Author: Alicia

These are not spontaneous developments by any means. They are the result of the intervention of the creative human mind,— Vladimir Putin’s.        

The Russian, Iranian and Azerbaijan presidents met on August 8, especially featuring the International North-South Transport Corridor of the New Silk Road.  Next, the Transport, Energy and Foreign Ministers of those three countries will meet in Teheran, in preparation for another three-way summit, this time in Iran.        

Another follow-on to the August 8 meeting was Putin’s summit with Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan in the Kremlin yesterday. They discussed Armenia’s integration into the Eurasian Economic Union, and moving toward a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan, in light of Putin’s recent summit with Azerbaijan’s President Aliyev in Baku and his other diplomacy.        

Putin’s historic August 9 St. Petersburg summit with Turkish President Erdogan,— with its agreements on nuclear energy, increased trade, and the Turkish Stream gas pipeline,— was followed by a meeting today of the Foreign Ministers, Defense Ministers and intelligence heads of the two countries.  It was expected that they would try to coordinate their actions in Syria, including in the ongoing battle of Aleppo, near Turkey’s border.

It is no coincidence that just at this moment, Obama, with the help of his stooge Hillary Clinton, has suddenly raised the threat of war in Europe.  Yesterday, the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) disclosed that it had intercepted two Ukrainian reconnaissance and sabotage groups in Crimea over August 7 and 8, arresting seven persons at the cost of two Russian lives (an FSB officer and a soldier).  One of the arrested has confessed on Russian television that they were sent by Ukrainian military intelligence to sabotage infrastructure.

Putin said last night that the intended sabotage was intended to destabilize Ukraine as it prepared for elections.  He rejected the proposal for a meeting of the Normandy Four on Ukraine on the sidelines of the September G-20 summit in China, saying that it no longer makes sense, when Kiev is rejecting compromise in favor of terror.  And Putin knows what Crimean Prime Minister Aksyonov said aloud: that Kiev would not have done this without the go-ahead from Washington,— i.e. from Obama. And Obama is being loudly supported in his drive for war by Hillary Clinton.

“Putin has suddenly come into control of large developments in the world, and these guys are going wild,” Lyndon LaRouche said today.  “It doesn’t mean he’s perfect, but he’s in charge, and the others are having a freakout, and they don’t know what to do about their freakout.  Putin will do what he has to do,— expect all kinds of evil to pop up.  Now another attack has popped up,— not from Ukraine, but through Ukraine from elsewhere.”

The interview by former Colin Powell Chief of Staff at the State Department, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, on more detailed review, opens up former Vice President Dick Cheney to criminal prosecution for his cover-up of the Saudi role in 9/11, and for explicitly soliciting lies to justify the attack on Iraq in March 2003. As Wilkerson made clear in his recent interview with 28pages.org, Vice President Cheney, on ten separate occasions, tried to force Secretary of State Colin Powell to insert claims that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and was providing material support to Al Qaeda during the period leading up to the attacks. Each time Cheney tried to insert the lies into Powell’s prepared testimony before the United Nations Security Council in Feb. 2003, Powell pushed back. But, according to Wilkerson, on the very eve of the scheduled Powell testimony, CIA Director George Tenet and his Deputy Director, John McLoughlin, showed up with “new eyewitness evidence” that Saddam was behind 9/11. Powell relented and allowed the claims of Saddam 9/11 links to be included in his testimony. It later came out that the “new” intelligence was actually a year-old discredited “confession” by tortured Al Qaeda figure Ibn-Sheikh al-Libi and was entirely false.

Wilkerson also recounted that Dick Cheney deployed top national security aides Scooter Libby and John Hannah to make sure that there was no mention of Saudi Arabia’s links to the 9/11 hijackers and that no real investigation was ever launched into the Saudi sponsorship. The cover-up of the 28 pages was part of a larger Cheney-led fraud, to secure both the U.S.-Saudi “special relationship” despite the Saudi complicity in 9/11, and to assure that the U.S. went to war to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

Wilkerson was blunt about the Saudi claims that there was no evidence of any Saudi links to the 9/11 hijackers: “It’s utter hogwash with regard to the entire set of circumstances surrounding 9/11 in my view. As far as I know, there never was an official investigation of so many of the things that are intimated in these [in the 28 pages], not least of which is a really hard look by the intelligence community at the ultimate question of [saudi] government knowledge, government direction, even government strategy associated with the Salafist movement in general, but, more specifically, organizations like al Qaeda.”

