EIR Daily Alert Service
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2019
Volume 6, Number 21
EIR Daily Alert Service
P.O. Box 17390, Washington, DC 20041-0390
- British Well Thought Out Plan to Counter LaRouche Plan: War, Genocide, Coups, End to National Sovereignty
- China and U.S. Hold Key Talks This Week as Trump’s Enemies Aim New Provocations at Beijing
- Italy, China Agree to Reinforce Synergy of Infrastructure Plans During Wang Yi Visit
- U.S. Intelligence Chiefs Take Anti-China, Anti-Russia, Anti-Trump Show to Senate
- Lavrov Slams U.S. and Allies for ‘Brazenly Violating Int’l Law Against Venezuela
- London’s Regime Change Operation Against Venezuela Escalates
- U.S. Army Wants a ‘Supergun’ to Target Chinese Ships
- Fox Anchor Tucker Carlson Warns That Mueller Threatens America
- Anti-Population Lobby Targets Agriculture Chemicals, Alleges Glyphosate Causes Cancer
- Angela Merckel as Environment Minister Cooked Up Diesel Emissions Values
- Meteorologists Take Up Fight Against Privatizing Weather Data
British Well-Thought-Out Counter to LaRouche Plan: War, Genocide, Coups, End National Sovereignty
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Over the course of 50 years of scientific endeavor and organizing, Lyndon LaRouche and his international movement have consistently presented, and helped bring into existence, a New Paradigm which is an alternative to the dying British Empire, and which is worthy of the dignity of Man. A science-based physical economic system is now taking shape around China’s Belt and Road Initiative. And a resurgence of national sovereignty and an end to British geopolitics is gaining traction, with Russia’s strategic intervention into Syria, and President Donald Trump’s obstinate efforts to also end geopolitics, as seen in such examples as the Korean Peninsula, and his withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria. A broader, working alliance among the U.S., Russia, China and India would of course seal the fate of geopolitics forever.
The British Empire’s response to this existential threat to their system has been eloquent.
As the U.S. and China prepare for crucial trade talks in Washington later this week, on the instructions of Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping, Britain’s trustworthy apparatus in the U.S. Department of Justice yesterday launched a 23-count criminal indictment against the Chinese chip giant Huawei—with impeccable timing designed to sabotage those talks. And today, Britain’s war-hawk apparatus in the U.S. intelligence community and the Senate held hearings to denounce Russia and China, and their alliance, for being the greatest threat to U.S. national security—because they are intent on the scientific and technological development of their nations, and because of the Belt and Road Initiative.
• That same British-run gang remains intent on toppling President Trump, or sinking him with their geopolitical gambits. They are inventing non-existent crimes; trying to entrap victims into crimes they themselves committed; and if none of that works, politically waterboard and otherwise terrorize them into plea bargains to lyingly incriminate the President.
• The British continue to organize heavily for the Green depopulation of the planet, with Germany at the center of their drive. To their criminal, unscientific campaigns for denuclearization, decarbonization, and de-dieselization, they have added their insistence that crucial, absolutely safe herbicides such as glyphosate (used extensively in agriculture as Round-Up) be banned, on the grounds that it is “carcinogenic.” This is like the earlier environmentalist campaign to ban the use of DDT, which ban succeeded in leading to the death of millions as a result. It is intentional genocide.
• Britain’s chicken-hawk gang in Washington has been put into high gear to carry out regime-change in Venezuela, not to come to the rescue of the suffering Venezuelan people, as they proclaim, but to put an end to the Peace of Westphalia system of national sovereignty. They also intend to deny China and Russia any role throughout Ibero-America—especially of the Belt and Road alternative to their dying speculative system.
The most effective way to make sure that these dangerous, but rearguard British actions fail, is to stop their attempted coup d’état against President Trump in the United States—as Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche has repeatedly insisted. As part of that, ensure that Lyndon LaRouche, 30 years after his unjust incarceration, is finally exonerated, and that his policies are adopted by all nations around the world, most especially the United States.
THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMIC ORDER
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Top Chinese government officials will arrive in Washington this week to continue with the crucial trade talks between the two countries, as mandated by Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. As an indication of the importance Trump places on the meetings, he is planning to meet personally with China’s top negotiator, Vice Premier Liu He, according to a statement issued yesterday by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. The U.S. delegation will be led by Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, and will include Mnuchin, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, and White House economic advisors Larry Kudlow and Peter Navarro, according to Bloomberg. Said Mnuchin: “We have another 30 days after this” to reach an agreement before the March 1 deadline Trump and Xi agreed to. “My expectation is that we will make significant progress.”
