EDITORIAL

The British in Britain and the British in the U.S. Are Desperate To Rewrite History

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—Ever since the shocking defeat of Hillary Clinton, the anointed successor to their man Barack Obama in the November 2016 U.S. Presidential election, the British Empire has been trying to rewrite history to make the outcome more to their liking. They simply refuse to accept reality, howling instead: Donald Trump cheated by winning in the Electoral College; the Russians are responsible for the outcome; Trump colluded with Russia, as proven by the Steele dossier; Trump is a sexual predator; his appointees are sexual predators; he is “unfit” for office because we don’t like him, and should therefore be removed by use of the 25th Amendment. And so on, ad nauseam.

Now they are scrambling to convince Americans they should elect a Democratic majority to the House of Representatives next month, in order to proceed with Trump’s impeachment. And they are openly calling for Jacobin violence against any and all Trump supporters or elected officials.

It is of note that the British Empire crowd is also refusing to accept reality in the United Kingdom itself, where the British population voted earlier in 2016 for Brexit, to leave the European Union and its destructive policies. First, the City of London crowd refused to accept the vote and wanted a new referendum; then they said the vote should simply be ignored; and now their wholly owned ass-ette, Prime Minister Theresa May, is proposing to implement a version of Brexit which leaves the country totally subservient to Brussels, in exchange for keeping the City of London’s control over the world derivatives trade.

The British Empire just doesn’t know how to take no for an answer.

And yet the global tide of angry rejection of their failed policies and institutions over the past half-century—a tide expressed in the Brexit vote, Trump’s victory, the Italian elections, the Mexican elections, and so on—is not being held back by these British pronouncements. On the contrary, it is growing and swelling, both in the U.K. and in the U.S., as seen in the explosive turnouts for President Trump’s MAGA rallies, and in the unprecedented openness in the population to the ideas and policy proposals of Lyndon LaRouche. Similarly with the New Silk Road, whose Spirit grows daily, British hysteria notwithstanding.

It is here that implementation of Lyndon LaRouche’s ideas and policies are urgent to ensure that the rage at the Establishment and its bankrupt institutions will succeed in bringing a viable New Paradigm into existence.

This process was foreseen and publicly stated by Lyndon LaRouche, literally the day after Trump’s victory on Nov. 8, 2016. LaRouche then stressed that the forces that acted in the context of the American election could not be competently understood within the United States as such.

“[The election] was not national, it was international in its entire character,” LaRouche stated. “So that’s the pattern. It’s not the pattern of local groups in the United States, though they have significance. But they are not something you can parcel out under categories. You have to see the larger total value. And that will become evident, once we start to treat the economy seriously. In other words, instead of trying to figure out how to get this particular product out in a certain way and so forth, the point is, you’re going to start on a global basis. What we’re dealing with is a global basis.

“Now, this has been the actual condition for some time. But it has not been evident because the people have not categorized these things in the proper way. What they’ve done is they’ve accurately looked for things that they think are important, and they are important; but the issue here that governs, is international, global.”

LaRouche stressed: “What you’re looking at is a breakdown of the entire previously existing area of life in the world. And when you see that, then you get the whole picture…. And so, you’ve got to look at this thing from the standpoint, not of what guy is important in this area or not; you’ve got to look at the overall picture, otherwise, you don’t get the right answer.”

U.S. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC

Trump Warns Rallies, Democratic Seizure of Congress Would Plunge Nation into ‘Gridlock and Chaos’

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—President Trump addressed another giant rally last night, this one in Southaven, Mississippi, warning his supporters that if today’s Democrats win the midterm elections, they will move to overturn the 2016 presidential election. As he said to a rally of equal size in Johnson City, Tennessee the night before, the Democrats “have gone crazy”; they are “in a blind rage,” and if they take over the Congress, “they will plunge our country into gridlock and chaos.” They only seek to “obstruct, resist, demolish, destroy and delay.”

The rallies demonstrate how President Trump continues to mobilize the level of support which won him the 2016 elections. The crowd at the Johnson City rally easily filled the Freedom Hall Civic Center to capacity—8,000 people—and filed into an overflow room; tens of thousands more who were turned away stayed outside to watch on jumbo TV screens. Prior to the event, there had been lines of people snaking for several blocks outside the Civic Center, hoping to obtain tickets. There were 92,000 requests for tickets. In Southaven, Mississippi there was also an overflow crowd at the 10,000-capacity Landers Center, and many more watching the rally from outside.

