Author: David

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Dennis Speed

“O, my offense is rank / It smells to heaven”—Claudius, Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 3

“You are all Goebbels! You are all Nazis. This is Goebbels. You are all Goebbels!! This is inciting terrorists. The blood of [Congressman, majority whip and shooting victim] Steve Scalise is on your hands. Goebbels would be proud.” The two protesters that interrupted the recent Central Park Julius Caesar performance, in the which Donald Trump, as Julius Caesar, is mock-murdered under the pretense of “poetic license” and “contemporaneity”, made their trenchant view of the matter known, and the audience—their audience, for those 45 seconds—uncomfortable. That was the only properly performed drama witnessed by that audience that night.

Lyndon LaRouche emphasizes that the figure Casca, in Shakespeare’s play, reveals the core of the real tragedy:

CASSIUS: Did Cicero say anything?

CASCA: Ay, he spoke Greek.

CASSIUS: To what effect?

CASCA:Nay, an I tell you that, I’ll ne’er look you in the face again; but those that understood him smiled at one another and shook their heads; but for mine own part, it was Greek to me.

Casca’s arrogant ignorance warns us of what fate America must suffer, were we to refuse to master those ideas, essential to our continued, durable survival, no matter how foreign they might seem to be. When President Trump, for example, invoked the American System of economy in Kentucky back in March, and Kentucky’s Abraham Lincoln in that context, he might have usefully referred to Lincoln’s habit of reading Shakespeare to his cabinet, as Lincoln often did during meetings of the 1861–65 War of the Rebellion (“Civil War”). He did this precisely so that he and they could think outside of the system of economic and social tragedy that he so eloquently portrayed in his Second Inaugural Address, a soliloquy more than a speech.

There is an unfortunate association of William Shakespeare with things British. It should not be so. The British rejected Shakespeare for over 150 years after his death, until the power of Friedrich Schiller’s tragedies forced them to seem to embrace Shakespeare as an “alternative” to Schiller. In the case of criminal acts, including the use of a drama as the pretext for inciting a criminal act, an association between British intelligence-trained actors and assassins is a not only useful, but correct one to make.

Since before the beginning of the Trump Presidency, British intelligence has made it clear that it prefers to see Trump impeached or killed. The MI6 “former spy” Christopher Steele dossier, which was the pretext for the launching of the Russia probe against the President and close associates, is a British intelligence product, as is the Russia “hacking” campaign itself. The inducing of a mass-agitation “Kill Trump” campaign in the United States, amplified by the gutter speech-like anti-Trump grunts of 15-plus “celebrities”, is being coordinated (and, probably, directly) through American-based but British intelligence-connected networks under the pretext of a nation-wide “Impeach Trump” campaign.

The British kill American Presidents, and have been doing it since the assassination of Alexander Hamilton, the man that should have succeeded Washington to that office, rather than either Jefferson or Adams. Sometimes, they use actors, including American actors, as collaborators and conspirators in assassinations, not only those less known, but even those that are famous. Lincoln is another example of a President felled by a British-deployed assassin’s bullet. (Britain supported the South in that revolt against the Presidency known mistakenly as the “Civil War”, and the nation of Canada was created 150 years ago as a way of preventing various of the Canadian provinces from joining the United States and becoming states.)

Actor John Wilkes Booth and his successful assassination of Lincoln should be recalled here. Booth’s meeting in Montreal in October of 1864, six months before the assassination, with Jacob Thompson, chief of the Confederate secret service in Canada; his account at the Ontario Bank, which still contained $455 at the time that he was killed; and his regaling of his Confederate friends and supporters in that city with readings from The Merchant of Venice and other Shakespeare plays, makes it clear why Michael W. Kauffman entitled his 2005 book about John Wilkes Booth American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies.

So, telegraphing something like a live assassination operation against the United States Presidency by means of hijacking Shakespeare, and recruiting the credulous to yell in support of it—just as happens in the play Julius Caesar itself—is the inverse of the purpose of that drama, but is in fact an efficient means to build the “plausible deniability” pre-condition for the actual operation, whose true origins are to be ignored, even as they are displayed.

This is not the Classical notion or function of tragedy. “A great Classical tragedy is composed, and performed as a Platonic dialogue, such that the audience of that performance is placed, as in the intellectual balcony, overlooking that history on stage, ” LaRouche tells us in his essay, “The Coming Eurasian World”. “From that higher vantage point, the audience is challenged to see the interactions of the figures on stage from a higher vantage point than virtually any of the depicted characters themselves…

“The players portray the action on the stage of real life. The author and players must reveal the system which controls the unfolding action, the system which controls the parts played, but which the individual participant in the real-life experience fails to recognize. Classical tragedy, so composed, so performed, is thus the model for imparting a true sense for history in both the ordinary citizens, or adolescents, and others. The pages of the historian’s book, the historian’s lecture before the audience, must aim for and accomplish the same effect; to bring the essence of real history, in the time and place it actually occurred, back into life within the mind of the audience, and of the historian, too…

“Such Classical drama, so composed and delivered, is the properly mandatory foundation for the education of all the actually qualified future citizens of a republic.”

The audience, as poet Friedrich Schiller observed in “Theater Considered As A Moral Institution,” should leave the theater better than when they entered it. The “Central Park Caesar” with its pornographic symbolic murder of the President, does the opposite. Cassius’ famous statement: “The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves, that we are underlings,” once heard, should have prompted the audience to immediately empty the theater, were it understood. Instead, “it was Greek to them”, the actors, and the director, and required the intervention’s metaphor, “You are all Goebbels!!”, the only true poetic idea presented. No audience member was reported to have asked, “Are we the mob in Shakespeare’s play?” that evening.

To become a qualified citizen of Hamilton’s republic, skip Central Park Shakespeare, and the play Hamilton also, for that matter. Try staying home and reading aloud Treasury Secretary Hamilton’s Reports on Manufacturing, credit, the National Bank, and its constitutionality. LaRouche’s Four Laws, Hamilton’s Reports but in a more advanced form, provide a new economic platform for America, which American must no longer reject as “Greek to me”. Small group readings of the Reports and the Four Laws can ensure joint comprehension and mastery of these principles.

Lyndon LaRouche’s idea of the republic, cited above, runs directly counter to the modern idea of tragedy, drama, and art in general. The United States is, thankfully, not a democracy. It is a Hamiltonian republic, with a Hamiltonian Presidency. And the comprehension of Classical tragedy will be the way out for the American people, causing them to accept, not Caesar’s crown, but the olive branch of win-win cooperation that Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin have offered the world, and the United States, as a way out.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Barbara Boyd

After viewing fired FBI Director James Comey’s testimony on June 8th, Lyndon LaRouche called upon the American people to immediately shut down the coup underway against President Trump. LaRouche said, “This is an FBI type operation to destroy the United States, and, if it is not stopped, the world will face general warfare.”

On June 7, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper openly touted the real reason for the coup against Trump in an unhinged speech in Australia, granting full leave to his inner swine: Clapper declared that Trump’s unforgivable sin is the President’s openness to collaborating with Putin and Russia and his refusal to back down on his campaign promise to end the Bush/Obama policy of perpetual wars, a key reason why he was elected.

Clapper ranted that it is in Putin’s and Russia’s “genes” to attack the United States. Since Trump has pursued better relations and shared intelligence with Russia on terrorism, Clapper raved, Watergate [where Richard Nixon committed proven crimes] paled in comparison to Russiagate [where both Clapper and Comey have testified to date that the President has committed no crimes]. Clapper also told the Aussies to target China, accusing the Chinese, without any offer of proof, of meddling in Australia’s elections. Comey backed Clapper in his testimony on June 8, attempting to wax eloquent in response to Senator Joe Manchin, about how Putin exists with one purpose in mind: to shred and dismember the United States.

Read the complete article with the PDF attached above

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder and chairwoman of the Schiller Institute prerecorded the following video address on June 16 to the Detroit Schiller Institute Conference.