Wilkerson added that the 9/11 Commission’s work was doomed from the moment that Philip Zelikow was named as staff director.

“It was clear to me from the very beginning that he was there as a control agent. I didn’t know how definitively he would control the process until later. He was tuned into the administration. He was tuned into what the administration wanted.”

The St. Petersburg summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has launched the first step in cooperation between the two countries on resolving the Syrian conflict. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavusoglu announced that a tripartite mechanism will be created, comprising representatives from each of the three countries’ intelligence agencies, foreign ministries, and military, as part of an effort to put all these functions under one roof. The two parties will hold their first meeting in St. Petersburg on Aug. 11. Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT) chief Hakan Fidan and representatives from the Foreign Ministry and Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) already left today for St. Petersburg.

“The first concrete step [between Turkey and Russia]: Previously, there were different mechanisms between us on Syria, between militaries, foreign ministries and intelligence services. Now, we [will] establish a threefold mechanism,” Foreign Minister Çavusoglu told state-run Anadolu Agency Wednesday.

Also, a direct line of communications has been set up between the Turkish and Russian chiefs of general staffs. “We have agreed to be in close contact in order to avoid such incidents,” said President Erdogan’s spokesman, Ibrahim Kalin, referring to Turkey’s fighters shooting down a Russian Su-24 over Syria in November.  “In this frame, our chief of general staff and the Russian chief of general staff have reestablished a direct line. They are in talks on this,” said Kalin, speaking to the private broadcaster AHaber on Aug. 10, reported Hurriyet Daily News.

Cavusoglu said that although Turkey and Russia had different views on Syria, they were on the same page regarding the declaration of a ceasefire, providing humanitarian aid, and finding a political solution. He said Turkey did not approve of the siege of Aleppo, but had agreed to “inform their Russian counterparts about the locations of civilians and moderate opposition groups and will ask to first get focused on the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria,” reported Hurriyet.

Cavusoglu said ties with Russia should not affect Turkey’s ties to the West, but did note that Turkey has been facing political obstacles from the EU in the last 15 years: “If the West loses Turkey one day, it will not be because of Turkey’s good ties with Russia, China, Central Asian or Islamic countries but because of its mistakes,”Hurriyet quoted him saying.

When asked about the possibility of a Turkey-Russia- Azerbaijan trilateral summit, suggested by Baku when he was there on July 15, Cavusoglu said, “During our meeting in Baku, Azerbaijani officials said that a trilateral summit was established between Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran. I told them there can also be trilateral summit with Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkey.” Cavusoglu said that Erdogan had suggested such a trilateral summit to Putin their own summit in St. Petersburg, to which Putin gave a positive response, reported the state-run Anadolu Agency.

“Lots of subjects can be brought up during that meeting. Unfortunately there is this Karabakh issue and occupied lands of Azerbaijan,” Cavusoglu stated. “We have made lots of efforts to resolve the issue. Russia made some attempts as well. We are right now considering Russia’s suggestions, which suits our suggestions to Armenia.” Cavusoglu said Turkey will do its part, because “both our Russian and Azerbaijani friends want us to contribute to the subject.”

He was referring to the conflict over the Nagorno Karabakh region inside Azerbaijan, which broke away from Azerbaijan and wants to unite with Armenia. Resolving the conflict would greatly help stabilize the Caucasus and allow for deepening Eurasian economic cooperation over an area extending from China through to Turkey and Russia. Azerbaijan and Armenia are both members of the Commonwealth of Independent States of former Soviet republics.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan reached an agreement-in-principle following talks in late June in St. Petersburg.  

Following the Aug. 9 St. Petersburg meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recip Erdogan, high level delegations from both countries are meeting Aug. 11 in a trilateral (foreign, defense and security ministers) working meeting to set a collaborative course for ending the Syrian war. Russia and Turkey plan to expand bilateral trade to $100 billion per year, a three-fold increase over previous peaks. The North-South Corridor project will now engage Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Iran, and will fold into China’s One Belt, One Road project.

The Russia-Turkey partnership will bring greater stability to the entire Caspian Sea, Balkan, Caucasus region, extending the zone of Eurasian security and prosperity further west.