On cue, the President’s enemies unleashed their measures clearly designed to sabotage those talks, and any good relations between the U.S. and China. The U.S. Justice Department yesterday filed a total of 23 criminal charges against Chinese telecom giant Huawei and its Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou, earlier arrested Dec. 1 in Canada—a 13-count indictment in Brooklyn, New York, and a 10-count indictment in Washington state. The charges include bank and wire fraud, obstruction of justice and theft of technology. As BBC reported, the U.S. charges come one day after Canada fired its ambassador to China, just after he publicly argued that the U.S. extradition request for Meng was seriously flawed. U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told the press that the Huawei charges were “wholly separate” from the ongoing trade negotiations. But, as Bloomberg commented, “any expectation for big progress was complicated by growing tensions between the two countries over Huawei.”
A few days before that, on Jan. 24, Goldman Sachs issued a report warning its clients about companies that have significant sales or other operations in China. They specifically targeted firms Nvidia, Broadcom, Micron Technology, Qualcomm, Qorvo, Skyworks Solutions and Wynn Resort. Goldman noted those seven companies get more than half their sales from “Greater China.”
Lo and behold, shares of Nvidia plunged by 17% on Jan. 28, after the company lowered its “revenue guidance” for the fourth quarter of 2018, in large measure due to “deteriorating macroeconomic conditions, particularly in China.” As CNBC reported, “Caterpillar stock fell more than 9% on Jan. 28 after the company pointed to tariffs and a slowdown in China as major factors in its disappointing fourth-quarter results.”
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman reported that during his visit to Italy on Jan. 25, Chinese Foreign minister Wang Yi met with Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte and held talks with Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Enzo Moavero Milanesi. The two foreign ministers attended the ninth joint meeting of the China-Italy Government Committee and signed its joint document.
In particular, the two sides agreed “to reinforce synergy between the Belt and Road Initiative and Italy’s infrastructure construction and investment plan, oppose unilateralism and protectionism, and promote the building of an open world economy and a closer partnership.”
STRATEGIC WAR DANGER
U.S. Intelligence Chiefs Take Anti-China, Anti-Russia, Anti-Trump Show to Senate
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and FBI Director Christopher Wray led off the testimony by six discredited heads of U.S. intelligence services in the open session of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearings today, on the “Statement for the Record: Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community” report released Jan. 29. A closed hearing followed. They used the occasion to launch on all-out assault on President Donald Trump’s efforts to have good relations with Russia and China—not surprising, since this is the same corrupted intelligence establishment that the British Empire has been deploying to overthrow the Trump Presidency.
Wray pounded away that “the Chinese counter-intelligence threat is more deep, more diverse, more vexing, more challenging, more comprehensive and more concerning than any counter-intelligence threat that I can think of.”
CIA Director Gina Haspel joined Coats in contradicting President Trump on North Korea, emphasizing their assessment that North Korea does not intend to denuclearize.
The statement submitted by Coats for the record in the name of all U.S. intelligence agencies hammers on the theme that China and Russia are the chief threat to the United States today. Why? Because the commitment of both countries to their own sovereign development and to sharing that development through the Belt and Road Initiative, combined with the general advances in new technologies being developed and applied internationally, threatens the post-World War II international system established under the direction of Winston Churchill and the British Empire after the death of Franklin Roosevelt.
Not one glimmer of creative insight can be found in the entire 42-page document on how to resolve its long list of threats—some real, most paranoid.
What kind of moron considers it ominous that “many foreign leaders, including Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin, view strong indigenous science and technology capabilities as key to their country’s sovereignty, economic outlook, and national power”? That “rapid advances” are occurring around the world in biotechnology, materials science and manufacturing technology, so-called artificial intelligence, and the global space industry?
China and Russia are more allied than at any time since the 1950s, and they are out to get us, the intelligence chiefs proclaimed. “China presents a persistent cyber espionage threat and a growing attack threat to our core military and critical infrastructure systems.” Russia is already “staging cyber attack assets to allow it to disrupt or damage U.S. civilian and military infrastructure during a crisis.”
“Our adversaries and strategic competitors probably already are looking to the 2020 U.S. elections as an opportunity to advance their interests…. It is anticipated that China and Russia will collaborate, taking advantage of rising doubts in some places about the liberal democratic model….
