Mr. X is a globally recognized author in the intelligence community, known for challenging state narratives and exposing hidden truths. His work carries significant risks, as he navigates the dangers of government retaliation to reveal critical insights.
Keywords:
Mr. X, intelligence author, government secrecy, whistleblower, deep state, espionage, geopolitical analysis, classified information, covert operations, political dissent
by Mr. X
Sept. 1—Should U.S. President Donald Trump journey to Beijing, on the occasion of China’s September 3, eightieth anniversary commemoration of the worldwide Victory Against Fascism? Many, including Schiller Institute Founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, have called for him to do so. It is fitting and proper to do so, in that the September 3 ceremony, as stated by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, “also symbolizes the unity and determination of the two countries to defend the outcome of the victory in World War II.”
American President Franklin Roosevelt’s idea of the world that must emerge from the ashes of the Second World War became, through the force of his intervention, the dominant policy-outlook in the world in 1945. FDR proposed in late 1941 a template for post-war world security, a council for which Russia and China were permanent members. They were to be two (in addition to Great Britain and the United States) of what FDR would call the “Four Policemen,” a phrase he coined in 1942, for a first approximation of what would ultimately become the United Nations Security Council.
FDR would not have allowed the United States to be the sole dissenting voice in the recent UN Security Council vote, pertaining to Gaza. The United States refused to endorse the statement, “The Use of Starvation as a Weapon of War Is Clearly Prohibited Under International Humanitarian Law. Famine in Gaza Must Be Stopped Immediately.” The forced starvation violates two of FDR’s Four Freedoms: Freedom From Want, and Freedom From Fear, and he would have never allowed the United States to do that.
In the next days, a combination of meetings, starting with the August 31-September 1 Shanghai Cooperation Organization, followed by Beijing September 3, and then by the Vladivostok Eastern Economic Forum September 3-6, represent an extraordinary opportunity for a dialogue of civilizations. Seventy nations will attend the Vladivostok meeting alone. These are nations that are already assembled, prepared, and positioned to discuss, in general outline form, a new security and development architecture, including with the Presidency of the United States. Many projects are already underway among these nations. A post-August 15 overture from the White House, of the “Good Neighbor” form that FDR projected so well on the world stage, would be an anomalous, unexpected, welcome shift, especially away from the tariff wars.
As with the meeting that Trump held with President Vladimir Putin Aug. 15, there are things of great moment, and that will determine the fate of the human race that can only be handled through face-to-face deliberations of what might be called a “dialectical nature.” “Dialectical” refers here to what Plato expressed as the method of the Socratic pursuit of truth, portrayed in each of his famous dialogues, and not what German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel spoke about, as “the dialectical method,” a term bandied about today by Frankfurt School escapees like Palantir’s Alex Karp, or the neo-Marxists. It is a process of dialogue that forces a change of axioms through a “coincidence of opposites.” In this way, we are able to arrive at a higher idea, giving us the capacity, as individuals, or a society, not only “to see ourselves as others see us,” but to see the seed-crystal of the future in the present and to thereby act, including with our “opposites,” in such a way as to make that future a reality.
As an example, take the morally horrific situation regarding Gaza, with its now-undeniable forced starvation of scores of thousands of children. There is, nonetheless, something transformative happening, unexpected by the criminal perpetrators, presently erupting in Israel itself. There, since Sunday, Aug. 24, there have been two large street demonstrations. The one that occurred Sunday reportedly had 500,000 people. The one on Tuesday, Aug. 26, had about 300,000. (More than 500,000 gathered last night and today to call for an end to the war and not the occupation of Gaza and the slaughter of the hostages and Palestinians alike.)
The population of Israel is approximately 10 million people. Compared to the United States’ 340 million people, an American demonstration, to be the same proportionate size as that which just occurred in Israel last Sunday, would require 17.5 million people. An appeal was made, not to Netanyahu, but to President Donald Trump, to put an end to the killing.
The population in both Gaza and in Israel are in upheaval. People, there and elsewhere, because they are human, sense that a higher conception of humanity is required, or Israel will cease to exist—not because it is bombed out of existence, but also because it becomes morally unfit to sustain itself. Our Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture contains that higher conception of humanity that must be the starting point for the end of war. Nations of the world are conveying in Beijing to reaffirm the resolve to uphold what FDR and their predecessors achieved 80 years ago, in founding the United Nations. Will the President of the United States miss the opportunity of the next seven days, or seize it?