Dear Guests of the Schiller Institute Conference in Detroit:

If you only believe the Western media, especially the mainstream media in the United States, you actually would have quite a reason to be pessimistic, because what do you see? You see an unbelievable campaign against President Trump, a color revolution; you have a Special Prosecutor—who is supposedly investigating Russia-gate, the absurd idea that Russia stole the election from Hillary Clinton, and gave it to Trump—a Special Prosecutor who investigates possible obstruction of justice, and you get the impression that it’s only a question of time when the Presidency of President Trump will fail.

If that were the only reality, it would be very bad for the people of America, and the world. For the people who have voted for Trump, which Hillary Clinton called cynically “the deplorables,” it would mean that they still have 100 million jobs lacking, because that’s the actual figure which is not in the statistics, but that is the reality of unemployment in America. They would still have a dropping life expectancy rate, which is the surest indicator for a failing economy.

But this is not the whole reality: Because what the mainstream media are not reporting, is that there is already, right now, a completely new paradigm becoming a reality.

A little less than four years ago, President Xi Jinping of China announced a completely new policy which he called the “New Silk Road.” He did that in September 2013 in Kazakhstan. And in the almost four years since, this new economic cooperation policy, the so-called Belt and Road Initiative, has taken on a dynamic that is absolutely breathtaking. It is already about 20 times as big as the Marshall Plan in the post-war reconstruction after the Second World War. And it is by no means limited to that: It is open-ended.

There are already six major industrial development corridors, in various parts of the Eurasian continent. You have more than 110 countries cooperating, and it extends to all of Asia. It already reaches—despite the policies of the European Union, which is very hesitant, to say the least—it reaches into Eastern and Central European countries, the Balkan countries; Italy is cooperating, as are Spain and Portugal; France has a positive attitude; Switzerland wants to be a hub of the New Silk Road; and even the small country of Luxembourg now recognizes the advantages of this new policy. It reaches as far as into Latin America.

But from my standpoint, one of the most important things is that it has changed the nature of the crisis in Africa completely. By the Chinese building railways, from Djibouti to Addis Ababa—from Uganda, Rwanda, Congo, Tanzania—reaching into the heart of Africa, it has completely changed the outlook of the Africans, in terms of a real perspective of overcoming poverty and underdevelopment.

The largest infrastructure project in history is now at least under consideration, in terms of a feasibility study: It is the Transaqua project, which is the idea to refill Lake Chad, which now has only 10% of its original water, and take some of the water from the tributaries of the Congo River, and bring it along a system of rivers and canals, and this way, give hydropower to 12 countries, which are along the route, bring in inland waterways, and provide plenty of water for irrigation of agriculture. So, it has completely changed the self-confidence of the Africans.

The Perspective From China

But there was in mid-May, a very, very important summit, in Beijing, the “Belt and Road Forum.” There were 29 heads of state, representing, together with other top leaders, 110 nations. There were 1,200 international delegates. And I had the extraordinary honor to be one of the invited speakers, and I could both speak, and make a commentary at the Think-Tank Summit, which was part of the Belt and Road Forum. And then, I had the opportunity to have high-level meetings, in Beijing, Nanjing, and Shanghai, in the following two weeks.

And from that very fresh experience, I can tell you: The world looks completely different from this perspective.

First of all, the delegates at the Forum had the very distinct feeling of participating in the shaping of history, of the creation of a new world economic order, a completely new paradigm of mankind, where geopolitics is superseded by a “win-win cooperation” among all nations which participate in this project.

Now, what is being discussed and being realized, here, is to export the Chinese economic miracle, in a win-win form of cooperation among all the nations of Eurasia, Africa, Latin America, and so forth. People from China naturally know, what the Chinese economic miracle is, but I think it tends to be underestimated by Americans. It truly is the greatest economic achievement in the history of mankind, and I think it goes even beyond the famous German post-war economic miracle.

Consider the magnitude of the changes. In 1949, when the People’s Republic of China was founded, because of the civil war and the war against Japan, the life expectancy in China was only 35 years. The infant mortality was 20%. The illiteracy rate was 80%. Especially since the economic reforms of Deng Xiaoping, but especially in the last 30 years, China’s economic policies have created an economic miracle that is unlike any other development in any other country. It lifted 800 million people out of poverty. At this point, there are only 4% left in severe poverty, and it is the aim of the Chinese government to overcome and eliminate that poverty by the year 2020. The life expectancy has gone up to 76 years average. The illiteracy rate is only 4% left; it is probably much less that in the United States, at this point.

And China has become the world leader in many areas, but especially in the building of fast train systems, and it has already constructed more than 20,000 km of fast train systems, and it has the aim to connect every Chinese city, by the year 2020, with a fast train. There will probably be 50,000 km of such fast train lines.

A Global Perspective for Development

Since the Belt and Road Forum took place, in mid-May, there have been, in rapid sequence, two other major international economic events. One was the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, and then the Shanghai Cooperation Organization annual meeting, held in Astana, Kazakhstan. And what you see in these meetings is the extremely rapid economic integration of the New Silk Road, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and reaching out even beyond that.

Now, President Putin just gave an interview, where he invites all the Russian citizens to ask questions, and he got 2 million questions. And one question referred to the cooperation between the New Silk Road and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and he stated what is very obvious, that this does not just improve the relations between Russia and China, but it is of global importance for the well-being of the entire civilization.

President Xi Jinping on his side, has said the same thing, many, many times, that what we are talking about is a completely new approach to world affairs, a community for a shared future of mankind.

Now, obviously, the key for this Belt and Road Initiative to succeed, is that the relationship between the United States and China must be going well, and they must cooperate, because they are the two largest economies of the world. And when these two countries can find a new relationship between each other, I am absolutely confident that there is no single problem on the planet which cannot be solved.

On Thursday, there was a very important high-level meeting in New York, which was addressed, among others, by the Chinese Ambassador to the United States, Cui Tiankai, who basically gave us the story, that in history, it has happened 16 times that a rising power was bypassing the existing dominant power. And the ambassador noted, that in 12 of these 16 times, it came to a war; and that in 4 times, the rising power superseded the existing power.

So he obviously said that we do not want to have either the example of the 12 wars, nor the other 4, but what we are talking about is a completely new page in history, a true win-win cooperation—not a zero-sum game, where one wins and the other one loses, but a community of shared interest. In other words, that it is the key to what even many leaders in the United States have been warning about, that the United States does not fall into the so-called “Thucydides trap,” which refers historically to the same problem between the ancient Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta, which led to the Peloponnesian War, and finally, to the destruction of the Greek state.

Now, fortunately, with the election of President Trump, that danger is clearly very much diminished. There was a very good meeting in Mar-a-Lago, the first summit between President Trump and President Xi Jinping, earlier this year. And as a follow-up, President Trump sent his advisor Matt Pottinger to the Belt and Road Forum in May. So this is on a very good route.

The “Color Revolution” Against Trump

But let me just say, in parentheses, that this very positive attitude of President Trump towards China, and towards Russia, actually, is the real reason for the currently attempted color revolution against President Trump. It is because Trump is about to improve the relationship with Russia and China, qualitatively, way beyond anything in the past. In response, the political forces representing the old paradigm—those people who thought, that when the Soviet Union had collapsed, that they would build an unipolar world and keep Russia down, prevent the rise of China—it is they, who have started what President Trump has called an “unprecedented which-hunt” against his Presidency, peddling the absolutely absurd idea, that it was the Russians who stole the election from Hillary Clinton, and gave it to Trump. And these are the same people who are now leading the charge that President Trump would be involved in an obstruction of justice, which is a complete lie. Even the {New York Post} came to the conclusion that the unbelievable hearing by the former FBI Director James Comey was really a show, which can only be characterized as “J. Edgar Comey,” in a clear reference to J. Edgar Hoover, who used to blackmail Presidents and threaten them with the distribution of lies.