“Both countries probably will use the UN as a platform to emphasize sovereignty narratives [sic!] that reflect their interests and redirect discussions away from human rights, democracy, and good governance.
“China, through its Belt and Road Initiative, is seeking to assert China’s model of authoritarian capitalism as an alternative—and implicitly superior—development path abroad…. Beijing has stepped up efforts to reshape the international discourse around human rights, especially within the UN system … to erode norms, such as the notion that the international community has a legitimate role in scrutinizing other countries behavior on human rights … and to advance narrow definitions of human rights based on economic standards.” And on and on.
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated today that “We are concerned about what the U.S. and its closest allies are doing with respect to Venezuela, brazenly violating all imaginable norms of international law and actually openly pursuing the policy aimed at overthrowing the legitimate government in that Latin American country,” reported TASS. Lavrov referred to the decision to exempt American businesses from the sanctions against Venezuela: “This merely underscores the cynicism of the current developments. U.S. companies operating in Venezuela are exempt from these sanctions. In other words, they wish to topple the government and derive material gains from this…. According to our sources, the leaders of the opposition movement who have declared dual power are in fact receiving instructions from Washington not to make any concessions until the authorities agree to abdicate in some way.”
Lavrov continued: “Together with other responsible members of the international community, we will do everything to support President Maduro’s legitimate government in upholding the Venezuelan constitution and employing methods to resolve the crisis that are within the constitutional framework.”
China Daily also denounced the regime-change operation in Venezuela, comparing it to what was attempted in Syria in an editorial Jan. 27. “Whatever has happened in Venezuela, it is still a sovereign country which has the say over its own fate. No country has the right to dictate to this nation and its people how to settle its own political crisis…. What has happened in Syria in the Middle East, where a civil war has lasted for years between the Syrian government forces and those opposing it, should serve as a mirror to reflect what would likely happen should the situation in Venezuela spin out of control.”
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Over the last 24-48 hours, the following developments occurred on Venezuela:
• Financial: Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and National Security Advisor John Bolton held a press conference Jan. 28 announcing that all property of Venezuela’s national oil company PDVSA, that is subject to U.S. jurisdiction, will be blocked (about $7 billion), and all U.S. citizens are prohibited from trading with it. All revenues earned by Venezuelan companies will be held in escrow until self-proclaimed Interim President Juan Guaidó has been handed control of the country. Guaidó announced on Jan. 28 that he plans to name a new board for PDVSA. The U.S. is the largest importer of Venezuelan crude, followed by India and China.
As for Venezuela’s oil, Bolton told Fox Business Jan. 28: “We’re in conversation with major American companies now…. It would make a difference if we could have American companies produce the oil in Venezuela. It would be good for Venezuela and the people of the United States.”
On the Bank of England’s refusal to return £1.2 billion in gold to the Venezuelan government, U.K. Minister of State for Europe and the Americas Sir Alan Duncan suggested that it might be given instead to Guaidó, who has already written Theresa May requesting the funds. Duncan said that the final decision would be the Bank of England’s, not the government.
• Military: Bolton called on the Venezuelan military to support a “peaceful, democratic and constitutional transfer of power.” Guaidó had his supporters leaflet the Venezuelan military urging them to switch sides, and guaranteeing them amnesty if they did so. Venezuela’s Defense Attaché in Washington, Col. José Luis Silva, switched sides to Guaidó over the weekend.
At yesterday’s briefing, Bolton had a yellow legal pad on which he had written the words “5,000 troops to Colombia,” which he somehow neglected to obscure from media cameras—a rather obvious theatrical message.
• Strategic: Bolton said that foreign penetration of Venezuela is a national security concern of the U.S.: “We think stability and democracy in Venezuela are in the direct national interests of the United States right now. The authoritarian regime of Chávez and Maduro has allowed the penetration by adversaries of the United States, not least of which is Cuba…. We think that is a strategic significant threat to the United States and there are others as well.” Bolton did not mention China and Russia in this interview, but in earlier comments he has denounced both countries for using Venezuela to penetrate the Americas economically and militarily.
• Unrest: Pope Francis, a native of Argentina, was asked about Venezuela, and responded: “What am I afraid of? A bloodbath…. The problem of violence terrifies me.” Guaidó has called for another mass demonstration on Jan. 30.