Aug. 23—“Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto—”I am a man. I think nothing human to be alien to me." The Roman playwright Terence’s saying has been used for many centuries, for many purposes. Let it now be used to call attention to the hope, as of last Friday’s Aug. 15 meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, that thermonuclear war can still be averted, that we can yet reverse our still-descending path downward into a final species-threatening tragedy.
To do this requires a next step—a meeting among Presidents Donald Trump, Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Putin, as early as September 3. In this meeting, if the idea, “nothing human is alien to me,” should prevail, it would demand that the practice of seeking the benefit for one section of humanity must now be supplanted by the principle of attaining the benefit of all humanity. It is only through the benefit of the other that a truly human standard for a new security and development architecture can be established.
The proposal to create a new physical platform for humanity’s joint collaboration through an Earth-bound “Apollo Project,” the Bering Strait Development Corridor linking Asia to America, is now circulating worldwide through a statement authored by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche. If people of good will join together for the next ten days, an international groundswell can, in this way, build a bridge for humanity out of Hell, and at least to Purgatory. Humanity’s way home lies across the divide of the Bering Strait.
At the same time, we must face the fact that unless the millions of trans-Atlantic spectators who daily absolve themselves from morally “taking arms against a sea of troubles, and, by opposing, end them,” in Gaza, in Ukraine, in Sudan, and are forced to hold up a mirror to their own nature, the genocide in Gaza will not be stopped. Israel’s Netanyahu continues to deny his enforced famine, one of the most painful ways to die, even though, now, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), which describes itself, has declared that famine conditions exist in Gaza Governorate, an area of the Gaza Strip that includes Gaza City. Helga Zepp-LaRouche called for UN General Assembly Resolution 377, Uniting For Peace, to be invoked superseding recalcitrant members of the UN Security Council, and which says, in part, “the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately with the view to making appropriate recommendations to members for collective measures, including, in the case of a breach of the peace or active aggression, the use of armed force if necessary, to maintain or restore, international peace and security.” The dramatic use of the principles of Classical tragedy in drama can assist us in rousing people out of the cave of their moral indifference.
The recently released film, “Dead To Rights,” which portrays the 1937 massacre of 300,000 people in the occupied city of Nanjing in a two-week period, and how the suppressed truth of it was gotten to the world by a few people who refused to be doomed, should be seen by all who wish to understand the nature of what is now transpiring in Gaza, but is being denied, just as the Nanjing massacre was, and is even now being denied. Where possible, this film should be seen together with the film, “Hiroshima 8:15,” on the refusal of individual civilians at “Ground Zero” of the atomic bomb’s detonation, not only survived the blast, but also refused to be doomed after first impact. Two different views of Japan, provided by the two different films, juxtaposed, are resolvable only at a higher level, from the mountain-top of the idea, “nothing human is alien to me.”
A Japanese blogger living in China, named Hayato Kato, known for amusing posts, stunned his 1.9 million followers by recounting how he had seen the film and wrote about it, instead of his usual diversions. “He said he had seen many people on the Japanese internet denying the Nanjing Massacre had happened, including public figures, even politicians. ‘If we deny it, this will happen again,’ he continued, urging Japanese people to watch the movies and ‘Iearn about the dark side of their history.’” Over 600,000 have now seen his remarks.
The dark side of the world’s history, in which well over 100 million died in the Second World War, including at least 35 million persons of Chinese ethnicity, 4 million-plus Japanese, and more than 27 million Russians, who were killed mostly on Europe’s Eastern front, means that there is a much different meaning for these people to this 80th anniversary of the September 3 Victory Against Fascism, than Americans or Europeans might dream. An American presence, or at least, an appreciation of the solemnity of what this occasion represents, may be decisive in moving forward. Consider, also, how the Chinese, and Russians, are thinking about a report from Reuters on Aug. 19: “Trump Shock Spurs Japan To Think about the Unthinkable: Nuclear Arms.”
Nuclear weapons expert Ted Postol, speaking on the Aug. 22, Friday 116th meeting of the International Peace Coalition, sobered the gathering by making it clear that Iran, now separated, as a result of the United States and Israel’s bombing of its nuclear facilities, from any International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection procedures regarding the uranium known to be in its position, could, or can, under certain circumstances, he believes, produce and use nuclear weapons without the need for testing them. Now, Iran is the second undeclared nuclear weapons country in Southwest Asia, after Israel. Does that mean that if Israel concluded that Iran was working right now on a bomb that could be deployed without testing, like the bomb used on Hiroshima, to the doorstep of Tel Aviv, that it would launch a nuclear pre-emptive strike against Tehran? How important is Russia’s relationship to Iran in this circumstance? More importantly, how significant is it, given this new danger in Southwest Asia, that the United States’ strategic relationship with Russia is now being positively advanced, as of Aug. 15? How could a Trump-Xi-Putin summit further consolidate this, given China’s recent constructive role with Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinians? And there is the additional matter that it has been China that has most recently been the leading proponent of a Bering Strait connection to further facilitate trade with the United States—a far happier and more economically productive policy than the Trump Administration’s tariff offensive.