Now, we should be absolutely aware: This is a very tense situation, and it is not just what people now call the so-called “deep state,” meaning the military-industrial complex, the intelligence community, in combination with the mainstream media.

We should not underestimate the role of the British Empire. It was the {Financial Times} calling for the impeachment of Trump. It was the {New York Times}, which is supporting this disgusting performance of {Julius Caesar} in New York, where the main actor acting as the Emperor Caesar looks like Trump, and his wife is dressed up like Melania Trump, and celebrating the death and the murder of Caesar, every day. So, this is a very serious matter, but it can be defeated.

In order to make the collaboration among the United States, Russia and China successful, however, we cannot leave cooperation on infrastructure at the level of private investments. The problem with private investors is, that they will want to have 12% return, per year, which is a completely wrong idea, in terms of the function of infrastructure. If Trump would just add it to the Federal budget, he would have the same opposition from the Democrats and the Republicans, which brought down the repeal of Obamacare.

Capitalizing a Recovery:

And the privatization of large infrastructure just does not work. There was an example in recent history, where this was attempted, and led to a complete disaster. And I just want to remind you of it, and tell you about it, and that was the example, when the Berlin Wall came down, in 1989; and when we,—that is my husband, Lyndon LaRouche, and I—when we proposed to have the so-called “Productive Triangle,” the region from Paris, Berlin, Vienna, which was no longer separated by the wall, beef it up through modern technologies, and then have infrastructure development corridors into Eastern Europe, to Warsaw, Kiev, the Balkans. And when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, we simply extended that conception to all of Eurasia, connecting the infrastructure corridors between Asia and Europe, and in this way, have the connection between the industrial and population centers of Europe and Asia connected.

And this would have been the basis for a peace plan. It would have allowed the use of the industries of the Comecon for the modernization of the infrastructure of these countries, with the help of Western technology, and it would have totally changed history for the better. But at that point, this was not the geopolitical intention of Margaret Thatcher, Mitterrand, or Bush Sr., and they went for privatization, instead.

When the first part of the project, the Productive Triangle, was on the agenda, the chairman of Deutsche Bank, Alfred Herrhausen, had a similar proposal for the development of Poland, by wanting to use the famous Credit Institution for Reconstruction [Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau] which had been the financial basis for the economic miracle of Germany, after the Second World War. He was assassinated, and so was Detlev Rohwedder, who was in charge of restructuring the state-owned industries of East Germany; and he came to the conclusion that he wanted to reconstruct them first, and then see, what was socially acceptable, in terms of privatization. And he was assassinated, and then, instead, they replaced him with a woman called Birgit Breuel, who went for rapid privatization. It led to a complete clear-cutting of the industry. And the results are still to be felt today, because in the eastern part of Germany, there are still some towns and villages, which are almost without people, because all the young people had moved away, there were no jobs left, and only those who were too old to move, would stay.

The same thing happened, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when Jeffrey Sachs went for the “shock therapy,” and was able, in the privatization of the state-owned industries, to cut the industrial power of Russia between 1991-94, down to only one-third.

This had unbelievable social consequences. It led to a complete demographic collapse. Russia lost 1 million people each year in the 1990s under Yeltsin, and it was clearly a form of genocide, which was only reversed by President Putin. It had led to the phenomenon of the “oligarchs,” people, who all of a sudden were billionaires, without doing any work.

So, the same problem now exists for Africa. And the Africans are very clear: They say, this whole policy by the European Union to go for private investment in infrastructure in Africa will not work, because private investors want profit, and they are not concerned about the future for Africa.

National Priorities, Not Private Financing

This is why my husband recently called for the full implementation of a national credit policy, a policy in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton: Glass-Steagall, a National Bank, a credit system, and in this way {only} can America be integrated into the New Silk Road effort.

What has to be understood, is that there are certain areas of the economy, where private interests cannot play a useful role, because they create a framework for the entire economy; and infrastructure is not just measured by the cost you invest in it, or by the profit you get out of it, from toll booths and other such means; but the true value of infrastructure is obviously the entire transformation of the productivity of the industry, which is made possible as a result of the productivity of the labor power.

So, what we are talking about, is an entirely new economic platform, which is defined by a new level of technology. And in this time, it must be absolutely fast train systems, it must be the maglev. In the United States, there is presently only a miserable 150 km of high-speed rail, somewhere between New York and Boston, which only reaches 200 km per hour for short stretches. What is needed in the United States, is about 40,000 miles of a combination of maglev and fast trains, integrated with urban metro systems to reduce the average commuting time, from about four hours at present, down to 20 minutes.

The efficiency of infrastructure is all the more important, the more developed the level of production is. So, for many areas, industrial urban areas, like New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles, or Chicago, or the greater Detroit region, or Cleveland, Ohio, I would suggest, what should be taken as a model is the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei model, which is planned to be turned into a super-city. It’s called the “Jing-Jin-Ji model,” and it is supposed to take 130 million citizens, create one integrated new city of over 212,000 sq. km, integrate a system of airports, highways, fast train systems, maglev, metro, so that for every person, it takes no more than 20 minutes to go from home to work. The trains should go about 200-350 kph.

And in the case of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei model, there is a specific role for every city. Beijing is supposed to focus on technology and culture; Tianjin will be a research base for manufacturing; Hebei will have a core in minor industries. So, a similar approach should be taken for the United States, where you have, both, a renewal of existing urban areas, where the infrastructure is absolutely desolate, totally decrepit; but also create entirely new cities, science cities, where centers for scientific and technological cooperation and international projects will be put on the agenda.

Start with the Future!

I think, the biggest problem is: Do not just get stuck in the present problems. The infrastructure discussion in New York, as we saw it in the last couple of days, they don’t have a vision for the future, yet. They think about how to fix LaGuardia Airport, they don’t consider, that there could be population growth, or economic growth, or that, with a fast train system, as we are proposing it, the function of airports would be completely different—so, maybe, you don’t want to focus only on the airport, you should start with a fast train system as part of an integrated infrastructure system.

We have to look at this whole question from the standpoint of the future, from the standpoint of a completely new paradigm of cooperation among nations. We must start with the idea of one mankind, of a completely new set of relations among nations, where nations are not just looking for their own interest, but start with the interest of the other: That was the basis of the Peace of Westphalia, which has been the basis for international law, and it is now the basis for the idea of the win-win cooperation. And then, we can concentrate on the common aims of mankind.

What are these common aims of mankind? We can find cures for diseases, which are still incurable, today. We can develop the idea of energy and raw materials security, once we think about the commercial use of thermonuclear fusion power. We can think about the benefits for every nation, in joint cooperation in science and technology of space collaboration. And we can imagine many, many more breakthroughs, such breakthroughs, where we don’t even know yet what questions to ask: Because that is the true nature of human creativity, that there are no limits to what human beings can accomplish.

We are still in the infancy of development of the human species. And I think we are very lucky that we are alive and can shape the future at this point, but I think the most crucial aspect for this whole perspective, to succeed, is: Make the American-Chinese cooperation for the New Silk Road function in the immediate period.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments
Video of 4xCIcvAoW3Y

After viewing fired FBI Director James Comey’s testimony on June 8th, Lyndon LaRouche called upon the American people to immediately shutdown the coup underway against President Trump. LaRouche stated, “This is an FBI type operation to destroy the United States, and, if it is not stopped, the world will face general warfare.” The American people have the power to do that. You hold the cards here.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and President of the German Schiller Institute

The following is Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s article in the May issue of China Investment which is in Chinese and English. It is part of a cover story package on the Belt and Road Initiative.

While initially almost all U.S. think tanks were negative concerning China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), or simply refused to even take note of it, there has recently been a shift. Except for the hardcore neocon think tanks, several now have started to report about the tremendous business opportunities the New Silk Road project would also mean for U.S. enterprises. This reporting has occurred especially since the summit between President Xi Jinping and President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, which was very successful, despite difficult circumstances.

