Bridge would reconnect to the tradition of the Meiji Restoration of Okubo Toshimichi and Okuma Shigenobu and their policies inspired by Alexander Hamilton and Friedrich List: that it is the development of the creativity of human labor and the State development of science and technology which are the source of wealth in society—a tradition that was continued by MITI after the Second World war and by the Mitsubishi Global Infrastructure Fund, which included many of the projects which are part of the World Land-Bridge Program.

9

One of those projects, the Kra Canal, which will enable the increased flow of goods in the Pacific region, is again on the table. A second Panama canal is being built in Nicaragua by China; the Mekong Delta complex is still urgent; the Transaqua Lake Chad project is presently reactivated by several African countries and a feasibility study is in progress.

10

Thai proposal for the Kra Canal.

The building of the Bering Strait tunnel has recently gained new up-to-dateness, given the Russian-Chinese collaboration of the “One Belt, One Road” policy and the Eurasian Economic Union, especially for Siberia and the Far East of Russia.

12_1

Bering Strait connection proposal.

2. USA: Not only would the US benefit from joining in developing Africa and Southwest Asia, but it is itself in urgent need of a reconstruction program. The New Silk Road approach for the US would mean the construction of a continental fast train system of 50,000 kilometers, (9) new science cities in the South and West of the Rocky Mountains, and various programs for the creation of new weather patterns.

Proposed high-speed rail for US lower 48 states.

Proposed high-speed rail for US lower 48 states.

 

3. Ukraine: The collaboration between Europe, the Eurasian Economic Union and the “One Belt, One Road” policy for the construction of infrastructure corridors could reunite Ukraine by having the whole country enjoy an economic miracle instead of the present economic collapse.

4. Europe: All of Europe has a dramatic backlog in infrastructure investment. In Germany alone, it is an estimated 2 trillion Euro. Already in 2012, the Schiller Institute presented a plan for a new economic miracle in Southern Europe, the Mediterranean and Africa, as an alternative to the devastating austerity policy of the Troika.

In light of the escalation of the refugee crisis, this development program as an extension of the New Silk Road would be a complete game changer.

15

European continent developed under the World Land-Bridge proposal.

5. Africa: Because of the combination of wars and the denial of economic development due to ecologist and monetarist ideologies, much of the continent, as Southwest Asia, resembles hell on earth, not home countries. The announcement and beginning of international cooperation to realize a comprehensive development plan for the continent would send a powerful message of hope to millions of people now on the run from war, terrorism, hunger and epidemics.

16

The content of Africa connected with high-speed rail, part of the World Land-Bridge proposal, now being constructed by Xi Jinping’s China.

The World Land-Bridge, as concrete basis for a peace order for the 21st Century, however requires a new paradigm of thinking. The supposed legitimacy of geopolitics—the idea that one nation or a group of nations have a self-interest which they can pursue against another group of nations, if necessary by military means -, is, in the age of thermonuclear weapons, obviously outdated—unless one wants to risk the annihilation of the entire human species. The assumption, that it would be possible to “win” a “limited” nuclear war based on a First Strike Doctrine, is ludicrous, and has been refuted by impeccable military analysts and should be prosecuted against according to the Nuremberg Statutes.

Mankind will only be able to survive the present existential crisis if we can make the qualitative jump to defining the common interests of mankind as the point of reference. The question “Where should mankind as a whole be in a 100, in a 1000 years from now, and beyond?” must guide the decision-making. The World Land-Bridge does not only complete the infrastructural development of the landlocked areas of all continents, but it defines the next phase of the evolution of the human species by extending the idea of infrastructure into space.

19

If, in the best case, an immediate emergency summit of the UN General Assembly, otherwise an early G20 summit or minimally a meeting of some of the most future-oriented leaders of the world, in government positions as well as present and former representatives of the scientific, industrial, diplomatic and cultural community, would put such a World Marshall Plan, a World Land-Bridge as a peace plan for the 21st century on the table, it would suddenly impart a perspective of hope to the world.

The idea of the World Land-Bridge establishes a higher level of reason, where all the historical and ethnic conflicts disappear or are neutralized in the higher geometry. For example, tensions between Japan and China sometimes seem insurmountable; however, in the context of collaboration with India, Russia, and Southeast Asian and European nations for a Peace through Development Plan, the mutual benefits of such a win-win perspective would represent an overwhelming incentive to shape the future, rather than relive the past.

There are obvious differences to the situation of the 30 Years War, but what motivated the various war parties to come to the negotiation table and conclude with the famous Treaty of Westphalia, was the recognition that if this religious war were to continue, there would soon be nobody left to enjoy a victory. The Peace of Westphalia Treaty established for the first time in European history that peace can only be maintained if all foreign policy takes into account “the interest of the other,” and that it can not be based on revenge, but must be based on love. That treaty became the foundation of international law and the basis for the UN charter, and must be applied also to Southwest Asia, contrary to some different opinions.