Such a meeting will result, if those tens of millions in Europe and America, who now insist they are underlings whose the fault lies, not in themselves, but rather “in their stars,” such as the current President of the United States, fight for it. We suggest that that fight start from Principle Ten of Zepp-LaRouche’s Ten Principles for a New Security and Development Architecture: “The basic assumption for the new paradigm is, that man is fundamentally good and capable to infinitely perfect the creativity of his mind and the beauty of his soul, and being the most advanced geological force in the universe, which proves that the lawfulness of the mind and that of the physical universe are in correspondence and cohesion, and that all evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome.” That principle of humanity is not alien, but a fundamental, unalienable right of all people. September 3 can be a major step in building a bridge to the future, which determines our present.
Aug. 15--Today, as the Anchorage, Alaska Trump-Putin summit conference occurs, what is required of the citizens of the trans-Atlantic sector is “Action, and Action Now!” When Franklin Roosevelt spoke those words on March 4, 1933, he re-set the relationship between the American Presidency and the American people, in a “New Deal.” That is the true “Art of the Deal—” remove fear from the lives of the people, through using the economy to allow them to work and prosper at the expense of the speculators and parasites, and they will, in turn, and if called upon, fight to save the world, as they did, particularly between 1941 and 1945.
A “Strategic New Deal,” a new security and development architecture, must now supersede the last decades of Anglo-American chaos. The actions of Director of National Intelligence(DNI) Tulsi Gabbard have temporarily neutralized the British intelligence-run “Russiagate,” although Vice President J.D. Vance’s recent remarks in London [about the alleged special relationship between Perfidious Albion and its former colony, the United States) indicate the deeper vulnerability that plagues the Administration on evaluating the true, committed enemy of the United States. FDR’s presence, acknowledged or not, hovers over the Anchorage conference, wedged as it is between this year’s two great commemorations of the 80th anniversary of World War II's victory over fascism—those that have already happened in Moscow on May 8-9, and those that are about to happen in Beijing on Sept. 3.
In World War II, 420,000 Americans gave their lives, whereas Russia, however, suffered at least 27 million dead. Chinese sources, now preparing for the Sept. 3 ceremonies, have cited a casualty figure there of 35 million. They also point out that their war against the Japanese extended from 1931 (not 1937) to 1945—fourteen years, compared to the four years starting with Pearl Habor on Dec. 7, 1941, for the United States. Over 100 million people worldwide died as a direct result of the conflict. The Anchorage meeting occurs as the world has begun to now plunge into the same path of tragic self-destruction.
The specter of impending tragedy, however, must be converted to hope. We need a higher vision of humanity, which the so-called “elites” of the West, particularly California’s Silicon Valley trans-humanists, moral descendants of the British/Nazi eugenicists of the last century, hate. The LaRouche Organization has therefore mobilized to shift the thinking in the transatlantic sector to influence the underlying dynamic of the Anchorage summit process. If this first meeting is successful, it will be one in a series of such. Notably, if President Trump were to journey to China, either at the time of the Sept. 3 commemorations or slightly after, such a process can move the world, in the short term, away from Hell.
The “Action, and Action Now” available to free citizens from all over the world, is to propose an effective, elevated solution, an alternative to the march to total war that otherwise appears unstoppable. There are two ideas, offered by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche: First, that President Trump should accept the invitation of the Chinese government, and travel to Beijing for the Sept. 3 commemorations. Second, the Bering Strait Tunnel Project, advocated for decades by economist Lyndon LaRouche and Helga Zepp-LaRouche, should be immediately discussed among the three nations as a collaborative alternative to war.
The Bering Strait Tunnel (and Bridge) is a project that would connect the U.S./North American and Russia/Eurasian land masses, and by extension, the continents of North and South America, with the continents of Eurasia and Africa. This could, within two generations, at most, of advanced technology transfer, ultimately create, not only a Eurasian Land-Bridge, but a World Land-Bridge. This is a series of “development corridors” stretching across the interiors of the Eurasian, African, and North and South American continents, completely transforming the planet.