Lyndon LaRouche emphasized on Wednesday that these developments must not be seen as discrete actions. They are part of a new global dynamic, being led by Russia’s Putin and by the Chinese. In the coming weeks, Putin will be hosting the Vladivostok Eastern Economic Forum, which will now be attended by both Japanese Prime Minister Abe and by South Korean President Park. Following the G-20 summit, hosted by China, India will be hosting the annual BRICS leaders summit, which takes place in early October. China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi is in India this week, to further advance those crucial bilateral relations, and Indian Prime Minister Modi spoke by video conference with Russian President Putin on Wednesday, commemorating the opening of the first of five Russian-built nuclear power plants under construction in India, and arranging a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G-20.

LaRouche cited Putin’s leadership as defining a new direction for global progress. “This is a global process being steered by Putin and China. They have effectively taken charge of a new direction in policy, replacing rivalry with collaboration.” LaRouche noted that this process was fully underway in the middle of 2015, when Putin attended the Chinese celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Asia. It is now blossoming and leaving behind the pathetic old geopolitical games of Barack Obama, the British and NATO.

The developments in St. Petersburg this week will have a powerful impact in Germany, which is facing economic doom unless the policies of Merkel and Schaeuble are immediately abandoned. Look for dramatic shifts in Germany, which are now urgent. A number of recent studies, published since the fraudulent so-called ECB/EU bank “stress tests” have concluded that Deutsche Bank is doomed, is already a “dead bank walking,” and only the kind of reorganization that has been promoted by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche, for weeks, now can save the German economy from ruin. LaRouche has warned repeatedly that the collapse of Deutsche Bank and the destruction of the German economy must be avoided at all costs, because such a collapse will greatly increase the danger of world war.

The Putin-Erdogan developments, including the extension of the China OBOR program into the North-South Corridor running from the Persian Gulf up into Europe, afford the perfect opportunity for Germany to change.

The same is true for the United States, where a tremendous policy battle is underway, beneath the surface of the presidential electoral disaster. The push for Glass Steagall in both party platforms, and the fact that a number of Congressional progressive Democrats and the AFL-CIO have denounced the coup d’etat against Dilma Rouseff in Brazil, in an open letter to John Kerry, are indications that the United States is also ripe for a revolution in policy.

The Schiller Institute has now produced the proceedings of the historic June 2016 Berlin conference, which spelled out the imminent danger of world war but provided the pathway to a new future of peace and prosperity. That report, which defines the policy guidelines for the next American presidency and for a new governing coalition in Germany, is already circulating and is a blueprint for the kind of new policy paradigm that Putin and the Chinese are driving.

In an interview with 28Pages.org, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell in the Cheney-Bush Administration, described how the Congressional intelligence on Saudi Arabia’s role in the 9/11 attacks was not just classified away from the public. It was made a “verboten” subject in the CIA and broader intelligence community as well, Colonel Wilkerson said. This was enforced from Vice President Dick Cheney and his staff, on down.

Wilkerson stressed that the Iraq War was launched by suppression of the indicated Saudi involvement in the attacks which killed 3,000 Americans.

Wilkerson told 28Pages.org that regardless of how strong the evidence pointing toward Saudi Arabia was, Cheney effectively dampened discussion of it — even within the intelligence community that was charged with solving the immense crime.

While there are conflicting reports in media worldwide about the fierce fighting around East Aleppo in Syria, one thing is clear. The jihadi force currently encircled in East Aleppo by the Syrian Arab Army, and also attacking that army from the Southwest to try to break the siege, is simply al-Qaeda.

A grouping of Arab-Americans called Ikras, whose intelligence is politically incorrect but accurate, reports that 85% of the “rebels” currently fighting in East Aleppo belong to the al-Qaeda formation which — until a few moments ago — called itself Jabhat al-Nusra, as do the jihadis fighting to break the SAA’s siege from the outside. The remaining 15% belong to 22 other, often-shifting groups who fight alongside al-Nusra. The great majority have not previously lived in Aleppo, and half are not Syrians.

This then is the al-Qaeda terrorist force, the encirclement and siege of which the Obama State Department, through spokesman Adm. John Kirby, is calling on Russia and Syria to lift. Obama’s discredited fraud of a UN Ambassador, regime-change war devotee Samantha Power, has been calling the Syrian government encirclement of al-Qaeda in Aleppo “chilling,” and “an entrapment of 250-300,000 civilians.” She has demanded those civilians not leave East Aleppo through corridors established for that purpose; and has demanded that Russia cause the Syrian government to lift the siege.