These midterm elections are “one of the most important to occur in our lifetime,” he told the Mississippi rally. “Pretend I’m on the ballot … this is also a referendum about me.”

The President had some choice words to say in Mississippi about the Kavanaugh confirmation fight, echoing remarks he had made prior to leaving the White House. There, he pointed to the threat those hearings represent to Constitutional law in the United States. “What’s happening here has much more to do than even the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice…. You could be somebody that was perfect your entire life, and somebody could accuse you of something … and you’re automatically guilty…. But in this realm, you are truly guilty until proven innocent. That’s one of the very, very bad things that’s taking place right now.”

The Mask of Anarchy: ‘Resist’ Democrats Incite Jacobin Violence and Chaos

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—The hysterical demands from “Resist” Democrats and like-minded anarchists to stalk and harass anyone who opposes them—particularly Republicans—in order to turn political discourse into a blood sport, are reaping violent results.

Recall that on June 23 California Democrat Maxine Waters told a Los Angeles crowd that, “if you see anybody from that [Trump] Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them! And, you tell them that they are not welcome, anymore, anywhere.”

Here’s what Waters’ marching orders have wrought:

“MeToo” protesters are roaming around the halls of Congress creating disturbances when possible, ostensibly to defend Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. Yesterday, a spokesman for Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, reported that a group advocating marijuana legalization tried aggressively to force its way into the Congressman’s office, slightly injuring Harris in the process. On Oct. 1, protesters stalked and harassed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) as he walked through Reagan National Airport.

Over the past 24 hours, President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary James Mattis, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) have received suspicious envelopes. The letter to Trump was intercepted by the Secret Service outside the White House. NBC reports that two people from the Houston campaign headquarters of Senator Cruz were hospitalized after a “white powdery substance” was discovered in a letter sent to that office. Envelopes containing the deadly ricin toxin were sent to General Mattis and to Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson, but intercepted at the Pentagon mail facility outside the main Pentagon building.

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson offered an appropriate commentary on the current national climate. In discussing his new book, Ship of Fools, on “Fox and Friends” yesterday, he described what’s occurring today as “terrifying.” He said he had grown up around liberals in California and Washington, D.C., who “believed in free speech, and due process, and color blindness.” Now, “you are seeing these exact same people crush speech, deny due process and tell us that the most important thing about people is their DNA and their skin color. It’s a mirror image of the way they were, and it’s terrifying and Orwellian. It is a threat to all of us, liberal and conservative, and we should honestly all speak up every time they challenge those basic American values.”

Michigan U.S. Senate Candidate John James Continues To Blast Both Parties

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—Michigan U.S. Senate candidate John James, running on the Republican ticket, again hammered at the failure of both the Democratic and Republican Parties last night at an overflow event (300-400 people) in St. Clair Shores, a working-class suburb northeast of Detroit.

As he did in his first TV ad (see yesterday’s EIR Daily Alert), James said that both parties have abandoned the voters, which made some of the traditional Republicans in the audience a little nervous. He asked the crowd: Who won the Michigan Republican primary? “Trump!” (Cheers.) Who won the Democratic primary? “Sanders.” (Boos.) No, he told the audience, these votes are the reflections of the fact that people are fed up. Look, he said, the coasts told us, we don’t need manufacturing anymore, but we do. The middle class was created here in Michigan, now we are losing jobs, not just to China. We are losing jobs to Tennessee and South Carolina and other states. He went on to hit hard on his main campaign focus, which is educating a work force for the future.

Significantly, he said that he wasn’t running against current Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow. “We just don’t need her…. I’m running because I love my children and I love my country.” Continuing to steer away from partisan and attack politics, he elaborated on how the Democratic and Republican Parties create small groups to fight each other, then “we all get screwed.”

LaRouche PAC organizers present at the meeting found a wide-open response to their explanation of the global strategic stakes in the U.S. midterm elections.

THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMIC ORDER

Serious Discussions of Economic Policy Are Underway in China, U.S., and Russia

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—In China, the United States and Russia, there are serious discussions going on about the nature of the current international economic crisis, and of some of the policy alternatives available—although they generally fall short when it comes to the required fundamentals of physical economy provided by Lyndon LaRouche, without which a viable alternative to the current crisis cannot be organized.

Take the case of an op-ed in China Daily by Zhang Yansheng, the chief economist at the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, headlined “Globalization Has Reached a Turning Point.” In it, Zhang pays lip service to the supposed recovery of the world economy since 2008, as measured in GDP, but he warns that despite that “the risks, rather than declining, have increased significantly…. The liquidity resulting from the quantitative easing policy in the developed economies has not boosted their domestic consumption or investment. Instead, it has entered China [and other emerging economies] on a large scale, appreciating the currency and raising the prices of real estate and other assets.”

Zhang describes the reverse carry trade that threatens a blowout: “But now that developed economies such as the U.S. seem to be recovering, it is likely that the bubbles in the emerging economies will burst. After the U.S. economy entered a period of recovery [sic] in 2015, it abandoned the quantitative easing policy and started raising the interest rate, with the resultant appreciation of the U.S. dollar leading to a large inflow of global capital into the U.S. triggering a new round of global economic shock.”

Consider an article published in the Oct. 1 South China Morning Post titled “Trade War Could End if China Commits To Helping Trump Make America’s Infrastructure Great Again,” written by William Mundell, a U.S. entrepreneur and producer of a documentary seeking to improve U.S.-China understanding titled “Better Angels.” Unfortunately, Mundell couches his argument on trade in terms of popular arithmetic notions of trade surpluses and deficits—rather than rising or falling technological platforms producing those trade flows, as with London’s lose-lose NAFTA atrocity—but he does make a useful policy proposal. He says that the only way to achieve an “enduring resolution to the trade war” between the U.S. and China is with a “fundamentally different approach…. A multi-year, multibillion-dollar commitment by Beijing to invest in U.S. infrastructure.”

Mundell continues: “China has built up an astonishing mountain of monetary reserves, some part of which is earmarked for its Belt and Road Initiative. That program, which is currently slated to deploy some $1 trillion into infrastructure development across 60 countries, could provide a healthy down payment on the crucial long-term capital needed for President Donald Trump’s No. 1 domestic policy initiative for 2018. A multi-year, multibillion-dollar commitment by Beijing to invest in U.S. infrastructure … could provide the catalyst for a building boom in the U.S. and serve as a bridge for additional middle-class jobs in the U.S.”

Rome Seminar Looks at Belt and Road, 500 Days After May 2017 Beijing Summit

Oct. 3. (EIRNS)—Upwards of 96% of the projects adopted at the 2017 Belt and Road Forum in Beijing are currently in the operational stage, China’s Ambassador to Italy Li Ruiyo told a Rome-based seminar on “China’s Belt and Road Initiative, 500 Days After the 2017 Beijing Summit,” held at the Institute of International Affairs. Chinese officials and analysts from Italy, France, Britain, Greece and Poland discussed the initiative’s current state and prospects.

The May 14-15, 2017 Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing “produced 279 projects at the time. Now, some 265 of those projects have entered the operational stage, with an implementation of over 96%,” Chinese Ambassador to Italy Li Ruiyu said in his opening remarks.

Former Greek Finance Minister and economist Giorgos Papakonstantinou stated that a common EU approach would help its member states to address more comprehensively both opportunities and concerns related to the Belt and Road. “China came to Greece when nobody else would,” Papakonstantinou stressed, citing the Piraeus Port as one major example of these investments and a potential component of the BRI.

Time for Mexico To Join the Belt and Road Initiative

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—Dialogue is intensifying in Mexico on what it could mean for the country’s future were it to join China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

In an opinion piece in China Daily’s Spanish-language edition Sept. 29, Prof. Arturo Montero of the University of Tepeyac in Mexico, argues that Mexico would benefit greatly from joining the BRI. After reviewing the history of the ancient Silk Road, including the role of the Manila Galleons, or “Nao de China” that departed from the Philippines to arrive at Mexico’s Pacific port of Acapulco in the 17th century, Montero reports that China’s presence in Ibero-America today is increasingly important and has led to significant cooperation between these two regions of the world.