“Ukraine,” no matter what the foolish wish to think, is, while important to resolve, not the central matter that the American delegation in Anchorage should cause to be under discussion—especially given the realities of NATO’s impending defeat on the battlefield. In taking up the aforementioned policy perspective, the United States can reverse the fateful, tragic misapplications of the powers of the American Presidency that occurred in the immediate weeks following the death of Franklin Delano Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, leading to the unwarranted dropping of the atomic bomb. “Had the same wartime, Roosevelt program of 1939-1945, been adapted to the rapid, post-war, agro-industrial development of new nations freshly freed from the debilitating hand of British, French, etc. imperialism, the U.S. and its partners would have enjoyed a continuing, post-war economic growth. The policy-shaping institutions established under the first two decades of such a post-war conversion program, would have virtually ensured further, planetary growth and stability throughout the 1945-1998 interval,” wrote Lyndon LaRouche, in “Where Franklin Roosevelt Was Interrupted.”
Of course, as Col. Larry Wilkerson said in an interview yesterday, there is another path that might be taken in Anchorage. “Also a possibility is, we terminate right here, and Putin and his team go home, and Trump basks in his having stood up to the Russians, and uses that domestically and tries internationally. It could be either way. I’m hoping it’s the former.” We, choose, however, not to hope, but to act.
Consider the awesome implications of failure. On May 28, 1945, former President Herbert Hoover, visiting Harry Truman in the White House, proposed to him: “I am convinced that if you, as President, will make a shortwave broadcast to the people of Japan—tell them they can have their Emperor if they surrender, that it will not mean unconditional surrender except for the militarists—you’ll get a peace in Japan—you’ll have both wars over.”
Truman instead went along with recommendations from the British Ministry of Defense, Winston Churchill, and their American counterparts. The British as soon as they were certain that the atomic bomb would work, recommended “Operation Unthinkable,” which called for the United States to declare war on its ally, the Soviet Union, by July 1, 1945. While Truman did not adopt the entire policy, it was decided by July 25 to drop the bombs, even as the Potsdam conference was under way. After the Hiroshima bomb was dropped on August 6, Hoover wrote on August 8, “The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.” The next day, the second bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.
What would Eisenhower, MacArthur, and even Hoover think about the unfolding situation in Gaza, where, as Jeffrey Sachs and others have pointed out, elements now in power in Israel would not hesitate to use their undeclared but very real scores (and probably hundreds) of nuclear weapons “if threatened”? Sane Israeli elements, like former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg, who will address meeting #115 of the International Peace Coalition today along with former CIA analyst Ray McGovern and Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, has “called on Friday for 1 million Jews, worldwide, to join a collective legal complaint at the International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of crimes against humanity in Gaza,” reported Haaretz on Aug. 10.
“Never Again!” is a choice, not a hope. A Strategic New Deal starts with the dispossessed and forgotten, the despised and rejected, with advancing the General Welfare of each and every human being on the planet, in the name of the 100 million who perished in the last world war, and the billions who will perish in the next. That is the Action, and Action Now—the choice that must be made in Anchorage, and in the hearts and minds of each of us.
by Mr. X
Aug. 11—Near where the future Bering Strait Tunnel finally connecting Russia and the United States will soon be located, there is a town in Russia named Kotzebue. It is named after the Russian explorer Otto von Kotzebue (1787-1846,) who was the son of the playwright August von Kotzebue (1761-1819.) On behalf of the Russian Imperial Navy—the same navy that Catherine the Great earlier deployed as part of her 1780 League of Armed Neutrality, which indirectly supported the American Revolution by protecting “neutral” shipping to the new United States from interference by the British Navy—Otto von Kotzebue explored the Bering Strait in pursuit of a passage to the Arctic Ocean.
As a result of Russia’s sale of Alaska to the United States in 1867, five years after Russia had also supported the Union cause by sending its navy to the ports of New York and San Francisco to prevent Britain and France from breaking Lincoln’s blockade of the Confederacy, Russia’s mainland coast is 55 miles from the Seward Peninsula of the United States. (Technically, the two countries, each of which owns one of the Diomede Islands, are actually geographically much closer—only 2.4 miles apart.) Could the eight decades of hostility between Russia and the United States, two nations which, prior to 1945, had not only not fought each other, but had been allied in opposition to the British Empire, now be finally overcome? Was that hostility instigated by Britian's Winston Churchill’s “Operation Unthinkable” proposal to go to war with the Soviet Union by no later than July 1945, well before the end of the War in the Pacific? Is that empire, and its lackeys, right now attempting to foment war with Russia, involving the United States, up to this very moment?