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—The U.S. Army is in the market for a super long-range cannon, one that reaches well beyond the ranges of most potential enemy weapons. “On a tactical level, we need to be able to out range our adversaries’ guns with comparable caliber and organization,” Army Secretary Mark Esper told reporters at a media round table on Jan. 24, reported Military.com website. This would not only have utility against Russian land forces, but also against Chinese naval vessels in the South China Sea. “You can imagine a scenario where the Navy feels it cannot get into the South China Sea because of Chinese naval vessels, [but] we can from a fixed location,” Esper said.
The range that the Army is looking for is on the order 1,000 nautical miles, but can you really launch a ballistic shell that far based on an explosive charge inside the cannon, alone? The Chinese don’t think so. They think by calling it a cannon, it’s a cover for a weapon that actually violates the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Chinese experts believe the whole “supergun” tag could be a cover for the U.S. to develop an intermediate-range ballistic missile, like the Chinese DF-26, capable of targetting moving vessels while avoiding the INF Treaty, Global Times reports.
A few days after Esper’s remarks, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) released footage of a launch of two DF-26’s and images of the missile’s configuration over the weekend, apparently the first time that it has been shown publicly. According to a separate report in Global Times, the missile demonstrated the ability to maneuver mid-flight, giving it the capability to hit a moving target, such as a U.S. aircraft carrier. “An information network connected to the warhead, which possibly includes satellites, ground and naval radar in addition to radar on the missile itself, will constantly update the location of a moving target, informing flight control where to guide the missile,” an unnamed Beijing-based military expert told Global Times.
U.S. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—Tucker Carlson, in a short clip on his Fox News show on Jan. 25, the day Roger Stone was arrested on dubious charges, primarily of lying, decried that atrocity as exemplifying Robert Mueller’s general reign of terror and violation of justice which Americans must fight.
“We have just witnessed FBI agents in tactical gear with heavy weaponry swarming over the lawn to arrest a 66-year-old man who has no history of violence, doesn’t run an international drug cartel, hasn’t been charged with murder—or even with spying for Vladimir Putin,” Carlson pointed out.
“You don’t need to be a Roger Stone partisan, a fan, to see that there is something wrong with what happened this morning: The most powerful man in America is now an unelected prosecutor with no functional oversight over what he does. Robert Mueller commands, in effect, his own domestic army; you just saw them. He can use it however he likes, and he does. Mueller crushes people, when it’s not even necessary to do so, weak people mostly, and he does it in ways clearly designed to send a political message. That is not how democracies are supposed to work.”
As for Stone facing jail time for lying, Carlson concluded:
There is one thing worse than lying: “The selective application of federal law. One standard for the powerful and well-connected; another for barefoot 66-year-old men with unfashionable political views. Some people skate; others are destroyed. It all depends on who you know. That’s what America is becoming, and we ought to fight that.”
COLLAPSING WESTERN FINANCIAL SYSTEM
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—The mutant zero population growth lobby has succeeded in stirring up a wave of know-nothing hysteria against the herbicide chemical widely used in farming and in lawn upkeep, and effective against drug plants—coca, poppy, and marijuana—by claiming it causes cancer.
At present, there are an estimated 10,500 filings in U.S. courts by plaintiffs seeking damages from, mostly, the first patent-holder on glyphosate, Monsanto—since June 2018 owned by the German firm Bayer AG. The Bayer products are still marketed under their original brand names Round-Up and Round-Up Pro. The plaintiffs claim they got cancer. Bayer says it will fight the false charges. Law firms are trolling the country, on late night TV ads and social networking, for more potential litigants.
Prominent players in the anti-glyphosate and anti-farm chemical movement are the ultra-greenie Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Pesticide Action Network (PAN), operating since the 1990s, with multi-millions in funding, to demand “chemical free,” and “organic” lifestyles, and the banning of pesticides, herbicides, nuclear power, and advanced technologies in general.
The stampede into the courts was kicked off in August 2018, after a California jury awarded a $289 million settlement of damages ($39.25 million) and punishment ($250 million) against Bayer (Monsanto,) to a school district groundskeeper, who said he got cancer from using their product over a two-year period. Science experts testified on both sides. Upon appeal by Bayer, a judge decreased the punitive damages down to $39.25 million, in October, bringing the total award down to $78.5 million. But the judge let the jury verdict stand, which Bayer is continuing to appeal.