“Undoubtedly, there are many of us in the world who wish to see a Latin America freed from poverty and disease; we don’t want to see our youth migrating by the thousands to the United States … we’re losing our greatest resource…. I’m sure that the New Silk Road is the necessary component to achieve the development of my country and prosperity of the world.”

Similarly, Liu Baocheng, director of the Center for Business Ethics at the International Business and Economics University of China, recommends that, given recent developments around the signing of a new Mexico-Canada-U.S. trade deal, now would be the time for Mexico to join the BRI. By joining the Belt and Road, he said, according to the Sept. 30 El Financiero, Mexico could expand cooperation in the field of technological innovation and jointly build infrastructure projects, while promoting service industries and tourism. Obtaining loans would be facilitated through the BRI and Mexico could take advantages of the training of personnel and scholarships that China offers to government officials, professionals and students in many different fields.

STRATEGIC WAR DANGER

U.S. Ambassador to NATO Brags U.S. Could ‘Take Out’ Russian Missiles

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison set off a firestorm yesterday when she suggested that the U.S. could “take out” Russian missiles that alleged violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. During a press conference at the U.S. Mission to NATO in Brussels, Hutchison stated: “We have been trying to send a message to Russia for several years that we know they are violating the treaty. They are building a medium-range ballistic missile in violation of the INF. That is a fact which we have proven…. But if Russia continues to say they are not violating when the evidence is clear that they are, then diplomacy needs to be strengthened, and we need to look for other ways to bring Russia to the table on this issue,” she said.

When asked what countermeasures the U.S. could take, Hutchison said: “The countermeasures would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty. So that would be the countermeasure eventually.” When she was asked to clarify if she meant withdrawal of the Russian missiles or something more kinetic, she replied she meant withdrawal, of course. “But I think the question was what would you do if this continues to a point where we know that they are capable of delivering. And at that point we would then be looking at a capability to take out a missile that could hit any of our countries in Europe and hit America in Alaska,” she again stated. “We are not moving in that direction right now, but we are trying to tell Russia,” she went on, “that we know they have violated the treaty and we are beginning the research capabilities that are allowed by the treaty to deter a medium-range ballistic missile.”

The U.S. probably has no capability to “take out” Russian missile systems in Russia short of a nuclear first strike and this is apparently how the Russians interpreted what Hutchison said. “It seems that people who make such statements do not understand the degree of their responsibility and the danger of such aggressive rhetoric. Who has this lady been authorized by to make such statements? By the American people?” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said afterwards. Asked to comment by CNN, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed Hutchison’s statement, saying that the Kremlin “prefers not to pay extra attention to statements by ambassadors while we have too many uncertainties with the messages on the higher level.”

The storm that erupted on Twitter over Hutchison’s remarks eventually caused her to deny, although not until nine hours later, that she was threatening pre-emptive strikes on Russia. “I was not talking about pre-emptively striking Russia,” she said in a Twitter posting. “My point: Russia needs to return to INF Treaty compliance or we will need to match its capabilities to protect U.S. & NATO interests. The current situation, with Russia in blatant violation, is untenable.”

Second Donald Trump-Kim Jong-un Summit Possible Before Year’s End

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—In remarks reported by Sputnik, South Korean Ambassador to Russia Woo Yoon-keun told Russian media outlets that a second summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un could take place by the end of this year. “As for a second North Korea-U.S. summit, the exact date has not been announced yet, but it is possible that it will be determined shortly,” the diplomat said. “As you know, the midterm elections will be held in the U.S. soon, [and] that is why a meeting between the [U.S. and North Korean] leaders may take place right after that,” he said.

In her briefing yesterday, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert reported that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will be traveling to Pyongyang to meet with Chairman Kim on Oct. 7, his fourth meeting with the North Korean leader this year. Between Oct. 6-8, Pompeo will also travel to South Korea, Japan, and China to brief their leaders on his discussions with Kim.

The Pyongyang meeting is reportedly to discuss another summit with President Donald Trump. Nauert stated that Pyongyang is particularly anxious that Washington provide it with “security assurances,” before it can proceed with total denuclearization.