The most obvious of many areas of such cooperation would naturally be the link between the Belt and Road Initiative and the planned $1 trillion infrastructure project Trump has promised in his election campaign, which is supposed to be presented in May. There are several roadblocks to be overcome for this to happen.

The infrastructure requirements of the U.S. are enormous due to decades of long non-investment by the previous administrations. Besides those who have actually been to China, most Americans have no idea how far behind U.S. infrastructural development is as compared with China. The Washington-Boston 736 km Acela “high-speed” line travels at an average speed of only 105 km/h, with only very short segments at 145 km/h, which is by no means high-speed compared to the approximately 130,000 kilometers in China, over 50 times as much! The roads are in terrible, dangerous condition, and so are the bridges, sanitation systems, etc., but their use is still extensive. For a trip between Washington and New York one has to pay the substantial amount of $115 in tolls and gas per car.

The American Society of Civil Engineers at a recent conference put out the estimate that the real infrastructure investment requirements are actually $4.5 trillion. There is no way the financing of either these amounts will come from the private equity market, as representatives of this sector in recent discussions with President Trump expressed prohibitive conditions, such as a 11-12% return per annum, and a full return of the capital invested within ten years. Also problematic is the idea that the infrastructure should be financed by a toll system, which would maybe work narrowly in densely populated areas, but not at all in thinly inhabited ones. But the very idea, that there should be an immediate direct return on infrastructure, completely misses the function of infrastructure for the general economy.

The quality and density of infrastructure represents the precondition for the productivity of an economy as a whole, and a modern economy requires approximately 50% of its total expenditures for the expansion and modernization of infrastructure, since the life expectancy of various categories is between 20 and 50 years. A well planned infrastructure platform is an integrated system of high-speed rail lines, waterways, highways, energy production and distribution, communication, as well as so-called soft infrastructure such as health and education systems, etc. The higher the technological development and productivity of an economic space becomes, the more important the speed and efficiency of the transport and density of infrastructure in general will need to be, since all the various levels of production into semi-finished and finished goods work together like a complicated machine, where each part has a role for a harmonious function. Thus, the return on the infrastructure investment is actually measured by the increase of the productivity of the entire economy, and the financing therefore can not be left to the private investor, but it has to be the responsibility of the state, which is devoted to the common good of the national economy.

If President Trump would simply request Congress to fund the infrastructure program by the Federal budget, he would run into the same opposition of the Democrats and part of the GOP that already prevented the repeal of Obamacare. And if China and other foreign investors would simply invest by means of the private equity market, provided that would be allowed, these investments would be exposed to potential fluctuations of the markets.

Due to decades-long policies of outsourcing to cheap labor countries, the U.S. manufacturing sector presently lacks a complete upstream and downstream industry chain, which is another impediment. China on the other hand, has such a complete upstream and downstream industry chain, and it also has a vast experience in building of modern infrastructure systems, not only from its experience in China itself, but also having built them in other countries.

China could therefore not only help those cities with the greatest transportation needs, such as New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington DC, but it could also help to replicate what China is doing domestically, namely to connect all major cities with fast train systems. For regions like the one between New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia for example, an integrated infrastructure system like the planned system for “Integrated Transport Development” of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, would make a lot of sense, since people are losing every day many hours in commuting back and forth between living quarters and work. While it takes only five hours to travel the distance of 800 miles from Beijing to Shanghai at an average speed of 185 mph (298 km/h), it takes 19 hours from New York City to Chicago, about the same distance!

The United States would also benefit greatly from the construction of entirely new cities, which could be located in the very thinly populated areas in the central states of the U.S.. They could be science cities, as education and research centers, or they could be located with other needed large infrastructure projects, such as water management projects for the drought endangered regions of the Southwest. One such project, which has been on the shelf since the Kennedy administration, is the North American Water and Power Alliance, NAWAPA, which has recently been upgraded for the 21st Century.

On the other hand, such an upgraded U.S. economy could also export into the expanding Chinese market where a middle class of now approximately 900 million people is enjoying a quickly increasing buying power, due to the structural reforms implemented by the Chinese government. In 2016 the bilateral trade volume between the U.S. and China was already $519.6 billion, bilateral investment grew to $170 billion in the same year. Over the last decade, U.S. exports to China grew 11%, and Chinese investments to the U.S. grew 5.6%. The potential for all of these categories to grow, if the two complementary economies of the U.S. and China would link in the described way, is enormous.

Such U.S.-China cooperation would naturally not be limited to bilateral exchanges, but given the vast requirements for infrastructure, agriculture and industrial development in the world, joint ventures almost anywhere in the world would be a Win-Win perspective for the United States, China, and the third party country. With the huge potential of the Belt and Road Initiative to develop into the World Land-Bridge proposed by the Schiller Institute in 2014, in the not so distant future there can be the construction of a fast train system from the southern tip of South America in Chile and Argentina all the way up through Central and North America and via a tunnel under the Bering Strait connect to the Eurasian Transport systems. This would provide the gateway for the United States to join the newly emerging Pacific-centered world. This would require vastly improving and expanding the Alaska railroad corridors through Canada and connect that with the new rail line system in the U.S..

Such a perspective of approximately 40,000 miles of modern electrified rail, about half of which should be fast train systems, will also mean an enormous investment into industrial production to supply the necessary goods and materials, as well as the training and education of the skilled labor needed to accomplish such a huge task. Especially for the training of the youth one can go back to the experience of Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps, the CCC program, which contributed significantly to help lead the U.S. out of the depression in the ’30s. Roosevelt called the CCC “the greatest peacetime movement this country has ever seen.” It was created to address the dire lack of education and skills of the youth, a condition which in today’s America takes the form of a very large drug addiction and drug-related crimes.

At the summit between President Trump and President Xi Jinping, they decided to set up four permanent dialogues, one of them devoted to economic issues. This group of experts could start to explore the project of the U.S. joining the BRI immediately.

The most important aspect of the concept of the U.S. joining with the Belt and Road Initiative, however, will be to inspire the whole population with hope for the future, a better future for generations to come, something which has been lost in the last five decades. It would also demonstrate that President Trump’s promise to make America great again, is not in contradiction to the interests of other countries, but that such a Win-Win cooperation would move the entire world into a new era of human civilization. If the two largest economies of the world would work together in this way, there will be no problem on the planet that could not be solved.

If one studies the economic theory behind the tremendous success of the Chinese economic miracle of the last 30 years, one will find that present Chinese economic policies, basing themselves on the education of its citizens, very much in coherence with the Confucian principle of lifelong learning and innovation, are actually very close to the economic principles of the American System of economy, as it was developed and implemented by Alexander Hamilton, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, Henry C. Carey and Lincoln. All of these men understood that the most important source of wealth of a country is the development of the creative powers of their own population. And therefore, they designed a system of economy that furthered exactly that in order to catalyze the greatest rate of scientific and technological progress and innovation.

It is also fascinating that the real spiritual father of the American Republic, Benjamin Franklin, was completely excited and inspired by the writings of Confucius, from whom he took the conviction that the moral ennoblement of the individual was the absolute key for the improvement of society. Franklin based his own system of moral teaching on Confucius, which was decisive for the spirit of the foundation of America. A very similar intellectual closeness existed between President Lincoln and the founding father of China.

The collaboration with the New Silk Road should therefore have a cultural dimension, and exactly like the ancient Silk Road, lead to an exchange of art and philosophy. It should do so to bring forward the best traditions and highest expression of humanity of each participating country, and in doing so, people will discover the unexpected beauty of the other cultures and this knowledge will lead to admiration and open new horizons. The epoch of a community of a shared future is within reach. If President Trump and President Xi Jinping will join hands for this collaboration, both of them will have a place in history for having led Mankind to its true destiny.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, Founder and President of the German Schiller Institute

The following is Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s article in the May issue of China Investment which is in Chinese and English. It is part of a cover story package on the Belt and Road Initiative.