Readers of Executive Intelligence Review’s Daily Alert are aware that since July 30, documents released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have provided clues that may yet figure in answering that question. In his August 5 article, “Whistleblower Exposes Real 2016 U.S. Election Meddling,” journalist Kit Klarenberg, reporting on those documents, tells the story of “a U.S. intelligence veteran who from 2015 to 2020 served as Deputy National Intelligence Officer, at the ODNI-overseen National Intelligence Council. They specialized in ‘cyber issues,’ including ‘cyber-enabled information operations.’ Prior to the 2016 vote, they led the production of an ICA [Intelligence Community Assessment] on ‘cyber threats’ to U.S. elections, at the order of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, for which they were ‘commended.’” Klarenberg then quotes that source from one of the documents Gabbard released. “For the new 2017 ICA, I was directed by (REDATED) to focus on Russian attempts to access U.S. election-related infrastructure. IC [Intelligence Community] reporting suggested many Russia-attributed what did the initials IP stand for? IP addresses were making connection attempts that the IC could not explain the purpose of. Later, when presenting (REDACTED) with our findings, (REDACTED) directed us to abandon any further study of the subject, saying ‘it’s something else.’ In light of later development in open source reporting, I came to have concerns about this Russia-attributed cyber activity and the abrupt dismissal of the study effort.”
Note the following important passage: "In addition, I noted other nations’ efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election, but this critical context was omitted from the 2017 ICA. During conversion of the 2017 ICA to… Unclassified versions, key context was not included, and I was pressured to alter my views on the 2017 ICA’s [Intelligence Community Assessment’s] key judgments, with the expressed intent by (REDACTED) that my concurrence was sought to enable (REDACTED) to sway the views of the Defense Intelligence Agency, DIA."
Will Great Britain’s intelligence operatives, former head of GCHQ Robert Hannigan and former MI6 Chief Sir Richard Dearlove be among those foreign nationals accused, instead of “the Russians,” of co-managing the attempt, before and after the 2016 election, to alter the Presidency of the United States? As Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, both of whom survived assassination attempts in the past 18 months, prepare to meet this Friday, note Vice-President J.D. Vance’s comments on a Fox News interview regarding the criminal referrals DNI Gabbard has made to Attorney General Pam Bondi regarding Russiagate: “that’s a violation of what our intelligence services should be doing, and I absolutely think they broke the law.” Vance indicated he supports and expects indictments.
A new security and development architecture needs to be the focus of not only the August 15 meeting, but also a subsequent “Big 3” meeting, preferably in early September, among Presidents Trump, Putin, and President Xi Jinping of China. President Xi, who spent months in the state of Iowa as a student, and has an appreciation of American history, might be intrigued to know, if he is not already aware of it, that Abraham Lincoln’s Ambassador to Russia Cassius Marcellus Clay, who played a secondary but essential role in Secretary of State William Seward’s purchase of Alaska from Russia, “was among the first United States diplomats to urge Russo-American identity of interests in Eastern Asia,” according to author Albert Parry. During the Second World War, in the spring of 1943, Parry wrote this in an article cited here, titled “Cassius Clay’s Glimpse into the Future: Lincoln’s Envoy to Saint Petersburg Bade the Two Nations Meet in Asia.”
At this September 2-3, eightieth anniversary of the victory over fascism, in which the United States, China and Russia were all allied, the dream to connect East and West through the Bering Strait, equally a dream of Chinese, Russian and American thinkers and engineers, such as the Schiller Institute’s late Hal Cooper, who designed the World Land-Bridge map of international “development corridors,” could be discussed. Helga Zepp-LaRouche has released a petition that urges this. We, who are both patriots of our nations, and world-citizens in search of a more perfect union of humanity without war, should encourage this next step. That is the mountain-top standpoint from which to view the true potential, despite the dangers, of the upcoming summit-process.