Unfortunately, the respect for international law has vanished. The highest authority of the UN, the UN Security Council, since the regime change operation against Gaddafi, does not function any more.

International law must, therefore, be developed further. The principle which must be agreed upon, and which must enclose all following aspects, as a preamble, is that of the common aims of mankind—that there can be no legitimate interest of any nation, if it does not coincide with the interest of all of humanity, concerning its present and future existence.

The principles of the UN Charter remain valid, but this preamble must take into account a higher lawfulness, which is called in different cultures variably: in European philosophy, “Natural Law;” in Asian philosophy, “Cosmic Order.” It expresses the idea that mankind as a whole can only survive in the physical universe at large if the political and economic practices on planet Earth are being brought into coherence with the laws governing our universe.

Man is not an animal, condemned to remain in the mode of existence of the past. Mankind has a quality of creativity to discover again and again the deeper principles of our universe, which redefines its character as a species. When Kepler discovered the unifying principle of our solar system, he created the basis for mankind to be a completely different species, no longer bound to earth, but part of the solar system.

When Einstein discovered the theory of general relativity, he created the foundations for mans exploration of space. It is now clear from the earth history that here are defining influences of the changing relationship  of our solar system with the galaxy, effecting cycles of climate change and variations in the evolutionary processes of live. We have yet to discover the unifying principle of our Galaxy, as Kepler had discovered the unifying principle of the solar system.

So what is the meaning of the creativity of the human mind, as being an integral part of the laws of the universe? And where is the future of mankind located? The next phase of the work in space, in the galaxy and beyond, requires the collaboration among top scientists of mayor nations to discover the laws of our universe as a new scientific  frontier, We have to discover powers of mankind, which are complete unknown now, as Helium three on the moon was unknown during Kepler’s time, if mankind is to exist.

There is no closed earth system, but life on earth is defined by the lawfulness of the solar systems interaction with the galaxy, and we still have to discover the unifying principle of all the billions of galaxies. The meaning of live is the advancement of mankind’s ability to master the challenges of discovery the pathway of the necessary next discovery, for mankind’s ability to continue to exist in the millions and billions of years ahead. So far, we have only discovered the shadows of the principle.

It is therefore an existential requirement, to  return to the principles of physical economy and real science and eliminate monetarism. We have to restate the historic knowledge of the theoretical foundations of the different industrial revolutions, which has been almost eliminated from the economics textbooks of western universities.

21

American economist Henry Carey, Russian economist Sergei Witte, German-American economist Friedrich List and German philospher and statesman, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz.

But it is a fact that the industrial revolutions in the United States, as well as in Germany, Japan, Russia and, more recently, the Chinese economic miracle, were always based on the principles of the physical economy of Gottfried Leibniz, Friedrich List, the American system of economy of Mathew and Henry C. Carey and Count Witte.

The Meiji Restoration succeeded in rapidly transforming Japan into a major world economic power thanks to the theories of Alexander Hamilton and Friedrich List. (Erasmus Smith, a very close collaborator of Lincoln’s economic adviser Henry Carey, was sent by the Ulysses Grant Administration as an official economic adviser to the Meiji Restoration.)

The rapid transformation of Germany from a feudal state into an economic powerhouse, was based entirely on the tradition of Friedrich List and on Bismarck’s encounter with the economic model of Henry C. Carey, mediated among others by Wilhelm von Kardorff, then head of the German industrial association. Germany would have not become an industrial nation, but for Bismarck’s conversion from a follower of free market theories into a protagonist of the protectionist policies of List and Carey.

The Chinese economic miracle of the recent 30 years, especially the policies of the New Silk Road and the alternative banking system, with the AIIB, New Development Bank, Silk Road and Maritime Silk Road Funds, follow the same traditions. The 5th World Congress of China Studies in the Spring 2013 in Shanghai, and the 2014 List conference in Reutlingen made emphatically the point that the German economist is the most popular economic theoretician in China, and not Adam Smith.

List regarded the development of the productive powers of labor and industrial capacities as more important than statistical wealth; he would be an adamant critique of today’s asset driven economies. In the paper he submitted to a contest of the French Academy of Sciences in 1837, he developed a vision for the future role of transport systems, a “space and time economy,” which contains ideas still valid for the World Land-Bridge today.

He saw in the continuous perfection of transport and communication systems the precondition for the progress of humanity, enabling human beings to unfold increasingly all the potentials given to them by nature. The more talents could exchange their ideas and collaborate in all areas, the greater progress would be in all areas of knowledge, and the more science and the arts would be inspired and spread to all sectors and disciplines. Anticipating our present jet age, he said that the easier it would be for human beings to move from place to place, the more they would save time and compress space, the more the development and efficiency of his powers would increase and utilize the material riches of nature for his purposes.