Obama said on Aug. 6 that he does not trust anything Russia does in Syria, and also said the siege of East Aleppo should be lifted.

U.S. weapons such as TOW anti-tank missiles continue to go to these al-Qaeda fighters, along with Saudi-supplied weapons, although the New York Times reports today that this flow has slowed in recent weeks as supply roads have been cut by Syrian Army and allied forces.

As the veteran NATO Military Committee Chairman Gen. Harald Kujat (German Bundeswehr, ret.) warned on Deutschlandfunk radio recently, anyone talking about defending “rebels” fighting the al-Assad government in Aleppo, is talking about supporting al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and ISIS.

Precisely what Obama is now doing, with calls to do much more of the same from media which strongly back Hillary Clinton, such as the Washington Post today.

And as Lyndon LaRouche observed Aug. 6, at this point “Hillary Clinton should be ashamed of herself for being herself.”

According to new estimates by EIR, the four largest central banks in the world have taken just under $16 trillion in assets off the books of private banks and onto their own, since the U.S. Federal Reserve began the great money-printing game known as “quantitative easing” in 2009. The Fed, European Central Bank (ECB), Bank of England (BOE) and Bank of Japan (BOJ) now own about one-quarter of all government debt in the world, and have dragged one-third of all government debt in the Europe, Japan and the United States into the unprecedented territory of negative interest rates.

Moreover, these central banks are continuing to increase “quantitative easing” at a rate of about $2.4 trillion/year, a higher rate than at any prior point after the 2008 bank panic and economic crash. And although the Fed is no longer “easing,” U.S. banks and large corporations are continuing to suck up new central bank money through their London, European and Japanese branches.

Sunday’s Financial Times, in “The End of the World as We Know It?” by Michael Power, says that the central banks “have turned the norms of finance on their heads.” It notes that one very serious effect of this is that capital investment by business is at or near record low levels across the trans-Atlantic.

“Some 30% of the global issuance of sovereign bonds have negative yields,” Power reports. And, “As Morgan Stanley has noted, ‘Over the past 17 years, 10-year government debt in the U.S., Germany, the U.K. and Japan has produced a better return than the local equity market, with lower volatility.'” This is because as bond interest rates have gone surely and steadily downward for a decade, to zero and below, and to near zero even for the bonds of large corporations, the market “price” of those bonds has just as surely and steadily increased, making a perfect speculative market “outside the economies.”

This fatal effect on the banking system has become clear since the 2008 crash. Big Wall Street- and City of London-centered banks have reduced their commercial lending into the economy, concentrated on investment-bank speculation in the bond and securities markets, and slipstreamed the central banks in the government bond markets to make reliable “profit” — and then store it as excess reserves at the same central banks. And their speculations in government debt securities have provided the collateral they’ve used and/or loaned for financial derivatives bets and the so-called third-party repurchase or “repo” markets. The big bank holding companies have all moved toward the model of Deutsche Bank, for which loans make up just 15% of its EU1.6 trillion in “assets” — and which is now effectively bankrupt.

For the fourth consecutive Sunday, Germany’s leading financial newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has run an analysis of the perilous and declining state of its largest bank, Deutsche Bank. This Sunday, the FAZ interviewed a very prominent German economist who says, “Nationalize Deutsche Bank on an emergency basis! It is in worse crisis than in 2008” in the global bank panic.

That Martin Hellwig of the Max Planck Institute in Bonn would make this call — in a country where nationalizations were never discussed even at the depth of the 2007-09 panic and collapse — indicates that Deutsche Bank is nearing a real implosion unless it is “saved.” And the IMF has already formally found it to be the one giant bank which “radiates more risk” to other banks and banking systems, than any other in the world. Its implosion will signal a general economic crash, which will exacerbate the confrontations being pushed by the Obama Administration and NATO against Russia and China.

Schiller Institute founder and Germany’s BueSo party chairwoman Helga Zepp-LaRouche only weeks ago issued a public call to She and Lyndon LaRouche said the bank’s investment policies must be completely redirected in the process to industrial and infrastructure development, the policies of its CEO Alfred Herrhausen, who was assassinated on Nov. 30, 1989.