Russian Delivery of S-300 Air Defense System to Syria Complete

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—During the open part of a meeting of the Russian Security Council with Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported that deliveries of the S-300 air defense system to Syria have been completed. “It includes 49 units of equipment, illuminating laser radars, major emitter location systems, command vehicles and four launchers. The work was completed a day ago. We have completed the delivery of the full system to Syria,” he said. “Apart from that, we have significantly strengthened and activated the electronic warfare system, and added extra equipment to it. As a result, as of today we control the close zone of up to 50 km and the remote zone, where sorties on Syrian territory mainly originate from, we control 200 km of that.”

Shoigu reported that it will take three months to train Syrian crews to operate the S-300 system and that the necessary personnel and specialists have already been selected and started training. Also underway is work on a unified command system for the overall air defense network, work which will be completed by Oct. 20.

The provision of the S-300 system to Syria was Moscow’s direct response to the accidental shooting down by Syria of a Russian Il-20 intelligence aircraft during Israeli air strikes on a Syrian military facility on the night of Sept. 17, an incident that the Russian Defense Ministry held Israel responsible for.

At the State Department, spokeswoman Heather Nauert criticized the delivery of the S-300 system, calling it a “sort of a serious escalation in concerns and issues going on in Syria.”

In contrast to the usual line, Ha’aretz commentator Gideon Levy thanked the Russians for putting limits on what the Israelis can do. “For the first time in years another state is making it clear to Israel that there are restrictions to its power, that it’s not okay for it to do whatever it wants, that it’s not alone in the game, that America can’t always cover for it and that there’s a limit to the harm it can do,” he writes. Levy says that Israel needs such limits like it needs oxygen. “Suddenly someone stood up and said: Stop right there. At least in Syria: That’s the end of it. Thank you, Mother Russia, for setting limits on a child whom no one has restrained for a long time.”

Levy writes that in April, retired Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin and other officers had threatened that if Russia were to deliver S-300s to Syria, the Israeli air force would simply destroy them. “Every state is entitled to have weapons for defense against jet bombers, including Syria, and no state is permitted to prevent that forcibly,” Levy writes, saying that this sounds bizarre to Israeli ears. “The idea that other countries’ sovereignty is meaningless, that it can always be disrupted by force, and that Israeli sovereignty alone is sacred, and supreme; that Israel can mix in the affairs of the region to its heart’s content—including by military intervention, whose true extent is yet to be clarified in the war in Syria—without paying a price, in the name of its real or imagined security, which sanctifies anything and everything—all this has suddenly run into a Russian ‘nyet.’ Oh, how we needed that nyet, to restore Israel to its real dimensions.”

OTHER

British Tory Party Is Breaking Up, But May Get Boris Johnson Instead of New Election

Oct. 3 (EIRNS)—The Conservative Party in the U.K. is holding its annual conference this week, which showed signs of a breakdown in the party. Theresa May is pushing a version of Brexit which is, in fact, virtually no British exit from the EU at all, leaving the U.K. still at the whim of the Brussels bureaucrats by staying in the customs union, among other things. May pled for her “Chequers Plan,” as it’s called, warning that it was either that or no plan at all, which could be disastrous for business, for travel, and much more.

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn last week, at the Labour Party conference, warned if May proceeded with the Chequers Plan, or if there were no plan at all, that he would demand a new election—and he could expect some Tories to support that.

Conservative former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson openly displayed his intention to replace May, by convening a meeting in a separate room, crowded with his supporters. The boorish buffoon said the Chequers deal was “not pragmatic, it is not a compromise. It is dangerous and unstable—politically and economically. My fellow Conservatives, this is not democracy. This is not what we voted for. This is an outrage.”

May, in her speech, tried to hold the party together by ranting against Russia, bragging about her response to the Skripal affair and her April bombing of Syria (both incidents faked by British intelligence and blamed on Russia), and warning that Corbyn would “outsource our conscience to the Kremlin.” She particularly denounced Corbyn for saying he would only approve military action if the UN Security Council agrees; that is, that he would follow international law rather than uphold the Empire!

Tory MP James Duddridge issued May a letter of no confidence right before she spoke, telling the press: “There comes a point that blind loyalty is not the right way forward,” and insisted Boris Johnson take the Tories over, to “deliver what the electorate voted for” with Brexit. He said Johnson’s speech the day before was “inspirational.”

A total of 48 such “no confidence” letters from Tory MPs would force a vote of no confidence within the party.