While initially almost all U.S. think tanks were negative concerning China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), or simply refused to even take note of it, there has recently been a shift. Except for the hardcore neocon think tanks, several now have started to report about the tremendous business opportunities the New Silk Road project would also mean for U.S. enterprises. This reporting has occurred especially since the summit between President Xi Jinping and President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, which was very successful, despite difficult circumstances.

The most obvious of many areas of such cooperation would naturally be the link between the Belt and Road Initiative and the planned $1 trillion infrastructure project Trump has promised in his election campaign, which is supposed to be presented in May. There are several roadblocks to be overcome for this to happen.

The infrastructure requirements of the U.S. are enormous due to decades of long non-investment by the previous administrations. Besides those who have actually been to China, most Americans have no idea how far behind U.S. infrastructural development is as compared with China. The Washington-Boston 736 km Acela “high-speed” line travels at an average speed of only 105 km/h, with only very short segments at 145 km/h, which is by no means high-speed compared to the approximately 130,000 kilometers in China, over 50 times as much! The roads are in terrible, dangerous condition, and so are the bridges, sanitation systems, etc., but their use is still extensive. For a trip between Washington and New York one has to pay the substantial amount of $115 in tolls and gas per car.

The American Society of Civil Engineers at a recent conference put out the estimate that the real infrastructure investment requirements are actually $4.5 trillion. There is no way the financing of either these amounts will come from the private equity market, as representatives of this sector in recent discussions with President Trump expressed prohibitive conditions, such as a 11-12% return per annum, and a full return of the capital invested within ten years. Also problematic is the idea that the infrastructure should be financed by a toll system, which would maybe work narrowly in densely populated areas, but not at all in thinly inhabited ones. But the very idea, that there should be an immediate direct return on infrastructure, completely misses the function of infrastructure for the general economy.

The quality and density of infrastructure represents the precondition for the productivity of an economy as a whole, and a modern economy requires approximately 50% of its total expenditures for the expansion and modernization of infrastructure, since the life expectancy of various categories is between 20 and 50 years. A well planned infrastructure platform is an integrated system of high-speed rail lines, waterways, highways, energy production and distribution, communication, as well as so-called soft infrastructure such as health and education systems, etc. The higher the technological development and productivity of an economic space becomes, the more important the speed and efficiency of the transport and density of infrastructure in general will need to be, since all the various levels of production into semi-finished and finished goods work together like a complicated machine, where each part has a role for a harmonious function. Thus, the return on the infrastructure investment is actually measured by the increase of the productivity of the entire economy, and the financing therefore can not be left to the private investor, but it has to be the responsibility of the state, which is devoted to the common good of the national economy.

If President Trump would simply request Congress to fund the infrastructure program by the Federal budget, he would run into the same opposition of the Democrats and part of the GOP that already prevented the repeal of Obamacare. And if China and other foreign investors would simply invest by means of the private equity market, provided that would be allowed, these investments would be exposed to potential fluctuations of the markets.

Due to decades-long policies of outsourcing to cheap labor countries, the U.S. manufacturing sector presently lacks a complete upstream and downstream industry chain, which is another impediment. China on the other hand, has such a complete upstream and downstream industry chain, and it also has a vast experience in building of modern infrastructure systems, not only from its experience in China itself, but also having built them in other countries.

China could therefore not only help those cities with the greatest transportation needs, such as New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, and Washington DC, but it could also help to replicate what China is doing domestically, namely to connect all major cities with fast train systems. For regions like the one between New York, New Jersey and Philadelphia for example, an integrated infrastructure system like the planned system for “Integrated Transport Development” of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, would make a lot of sense, since people are losing every day many hours in commuting back and forth between living quarters and work. While it takes only five hours to travel the distance of 800 miles from Beijing to Shanghai at an average speed of 185 mph (298 km/h), it takes 19 hours from New York City to Chicago, about the same distance!

The United States would also benefit greatly from the construction of entirely new cities, which could be located in the very thinly populated areas in the central states of the U.S.. They could be science cities, as education and research centers, or they could be located with other needed large infrastructure projects, such as water management projects for the drought endangered regions of the Southwest. One such project, which has been on the shelf since the Kennedy administration, is the North American Water and Power Alliance, NAWAPA, which has recently been upgraded for the 21st Century.

On the other hand, such an upgraded U.S. economy could also export into the expanding Chinese market where a middle class of now approximately 900 million people is enjoying a quickly increasing buying power, due to the structural reforms implemented by the Chinese government. In 2016 the bilateral trade volume between the U.S. and China was already $519.6 billion, bilateral investment grew to $170 billion in the same year. Over the last decade, U.S. exports to China grew 11%, and Chinese investments to the U.S. grew 5.6%. The potential for all of these categories to grow, if the two complementary economies of the U.S. and China would link in the described way, is enormous.

Such U.S.-China cooperation would naturally not be limited to bilateral exchanges, but given the vast requirements for infrastructure, agriculture and industrial development in the world, joint ventures almost anywhere in the world would be a Win-Win perspective for the United States, China, and the third party country. With the huge potential of the Belt and Road Initiative to develop into the World Land-Bridge proposed by the Schiller Institute in 2014, in the not so distant future there can be the construction of a fast train system from the southern tip of South America in Chile and Argentina all the way up through Central and North America and via a tunnel under the Bering Strait connect to the Eurasian Transport systems. This would provide the gateway for the United States to join the newly emerging Pacific-centered world. This would require vastly improving and expanding the Alaska railroad corridors through Canada and connect that with the new rail line system in the U.S..

Such a perspective of approximately 40,000 miles of modern electrified rail, about half of which should be fast train systems, will also mean an enormous investment into industrial production to supply the necessary goods and materials, as well as the training and education of the skilled labor needed to accomplish such a huge task. Especially for the training of the youth one can go back to the experience of Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps, the CCC program, which contributed significantly to help lead the U.S. out of the depression in the ’30s. Roosevelt called the CCC “the greatest peacetime movement this country has ever seen.” It was created to address the dire lack of education and skills of the youth, a condition which in today’s America takes the form of a very large drug addiction and drug-related crimes.

At the summit between President Trump and President Xi Jinping, they decided to set up four permanent dialogues, one of them devoted to economic issues. This group of experts could start to explore the project of the U.S. joining the BRI immediately.

The most important aspect of the concept of the U.S. joining with the Belt and Road Initiative, however, will be to inspire the whole population with hope for the future, a better future for generations to come, something which has been lost in the last five decades. It would also demonstrate that President Trump’s promise to make America great again, is not in contradiction to the interests of other countries, but that such a Win-Win cooperation would move the entire world into a new era of human civilization. If the two largest economies of the world would work together in this way, there will be no problem on the planet that could not be solved.

If one studies the economic theory behind the tremendous success of the Chinese economic miracle of the last 30 years, one will find that present Chinese economic policies, basing themselves on the education of its citizens, very much in coherence with the Confucian principle of lifelong learning and innovation, are actually very close to the economic principles of the American System of economy, as it was developed and implemented by Alexander Hamilton, John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, Henry C. Carey and Lincoln. All of these men understood that the most important source of wealth of a country is the development of the creative powers of their own population. And therefore, they designed a system of economy that furthered exactly that in order to catalyze the greatest rate of scientific and technological progress and innovation.

It is also fascinating that the real spiritual father of the American Republic, Benjamin Franklin, was completely excited and inspired by the writings of Confucius, from whom he took the conviction that the moral ennoblement of the individual was the absolute key for the improvement of society. Franklin based his own system of moral teaching on Confucius, which was decisive for the spirit of the foundation of America. A very similar intellectual closeness existed between President Lincoln and the founding father of China.

The collaboration with the New Silk Road should therefore have a cultural dimension, and exactly like the ancient Silk Road, lead to an exchange of art and philosophy. It should do so to bring forward the best traditions and highest expression of humanity of each participating country, and in doing so, people will discover the unexpected beauty of the other cultures and this knowledge will lead to admiration and open new horizons. The epoch of a community of a shared future is within reach. If President Trump and President Xi Jinping will join hands for this collaboration, both of them will have a place in history for having led Mankind to its true destiny.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Diane Sare

Last week, in response to a report from Manhattan Project organizers, Lyndon LaRouche proposed that a committee be created to do something about the alarming collapse of the Manhattan-area transportation grid, and to “kick whomever needs it, to get it done.”