Hellwig declares to FAZ that “investment banks have sucked out Deutsche Bank” for more than a decade, so that its terminal crisis does not even stem from the 2008 global panic. It must be nationalized, Hellwig says, because any attempt to “wind it down” — i.e., to “resolve” the megabank by bailing in bondholders, etc. — would radiate that risk out to the whole banking system. The same thing, he notes, is true of France’s BNP Paribas. When asked if Deutsche Bank has an internal plan to avert implosion, Hellwig says the bank’s plans are insider trading, speculation, mergers and acquisitions, etc.

Finally, asked whether he himself could step in and run a nationalized Deutsche Bank, Hellwig demurs that he is not fit for the job because he takes time to think through decisions and for Deutsche Bank, there is no time.

Zepp-LaRouche stressed how rare any proposal for nationalization is in Germany, and that it signals that, in fact, there is no time; her proposal to save the megabank but to make it effectively a development bank, must be carried out. “This system is doomed. Don’t kid yourself and don’t become complacent; it could blow out at any moment,” she said.

by Jeffrey Steinberg

Within 24 hours of Hillary Clinton’s formal nomination as the Democratic Party’s 2016 presidential candidate, some of Clinton’s top foreign policy and national security campaign advisers came out with blood-curdling attacks against Russia and against Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Even as the Democratic Convention was underway, former CIA Director and Defense Secretary under Barack Obama, Leon Panetta, told the convention on July 27 that the key to ending the Syrian war is to overthrow President Assad. Two days later, Jeremy Bash, Panetta’s former chief of staff at CIA and the Pentagon and now a top adviser to Clinton, told the Daily Telegraph that one of Clinton’s first actions as President would be to order a top down review of the Syria policy, with a goal of putting the ouster of Assad at the top of the priorities. He argued that there is no prospect of defeating the Islamic State and Jabhat al Nusra without removing Assad.

Michelle Flournoy, who is viewed as Hillary Clinton’s top choice to be Secretary of Defense, told Defense One that a new administration must create a “no bomb zone” in the north of Syria, to safe-house rebel fighters and train and arm them to overthrow Assad, as well as combat ISIS and Nusra. She advocated the use of stand-off weapons against the Syrian Army as another escalation in the regime-change war launched by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton in early 2011.

Flournoy is the CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), a think tank dominated by Clinton advisers and other neoconservatives. Flournoy’s interview with Defense One was a condensed version of a report CNAS just produced from an ISIS Study Group, which included a collection of war-hawks and neocons who are all part of the Clinton stable: Ryan Crocker, Kimberly Kagan, Joseph Lieberman, Gen. David Petraeus, Kenneth Pollack, Andrew Tabler and Frances Townsend.

In May, CNAS published a blueprint for global confrontation, called “Extending American Power: Strategies to Expand American Engagement in a Competitive World Order,” which was co-authored by Robert Kagan, a leading neocon who prepared a similar study for the incoming Bush-Cheney Administration in 2000, called “Project for a New American Century.” Both documents advanced a unipolar world based on projection of ever-expanding U.S. military power. The PNAC study was widely seen as the game-plan that Bush and Cheney used to launch the decade of permanent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, a game-plan extended by Obama and Clinton into Syria and Libya.

Following the diatribes by Panetta, Bash and Flournoy, many astute observers concluded that the attacks on Syria, Russia and China, included in the combined remarks, could not have been issued without prior approval by Hillary Clinton herself.

In short, Clinton has declared herself as the “continuity” candidate from the nearly two-decades of permanent war, launched by Bush and Obama. Those wars have now put the world on the verge of thermonuclear war with Russia and China, a war that will wipe out humankind.

If anything, while serving as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was one of the most strident advocates of war and more war in the Obama Administration. Clinton was and remains a strong promoter of the need to overthrow the Assad government in Damascus, through direct U.S. military involvement if necessary. The demand to create a no-fly zone inside Syrian territory is a blatant violation of all principles of national sovereignty, and her role in the launching of the disastrous Libyan war—widely described as the decisive vote in the rush to regime-change—has created a permanent crisis throughout the African continent, leading to mass deaths and social chaos.

It was Hillary Clinton, along with Susan Rice and Samantha Power, who pushed for the ouster of Libyan leader Qaddafi, even though it meant aligning with hardcore Al Qaeda and related jihadist terror groups. The overthrow and assassination of Qaddafi turned Libya into an ungovernable no-mans-land, run by warring cliques of heavily armed militias, many dominated by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Magreb (AQIM) and subsequently by the Islamic State.