The impact of this characteristic of what he called the “Space and Time Economy” would be demonstrated by the wealth of nations, which would develop an advanced transport and communication system, even if their “natural environment” was unfavorable. The high degree of speed, regularity, and cost-efficiency of transport would facilitate new levels of the development of the mental and material productive forces.

In an almost prophetic forecast, he saw this development orienting towards the uniting of all nations in one humanity, in a “Republic of the planet,” based on the “economy of Mankind.”

The realization of the World Land-Bridge, proceeding from the common aims of mankind, is eminently feasible in the near term. But it must be accompanied by a dialogue between the high phases of the different cultures of the world. For many Asian countries that means Confucius; for India, the Gupta period and Indian Renaissance; for Russia Alexander Pushkin and Vladimir Vernadsky; for Italy, the Italian Renaissance; for Germany, the Classics in music and poetry. Out of knowledge of the other culture, will grow love and admiration. It is only in this way, that the representatives of different cultures can access the basis of their identity as members of the only creative species known in the universe, which, so far, has only reached its childhood, but which can and must become the immortal species.

Realizing this vision requires individuals, today, who are guided by a passionate love for humanity.


Helga Zepp-LaRouche Addresses Japanese Business Leaders on Urgent Need for World Land-Bridge To End War & Tyranny of Geopolitics

Schiller Institute founder and chair Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed two Tokyo events on Dec. 2, delivering a clear message to 400 Japanese business leaders that the World Land-Bridge is the only way to end the tyranny of war and geopolitics and solve the ongoing Middle East crisis.  In the morning, Ms. Zepp-LaRouche addressed the seventh annual Asia Innovation Forum, attended by 300 young Japanese entrepreneurs and hosted by Nobuyuki Idei, former Chairman and CEO of the Sony Corporation and now the founder and CEO of Quantum Leaps, as well as the founder of the Asia Innovators’ Initiative.

In her comprehensive presentation, Ms. Zepp-LaRouche warned of the global pattern of regional wars that can easily lead to global catastrophe, including a new superpowers conflict, and emphasized that the only way to change the course of events was by fundamentally changing the paradigms of thinking.  She went through a detailed presentation on the World Land-Bridge, identifying the major global projects that can transform the world, citing the Xi Jinping “One Belt, One Road” as the seed of a global renaissance.  After spelling out the immediately available great projects, she developed the idea of mankind as a unique species capable of creating a future through creative discovery.  She developed the American System concepts of Alexander Hamilton, and Henry and Mathew Carey, and detailed how those ideas spread around the globe in the 19th century, creating the modern nations of Germany and Japan, under Bismarck and the Meiji Restoration.

Ms. Zepp-LaRouche was joined on the panel by former IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn; former head of the Russian Railroad Corporation and co-founder of the Rhodes Dialogue of Civilizations, Vladimir Yakunin; and Paulo Nogueira Batista Jr., the former Brazilian director of the IMF, who is now a Vice President of the New Development Bank, founded by the BRICS and heaquartered in Shanghai.  The panel was moderated by Daisuke Kotegawa, a former Japanese Ministry of Finance top official who was also Japan’s IMF director at the time of the 2007-2009 financial crisis.

During his presentation, Dr. Yakunin strongly endorsed Ms. Zepp-LaRouche’s World Land-Bridge proposal, noting that Russia’s Eurasian Development Corridors and China’s One Belt, One Road policies were thoroughly compatible and represented the “new paradigm” of thinking that is urgently needed to avoid wars brought on by the dying system of neo-liberalism.  He emphasized that Presidents Putin and Xi were committed to Russian-Chinese cooperation to realize those Eurasian infrastructure links.

In his opening remarks of the panel, Strauss-Kahn detailed the ongoing crisis of the world financial system, and acknowledged that the austerity policies were a failure and had to be replaced by a growth model, while admitting that there is no real support for a viable change in policy from within the dominant world financial institutions today.

In the afternoon, Ms. Zepp-LaRouche addressed a separate event, sponsored by the Canon Institute for Global Studies, which was attended by 100 top executives of the major Japanese industrial corporations and financial institutions, as well as of the Japanese government’s overseas investment agencies and funds. EIR Senior Editor Jeffrey Steinberg also addressed the Canon Institute forum, delivering a detailed picture of the real process of economic and social breakdown of the United States. Ms. Zepp-LaRouche delivered her presentation on the World Land-Bridge as the only way to defeat the geopolitical drive to world war.  Nogueira Batista gave an in-depth report on the progress of the New Development Bank and the plans to begin issuing development loans by April 2016.  He reviewed the history of the launching of the New Development Bank by the BRICS countries in response to the abject failure of the “Washington institutions”—the IMF and the World Bank—to reform in the wake of the 2008 financial collapse.

Video proceedings of the two events will be available soon.


Page 2 of 6123...Last