As anyone who has attempted to travel into or through New York City will tell you, the roads in some areas, especially on toll plazas by the bridges, look like they were hit by a carpet bombing campaign. One couple returning from Staten Island to New Jersey destroyed three tires in one large pot hole! And this, where each driver pays $15 just to cross the Hudson River! Driving is a high anxiety activity, which has become like an obstacle course in a war zone.

Then there’s the rail system. Aside from the fact that both the East and West Hudson River tunnels were built 107 years ago, in 1910, they were also damaged by Superstorm Sandy in 2013, which flooded them with salt water, which is corrosive, but also leaves a nasty, rock hard residue around cables and wires, making “minor” repairs impossible. Some of the tunnels have been repaired, but the Canarsie Tunnel, built in 1924, which connects Manhattan to Brooklyn for 225,000 commuters each day, will have to be shut down for 15–18 months, beginning in 2019. The two tunnels crossing over from New Jersey need to be replaced, and there is no other tunnel to replace them or absorb the traffic while new tunnels are built.

New York Penn Station already is serving an average of 650,000 commuters per day, well over double the number of passengers for which it was built, and because it is so overloaded, and there are now so many delays due to ancient switches and storm damage, among other problems, no one knows which track a train will be pulling into, until just a few minutes before it arrives, so that there is a mad swarm of rushing New Yorkers suddenly all trying to move to the same location at the same time. In early April, when a train derailed due to old tracks, 8 out of the 21 tracks had to be shut down. The system is so run down, and so overloaded, that not only is there no redundancy, but any accident is likely to have a chain reaction, multiplier effect.

Repairs on Penn Station can no longer safely be delayed, so although there doesn’t seem to be any comprehensive plan yet in place, as of July 7, 2017 up to 20% of the Long Island RR trains will no longer be going there, and there will be similar reductions in NJ Transit trains. This is being called by Gov. Cuomo and others the beginning of the “Summer of Hell.” Supposedly the repairs are going to “only” take two months, but no one knows for sure. Also, although the partial shutdown begins on July 7th, no plan has actually been announced to address the plight of those commuters who need to get in and out of Manhattan each day. There are vague promises of ferries and buses, and proposals that some people should just start their work day at 4:00 am, but nothing concrete at all.

Tasks for the Committee

One of the tasks of LaRouche’s proposed committee would be to indicate what would be the potential consequences of doing nothing about this nightmare, which clearly could implode into a catastrophe, including with great loss of life. When asked this question, rail transport corridor expert Hal Cooper said the following, “New York City is the center of the United States. It’s the financial center, it’s the economic center, it’s the social center, it’s the political center. If we don’t repair the infrastructure, the ability of the people who work in New York, and I understand that’s something like 1.8 million [1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day to work, bringing the daytime population of Manhattan to over 3 million. –dws] people work in New York City, and a large portion of them come from outside, either Westchester County or Rockland County, or from New Jersey or from Long Island, and many of them wouldn’t be able to get to work. And what we’re going to see is an economic breakdown and collapse is going to happen, because of so much of what is important in this country centers in New York City. And that is {absolutely essential}, and we will see a great breakdown if something is not done to correct the problem soon.”

In other words, the consequences of a breakdown of transportation in the New York Metropolitan area would not only be catastrophic to the people in New York, but would be devastating to the nation as a whole. This implosion must be prevented, but to do so requires urgent action, and even with urgent action, we will be unable to prevent certain damage from occurring.

What is needed is a comprehensive plan to integrate Manhattan into China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The fact that President Trump sent a high-level delegation to the Beijing conference in May, and has himself established a personal relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping is a promising beginning. Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who spoke on a “Think Tank” panel in Beijing expressed the potential represented by Trump’s commitment to spend $1 trillion on infrastructure, and to return to the “American System” of economics. She pointed out that Chinese estimates are that the US needs more like $8 trillion of infrastructure investment, and the American Society of Civil Engineers calls for about $4.5 trillion, so Trump’s proposal would definitely be a step in the right direction.

The obstacles to the implementation of this are the following: first, the stalling by the U.S. Congress on reinstating the FDR-era Glass-Steagall Act, for which bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate, and for which the President has stated his support, but no one has thus far been willing to force through; and second, the small-mindedness of the American people themselves, who after 16 years of Bush and Obama, on top of the post-JFK rock-drug-sex counterculture, which is now {the} culture, barely consider the future at all, except as something they’d like to avoid. Many of them are just drugging themselves into oblivion, when they should be grabbing their pitchforks and chasing down their Representatives with appropriate urgent demands.

There is also another important factor delaying such action, and that is the political witch hunt against President Trump directed out of London. The hysteria being spouted in the US News media about President Trump and his administration’s relationship with anyone from Russia, and former President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns to harass and scandalize the new administration are highly destructive, not so much of Trump personally, who has demonstrated a fortunate willingness to fight, but of the opportunity that now greets the American people in the wake of the Beijing Belt and Road Forum.

Consider NY from Space

The committee that Mr. LaRouche has called for, would have to step back and look at Manhattan as if from outer space. With the impending doom of local break down, it can be challenging to consider where the United States and the world will be even 50 years from now, much less 100 or 1000 years from now, but this is the kind of thinking that is required.

One factor, hopefully in the not-so-distant future, is the development of thermo-nuclear fusion power, which China is pursuing aggressively. With cheap, abundant, clean energy, what kind of transportation, manufacturing, water management, and even food production would become possible?

The Belt and Road is all about connectivity. Now that the Bayonne Bridge is going to be elevated, large freight container vessels can get into the Ports of Elizabeth and Newark. What are the implications of that for trade? Not much if our rail system is in a shambles. Should we have a rail transportation grid that connects our ports to our major cities? What about rail from Newark to China and Russia across the Bering Strait? What role would Detroit play in this? Could New York City become a manufacturing center again? How will we connect the Elizabeth Port to the high tech areas of Connecticut and Long Island? What about building the storm surge barrier that should have been erected before Sandy? Shouldn’t those industries in Long Island, New Jersey, and Connecticut, which contributed so much to the Apollo Project, be revived, to become part of NASA’s collaboration with China on a mission to Mars, and establishing an industrial base on the moon?

New York City and the contiguous areas have a high density of capable people, and potentially capable people, if there were a crash program to train them. These are the questions that the people of the United States need to urgently consider, not whether Jared Kushner had a meeting with the Russian Ambassador (which would probably have been a good idea, at any rate).

LaRouche’s Four Laws provide the parameters for the needed crash program. Now we must assemble a committee of experts who can fill in the details, and by so doing, transform the way that New Yorkers think about the current catastrophe. Remember, in Chinese the character for crisis and opportunity is the same.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

by Diane Sare

Last week, in response to a report from Manhattan Project organizers, Lyndon LaRouche proposed that a committee be created to do something about the alarming collapse of the Manhattan-area transportation grid, and to “kick whomever needs it, to get it done.”

As anyone who has attempted to travel into or through New York City will tell you, the roads in some areas, especially on toll plazas by the bridges, look like they were hit by a carpet bombing campaign. One couple returning from Staten Island to New Jersey destroyed three tires in one large pot hole! And this, where each driver pays $15 just to cross the Hudson River! Driving is a high anxiety activity, which has become like an obstacle course in a war zone.

Then there’s the rail system. Aside from the fact that both the East and West Hudson River tunnels were built 107 years ago, in 1910, they were also damaged by Superstorm Sandy in 2013, which flooded them with salt water, which is corrosive, but also leaves a nasty, rock hard residue around cables and wires, making “minor” repairs impossible. Some of the tunnels have been repaired, but the Canarsie Tunnel, built in 1924, which connects Manhattan to Brooklyn for 225,000 commuters each day, will have to be shut down for 15–18 months, beginning in 2019. The two tunnels crossing over from New Jersey need to be replaced, and there is no other tunnel to replace them or absorb the traffic while new tunnels are built.