Meantime, the propaganda machines have worked overtime. Within five days of the August anti-Bayer decision, the EWG issued a paper charging that the Food and Drug Administration was soft on glyphosate contamination in U.S. food. They churned out scare stories, including that harm from trace glyphosate was found in General Mills’ Cheerios, and Kellogg’s popular cereal brands.
In Europe, French President Emmanuel Macron got on the bandwagon, and said last fall that France would totally ban glyphosate by 2020. After an uproar from farmers, French Agriculture Minister Didier Guillaume walked Macron’s decree back on Jan. 25. He said that by 2021, France hoped to have an 80% reduction in glyphosate use. Since, however, a Lyon judge has issued a ban on glyphosate use.
Relevant national agencies in Europe and the U.S. consider glyphosate safe, when used properly. But the World Health Organization-associated International Agency for Research on Cancer said in 2015, the chemical is “probably” carcinogenic, following which California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has put the chemical on its list (“Proposition 65”) of products as allegedly known to cause cancer.
Three points are essential for an overview. First, the chemical glyphosate itself, initially identified as a herbicide in 1970, is no more toxic than scores of others serving beneficial purposes of killing weeds or preserving food.
Secondly, on Monsanto: That company deserves its infamy, given its terrible treatment of farmers and the public. (Bayer is getting rid of the Monsanto name.) But the crimes of Monsanto and cohort firms in the chemical and genetics cartel (Cargill, Dow/DuPont/Pioneer, Bayer Crop Science, BASF, Syngenta, etc.) are not in developing new scientific methods and results, such as new chemicals, weed-killer tolerant crop varieties, or genetically-improved seeds. They are guilty of monopoly powers over these advances, which governments granted them as a core part of the last half-century of deregulation. The cartels even hold patent rights over living matter, such as human disease genes and plant life.
Finally, Round-Up tolerant food crops (e.g., Round-Up Ready soybeans, and many others) are being used successfully and safely by many farmers. An estimated 25% of U.S. corn cultivation utilizes glyphosate. Currently, glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world. Use of crop chemicals, fertilizers, and pesticides is a matter for science and agronomy, not green histrionics.
Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—In the context of the current controversy over diesel car emissions which has almost knocked out the German auto industry, the tabloid Bild found out that the current emissions values were decided by Angela Merkel in 1998, when she was Environment Minister in the Helmut Kohl government. Bild had made the discovery from inquiring of the current Environment Ministry, led by Svenja Schulze (SPD). The office replied that when the EU Commission laid out its proposals on Jan. 14, 1998, “the German position in Brussels was already at that time represented by the relevant ministry. The minister at that time was Angela Merkel.” Merkel approved the decision taken at the council of environment ministers in mid-June 1998. “With that, the basic position was decided.”
When the Green-SPD coalition government took power, the issue was already being negotiated between the head of the EU Council and the EU Parliament. This means that it was not the Green Party successor to Merkel, Jürgen Trittin, who was responsible for the current strict emissions values, but Merkel herself.
SCIENCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE
|Jan. 29 (EIRNS)—“Tempers flared” at the annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society earlier this month it was proposed to turn the government collection of weather data from satellites over to private companies. As SpaceNews magazine reported on Jan. 21 and updated in its online site on Jan. 29, as commercial companies expand their weather-gathering capabilities, especially through the launch of cubesats, which are much cheaper than the large government weather satellites, “academic and government researchers are deeply concerned that they will lose access to the data that fuels their work.”The U.S. and the world rely on that work for weather forecasts. And those U.S.-generated satellite data have been available for free to a wide range of users, from fishermen and offshore oil rigs, to farmers, shippers, disaster relief agencies, and developing countries, just to name a few. The thousands of lives saved and the billions of dollars of property damage averted from early-warning forecasts of storms has most likely already paid for the cost of the government’s fleet of “expensive” weather satellites.If weather data “go commercial,” what will be the charge for it? As the article points out, the private companies “will only remain in business if they are profitable.” How much would the companies charge users, including the U.S. government National Weather Service, for the data, in order to be “profitable”? What if companies can’t make a go of it, and go out of business altogether? Will there be any Plan B, to make sure there is no gap in data?It is not surprising that meteorological scientists are up in arms. In fact, understanding the Earth’s weather—one of the most challenging scientific fields—which affects nearly every facet of economic activity, is a public good, and should not be reduced to a commercial product.|
Reach us at email@example.com or call 1-571-293-0935