The arms that were “liberated” from Libyan government stockpiles have fueled wars across the African continent, and large quantities of those “loose weapons” were smuggled into Syria, through U.S., British, Saudi Arabian, Qatari and Turkish channels, into the hands of the jihadists who have turned Syria and Iraq into a Hell on Earth. Millions of refugees from the North African, Syrian, Iraq and Afghan conflicts, all boosted by Obama and Clinton, have flooded into Western Europe in desperate flight for their lives, creating the biggest refugee crisis in the entire postwar period.

These actions taken during Clinton’s four years as Secretary of State to Barack Obama, led directly to the events of Sept. 11, 2012, when jihadists from Ansar al-Sharia staged a heavily armed assault on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, resulting in the murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other American officials.

As State Department documents detailed, for months prior to the Benghazi 9/11 attack, Ambassador Stevens and other U.S. diplomats in Libya had begged for increased security personnel. The State Department compiled a grid of scores of attacks on foreign diplomats and even the International Red Cross, but security was actually stripped, rather than boosted. While State Department official Patrick Kennedy was ostensibly in charge of security arrangements for the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya, the buck really stopped with the Secretary—Hillary Clinton.

As the Benghazi attack on 9/11/12 was unfolding, live reports from Benghazi and from the embassy in Tripoli made clear that the attack on the mission was premeditated, well-planned, heavily armed and deadly. A Defense Intelligence Agency assessment, released within the government days after the attack, spelled out precisely how the attack was conducted.

Yet, President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, more concerned with the upcoming November 2012 presidential elections, chose to lie to the American people and claimed that the attack in Benghazi was a “spontaneous” protest against a little-known video slandering the Prophet Mohammed—a boldfaced lie.

That lie, worked out in a late-night phone call between President Obama and Secretary Clinton, and first issued to the public in a press release issued under Clinton’s name, was maintained for days. On the Sunday after the attack, National Security Adviser Susan Rice went on a string of interview shows to peddle the “spontaneous protest-gone wild” lie, first issued by Clinton.

Hillary Clinton put the re-election of Barack Obama ahead of the truth and the vital national security interests of the United States. She calculated that if she had told the truth and resigned from the Administration, Obama would have been defeated for re-election, she would have been blamed, and her own future prospects of being Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party would have been ended.

Lyndon LaRouche presented the case against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in an historic press conference in Washington, D.C. at the National Press Club in the weeks following the Benghazi tragedy. LaRouche identified Clinton as a stooge for Obama and as a leading member of the war party, that has given the United States and the world the longest running perpetual war, has created the conditions for the rise of the Islamic State, and has bankrupted the U.S. economy.

Hillary Clinton not only presided over the rise of ISIS and the total destabilization of the entire Middle East/North Africa region. She, along with her trusted State Department ally, Victoria Nuland, created a total confrontation with Russia, which, at critical moments, put her in bed with outright Nazis.

Clinton promoted Nuland, the wife of neocon ideologue Robert Kagan, to top State Department posts, from spokeswoman for Secretary Clinton and the Department, to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, a post from which Nuland presided over the “color revolution” overthrow of the Yanukovych government in Ukraine, using assets from the Banderist Nazi apparatus, that fought side-by-side with Hitler’s armies during World War II, and spawned several generations of avowed neo-Nazis like the Ukrainian Right Sector and Azov Brigades.

At one crucial moment in the overthrow of Yanukovych, Nuland boasted to an audience at the National Press Club in Washington that the U.S. had spent $5 billion on the Ukraine “democracy” campaign since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

That 2013-2014 coup d’etat in Kiev marked the dramatic escalation of the Obama Administration’s already-ongoing provocations against Russian President Vladimir Putin, actions that now include the deployment of NATO forces on the borders of Russia for the first time since the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in World War II.

It was Obama and Clinton, joined at the hips, who destroyed the U.S.-Russian relationship, and have now put the world on a dangerous course towards general war, and even potentially a thermonuclear war of extinction.

This is the real Obama-Clinton legacy.

Hillary Clinton detests the fact that this is her true record and that Lyndon LaRouche has fearlessly made this truth available to the American people and the world.

Sign me up, I’d like to stay connected