New York Penn Station already is serving an average of 650,000 commuters per day, well over double the number of passengers for which it was built, and because it is so overloaded, and there are now so many delays due to ancient switches and storm damage, among other problems, no one knows which track a train will be pulling into, until just a few minutes before it arrives, so that there is a mad swarm of rushing New Yorkers suddenly all trying to move to the same location at the same time. In early April, when a train derailed due to old tracks, 8 out of the 21 tracks had to be shut down. The system is so run down, and so overloaded, that not only is there no redundancy, but any accident is likely to have a chain reaction, multiplier effect.

Repairs on Penn Station can no longer safely be delayed, so although there doesn’t seem to be any comprehensive plan yet in place, as of July 7, 2017 up to 20% of the Long Island RR trains will no longer be going there, and there will be similar reductions in NJ Transit trains. This is being called by Gov. Cuomo and others the beginning of the “Summer of Hell.” Supposedly the repairs are going to “only” take two months, but no one knows for sure. Also, although the partial shutdown begins on July 7th, no plan has actually been announced to address the plight of those commuters who need to get in and out of Manhattan each day. There are vague promises of ferries and buses, and proposals that some people should just start their work day at 4:00 am, but nothing concrete at all.

Tasks for the Committee

One of the tasks of LaRouche’s proposed committee would be to indicate what would be the potential consequences of doing nothing about this nightmare, which clearly could implode into a catastrophe, including with great loss of life. When asked this question, rail transport corridor expert Hal Cooper said the following, “New York City is the center of the United States. It’s the financial center, it’s the economic center, it’s the social center, it’s the political center. If we don’t repair the infrastructure, the ability of the people who work in New York, and I understand that’s something like 1.8 million [1.6 million people commute into Manhattan each day to work, bringing the daytime population of Manhattan to over 3 million. –dws] people work in New York City, and a large portion of them come from outside, either Westchester County or Rockland County, or from New Jersey or from Long Island, and many of them wouldn’t be able to get to work. And what we’re going to see is an economic breakdown and collapse is going to happen, because of so much of what is important in this country centers in New York City. And that is {absolutely essential}, and we will see a great breakdown if something is not done to correct the problem soon.”

In other words, the consequences of a breakdown of transportation in the New York Metropolitan area would not only be catastrophic to the people in New York, but would be devastating to the nation as a whole. This implosion must be prevented, but to do so requires urgent action, and even with urgent action, we will be unable to prevent certain damage from occurring.

What is needed is a comprehensive plan to integrate Manhattan into China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The fact that President Trump sent a high-level delegation to the Beijing conference in May, and has himself established a personal relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping is a promising beginning. Schiller Institute President Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who spoke on a “Think Tank” panel in Beijing expressed the potential represented by Trump’s commitment to spend $1 trillion on infrastructure, and to return to the “American System” of economics. She pointed out that Chinese estimates are that the US needs more like $8 trillion of infrastructure investment, and the American Society of Civil Engineers calls for about $4.5 trillion, so Trump’s proposal would definitely be a step in the right direction.

The obstacles to the implementation of this are the following: first, the stalling by the U.S. Congress on reinstating the FDR-era Glass-Steagall Act, for which bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate, and for which the President has stated his support, but no one has thus far been willing to force through; and second, the small-mindedness of the American people themselves, who after 16 years of Bush and Obama, on top of the post-JFK rock-drug-sex counterculture, which is now {the} culture, barely consider the future at all, except as something they’d like to avoid. Many of them are just drugging themselves into oblivion, when they should be grabbing their pitchforks and chasing down their Representatives with appropriate urgent demands.

There is also another important factor delaying such action, and that is the political witch hunt against President Trump directed out of London. The hysteria being spouted in the US News media about President Trump and his administration’s relationship with anyone from Russia, and former President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s campaigns to harass and scandalize the new administration are highly destructive, not so much of Trump personally, who has demonstrated a fortunate willingness to fight, but of the opportunity that now greets the American people in the wake of the Beijing Belt and Road Forum.

Consider NY from Space

The committee that Mr. LaRouche has called for, would have to step back and look at Manhattan as if from outer space. With the impending doom of local break down, it can be challenging to consider where the United States and the world will be even 50 years from now, much less 100 or 1000 years from now, but this is the kind of thinking that is required.

One factor, hopefully in the not-so-distant future, is the development of thermo-nuclear fusion power, which China is pursuing aggressively. With cheap, abundant, clean energy, what kind of transportation, manufacturing, water management, and even food production would become possible?

The Belt and Road is all about connectivity. Now that the Bayonne Bridge is going to be elevated, large freight container vessels can get into the Ports of Elizabeth and Newark. What are the implications of that for trade? Not much if our rail system is in a shambles. Should we have a rail transportation grid that connects our ports to our major cities? What about rail from Newark to China and Russia across the Bering Strait? What role would Detroit play in this? Could New York City become a manufacturing center again? How will we connect the Elizabeth Port to the high tech areas of Connecticut and Long Island? What about building the storm surge barrier that should have been erected before Sandy? Shouldn’t those industries in Long Island, New Jersey, and Connecticut, which contributed so much to the Apollo Project, be revived, to become part of NASA’s collaboration with China on a mission to Mars, and establishing an industrial base on the moon?

New York City and the contiguous areas have a high density of capable people, and potentially capable people, if there were a crash program to train them. These are the questions that the people of the United States need to urgently consider, not whether Jared Kushner had a meeting with the Russian Ambassador (which would probably have been a good idea, at any rate).

LaRouche’s Four Laws provide the parameters for the needed crash program. Now we must assemble a committee of experts who can fill in the details, and by so doing, transform the way that New Yorkers think about the current catastrophe. Remember, in Chinese the character for crisis and opportunity is the same.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

Lyndon LaRouche called upon the American people to shut down the coup underway against President Trump which was fed Thursday by the lying testimony of fired FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. LaRouche said that the coup is an FBI-type operation attempting to destroy the United States, and if it is not stopped, the world will face general warfare.

On June 7, former Director of National Intelligence Clapper revealed the actual motivation for the coup against Trump in remarks in Australia. He said that Trump’s openness to peace with Russia—the platform upon which Trump was elected by the American people—was itself wholly against U.S. national security interests, in effect, equivalent to treason. It was already known in official Washington well before the election, that President Obama, in collusion with the British, candidate Clinton, DNI head Clapper, CIA head Brennan, and FBI head Comey, had steered the U.S. on a war course with Russia and China, which was meant to be fully activated with Clinton’s election. Trump was elected instead, triggering the coup which has followed. President Trump has kept his promise and established better relations with both Russia and China, who are seeking cooperation with the United States in developing the world based on great infrastructure projects. That is the only issue here. Comey backed that up Thursday in a long rant against Russia as a mortal enemy, in response to a question from Senator Joe Manchin.

Here’s how the actual conspiracy worked in general outline. According to Comey’s own words and their actual implication, on January 6th, FBI Director Comey is selected by Obama’s intelligence chiefs to do a “J. Edgar Hoover” on Trump, briefing him on salacious blackmail material fabricated by British intelligence and Clinton campaign operative Christopher Steele. It is a pure Hoover blackmail operation. Comey signals to Trump, “give up your fantasy about cooperation with Russia and we won’t release this.” Trump doesn’t budge. The very next day the whole Steele dossier is leaked all over the international news media, accusing the President-elect of perverse sexual acts with Russian hookers. Comey admitted as much in his testimony Thursday, saying he was aware that this briefing could be construed as a “J. Edgar Hoover moment,” in response to a question from Senator Susan Collins of Maine. During this meeting, Comey assured Trump that the President wasn’t under FBI investigation. Comey goes out and writes a classified memo about the briefing and the President’s responses. Was this memo shared with the British? Who else was it shared with?

Comey claims that he wrote this up because he thought the President would lie. This is hogwash. Comey had already been targeted to bring down the President, to entrap him, if Trump did not back down on seeking better relations with Russia and China. That James Comey set out to entrap the President, is the only logical conclusion which can be drawn from Comey’s testimony in response to questions by various Republican Senators.

First, Senator James Risch: I remember, you talked with us shortly after February 14th, when the New York Times wrote an article that suggested that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians… that report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?

Comey: In the main it was not true.

With respect to the alleged Michael Flynn conversation:

Risch: You quoted exactly what the President said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”… He didn’t direct you to let it go?

Comey: Not in his words, no.

Risch: He didn’t order you to let it go?

Comey: Again, those words are not an order.

Risch: You don’t know of anyone being charged for hoping something?

Comey: I don’t as I sit here.

In any truthful scenario that should have ended the matter there.

Various Republican Senators asked Comey repeatedly, why, if the President had asked for his loyalty, and had told him to drop the Flynn investigation (both of which Trump deny and is also apparently willing to testify under oath stating as much), why did he not report it to the Attorney General? Alternatively, why did he not threaten to resign, as he had done previously in a confrontation with President George W. Bush? Why keep meeting with the President, telling the President he was not under investigation, while refusing to tell the public the same thing, and returning to strategize with FBI agents about what was said and the next steps. Comey admitted during his testimony that he did not do logical things, including telling the President to stop any improper conduct, because the FBI had decided that these conversations were of “investigative interest,” i.e, Comey, acting as an undercover informant, had not yet succeeded in completely setting up President Trump.

Comey includes Assistant FBI Director McCabe in the circle of people he was briefing on all of his interchanges with the President. Unfortunately for Comey and this entire “obstruction of justice” scenario, McCabe testified under oath to Congress following all of these events, that there had been no effort by Trump or anyone else to interfere with or obstruct the FBI investigation. In fact, Comey himself testified to the Senate Thursday that prior to his firing, there was no investigation of President Trump for either obstruction of justice or collusion with the Russians.

In a statement following Comey’s staged performance, President Trump’s lawyer Marc Kasowitz denied that the President ever asked Comey to let the Michael Flynn matter go, that he ever pressured Comey, or that he ever asked for Comey’s “loyalty.” Kasowitz appropriately emphasized these parts of Comey’s testimony:

The alleged Russian hacking did not change any votes.

The President told Comey that if any of his satellite associates did something wrong it would be good to find that out.

James Comey admitted that he leaked all of his memos about his conversations with President Trump to the New York Times, in order to provoke the appointment of a Special Prosecutor. At least one of these memos was classified.

This is not a battle which will go to court. Whether it continues or not is a question for the American people and their representatives. As LaRouche said, it is time for the people to speak out and end this disruptive and highly dangerous attempted coup. It’s also time for the coup plotters to be investigated, including the treasonous news media.

Read more ›

By Posted on Posted in Aggregated No Comments

Lyndon LaRouche called upon the American people to shut down the coup underway against President Trump which was fed Thursday by the lying testimony of fired FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. LaRouche said that the coup is an FBI-type operation attempting to destroy the United States, and if it is not stopped, the world will face general warfare.

On June 7, former Director of National Intelligence Clapper revealed the actual motivation for the coup against Trump in remarks in Australia. He said that Trump’s openness to peace with Russia—the platform upon which Trump was elected by the American people—was itself wholly against U.S. national security interests, in effect, equivalent to treason. It was already known in official Washington well before the election, that President Obama, in collusion with the British, candidate Clinton, DNI head Clapper, CIA head Brennan, and FBI head Comey, had steered the U.S. on a war course with Russia and China, which was meant to be fully activated with Clinton’s election. Trump was elected instead, triggering the coup which has followed. President Trump has kept his promise and established better relations with both Russia and China, who are seeking cooperation with the United States in developing the world based on great infrastructure projects. That is the only issue here. Comey backed that up Thursday in a long rant against Russia as a mortal enemy, in response to a question from Senator Joe Manchin.

Here’s how the actual conspiracy worked in general outline. According to Comey’s own words and their actual implication, on January 6th, FBI Director Comey is selected by Obama’s intelligence chiefs to do a “J. Edgar Hoover” on Trump, briefing him on salacious blackmail material fabricated by British intelligence and Clinton campaign operative Christopher Steele. It is a pure Hoover blackmail operation. Comey signals to Trump, “give up your fantasy about cooperation with Russia and we won’t release this.” Trump doesn’t budge. The very next day the whole Steele dossier is leaked all over the international news media, accusing the President-elect of perverse sexual acts with Russian hookers. Comey admitted as much in his testimony Thursday, saying he was aware that this briefing could be construed as a “J. Edgar Hoover moment,” in response to a question from Senator Susan Collins of Maine. During this meeting, Comey assured Trump that the President wasn’t under FBI investigation. Comey goes out and writes a classified memo about the briefing and the President’s responses. Was this memo shared with the British? Who else was it shared with?

Comey claims that he wrote this up because he thought the President would lie. This is hogwash. Comey had already been targeted to bring down the President, to entrap him, if Trump did not back down on seeking better relations with Russia and China. That James Comey set out to entrap the President, is the only logical conclusion which can be drawn from Comey’s testimony in response to questions by various Republican Senators.

First, Senator James Risch: I remember, you talked with us shortly after February 14th, when the New York Times wrote an article that suggested that the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians… that report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement?

Comey: In the main it was not true.

With respect to the alleged Michael Flynn conversation:

Risch: You quoted exactly what the President said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”… He didn’t direct you to let it go?

Comey: Not in his words, no.

Risch: He didn’t order you to let it go?

Comey: Again, those words are not an order.

Risch: You don’t know of anyone being charged for hoping something?

Comey: I don’t as I sit here.

In any truthful scenario that should have ended the matter there.

Various Republican Senators asked Comey repeatedly, why, if the President had asked for his loyalty, and had told him to drop the Flynn investigation (both of which Trump deny and is also apparently willing to testify under oath stating as much), why did he not report it to the Attorney General? Alternatively, why did he not threaten to resign, as he had done previously in a confrontation with President George W. Bush? Why keep meeting with the President, telling the President he was not under investigation, while refusing to tell the public the same thing, and returning to strategize with FBI agents about what was said and the next steps. Comey admitted during his testimony that he did not do logical things, including telling the President to stop any improper conduct, because the FBI had decided that these conversations were of “investigative interest,” i.e, Comey, acting as an undercover informant, had not yet succeeded in completely setting up President Trump.

Comey includes Assistant FBI Director McCabe in the circle of people he was briefing on all of his interchanges with the President. Unfortunately for Comey and this entire “obstruction of justice” scenario, McCabe testified under oath to Congress following all of these events, that there had been no effort by Trump or anyone else to interfere with or obstruct the FBI investigation. In fact, Comey himself testified to the Senate Thursday that prior to his firing, there was no investigation of President Trump for either obstruction of justice or collusion with the Russians.

In a statement following Comey’s staged performance, President Trump’s lawyer Marc Kasowitz denied that the President ever asked Comey to let the Michael Flynn matter go, that he ever pressured Comey, or that he ever asked for Comey’s “loyalty.” Kasowitz appropriately emphasized these parts of Comey’s testimony:

The alleged Russian hacking did not change any votes.

The President told Comey that if any of his satellite associates did something wrong it would be good to find that out.

James Comey admitted that he leaked all of his memos about his conversations with President Trump to the New York Times, in order to provoke the appointment of a Special Prosecutor. At least one of these memos was classified.

This is not a battle which will go to court. Whether it continues or not is a question for the American people and their representatives. As LaRouche said, it is time for the people to speak out and end this disruptive and highly dangerous attempted coup. It’s also time for the coup plotters to be investigated, including the treasonous news media.

Read more ›