Aug. 6--The ingenious American intelligence officer Edgar Poe (1809-1849) in 1842 solved the murder of a New York City woman by the name of Mary Rogers. He presented his conclusions in a story, called “The Mystery of Marie Roget.” Poe reports that “‘The Mystery of Marie Roget’ was composed at a distance from the scene of the atrocity, and with no other means of investigation than the newspapers afforded.… It may not be improper to record, nevertheless, that the confessions of two persons, made, at different periods, long subsequent to the publication, confirmed in full, not only the general conclusion, but absolutely all the chief hypothetical details by which that conclusion was attained. “ Had Poe been alive in the present era, he would have ignored the “too much information” plague of the internet-dominated present, and ridiculed the methods of inquiry, if they can be called that, that have been used to in effect hide the truth, both in the “RussiaGate” matter, and in “the Epstein case.” In our world and time, awash in the massive electronic trash dump of “too much information,” the “tales of ratiocination” of Edgar Poe, which reveal the true method by which crimes like Russia-Gate and “the mystery of Jeffrey Epstein” might be readily solved, are ignored, just as the great intellectual and political achievement known as the American Revolution, which produced Edgar Poe, is intentionally misunderstood.
The important revelations coming from DNI Tulsi Gabbard on the Russiagate hoax represent much more than a break from “business-as-usual” in Washington. She should be supported, in order not only to bring long-denied justice to the treasonous actors within the Obama (and Bush!) administrations, but to reveal the true enemy of the United States, and humanity as a whole—the British Empire, in May of 1945, in a document titled “Operation Unthinkable,” Britain drew up plans for an immediate preemptive war against the Soviet Union, to begin in July of 1945–two months after the end of the war in Europe, and a month before nuclear weapons would be dropped on Japan! In the words of that report, “The overall or political object is to impose upon Russia the will of the United States and British Empire.” This meant that nuclear weapons would be used against the Soviet Union, either in 1945, or as soon as possible thereafter. As reported elsewhere in this White Paper, that is the intent, now, in 2025, of British financial and intelligence forces—which are the same thing—toward both Russia and China, in pursuit of ”final victory“ in what the British have for centuries called “the Great Game.”
In October, 2008, the American ambassador to Kyrgyzstan, Tatiana Gfoeller, found herself in Bishkek in a testy confrontation with Prince Andrew of Great Britain, now infamous and shunned because of “the mystery of Jeffrey Epstein.” When Ambassador Gfoeller protested against the idea that “Great Game” politics should be the template for policy in Central Asia, “Prince Andrew….stated baldly that ‘the United Kingdom, Western Europe (and by extension you Americans, too) were now back in the thick of playing the Great Game. More animated than ever, he stated cockily: ‘And this time we aim to win!’” Andrew is known to have been, until his disgrace, integral to the Empire’s international weapons trade.
One of Jeffrey Epstein’s earliest sponsors, in the mid-1980s was the late British “defense contractor,” Douglas Leese, a key architect of Al-Yamamah, one of the largest weapons deals in history. Leese is reported to have introduced Epstein to Robert Maxwell, and described Epstein to convicted swindler Steven Hoffenberg, once-owner of the New York Post, thus: “The guy’s a genius, he’s great at selling securities. And he has no moral compass.”
This is the face, and the soul, of the leaders and lackeys of the War Party. Both “The Mystery of Jeffrey Epstein” and “The Mystery of Russia-Gate,” in the way they have been reported, have, so far, been diversions from the truth. The truth is that the old colonial-imperial order has died, and can never be revived. The War Party does not accept that, however, and intends to impose its will upon humanity, either by subjugating it, or by destroying it in thermonuclear war. “Epstein” and “Russia-Gate” are one. Several of the actors in both are the same, in fact. “Imposing our will” upon humanity, whether that be the impassioned destruction of nations, or the remorseless destruction of innocent children, originate in the same Nietzschean view of humanity. If the two can be combined, as in Gaza, causing the victims of the Holocaust to commit that same ultimate crime upon Palestinians,“ that is the most delicious corruption. Of the War Party, Edgar Poe said it best: “They are neither man nor woman, they are neither brute nor human; they are pestilential carcasses, disparted from their souls.”
Aug. 6--The ingenious American intelligence officer Edgar Poe (1809-1849) in 1842 solved the murder of a New York City woman by the name of Mary Rogers. He presented his conclusions in a story, called “The Mystery of Marie Roget.” Poe reports that “‘The Mystery of Marie Roget’ was composed at a distance from the scene of the atrocity, and with no other means of investigation than the newspapers afforded.… It may not be improper to record, nevertheless, that the confessions of two persons, made, at different periods, long subsequent to the publication, confirmed in full, not only the general conclusion, but absolutely all the chief hypothetical details by which that conclusion was attained. “ Had Poe been alive in the present era, he would have ignored the “too much information” plague of the internet-dominated present, and ridiculed the methods of inquiry, if they can be called that, that have been used to in effect hide the truth, both in the “RussiaGate” matter, and in “the Epstein case.” In our world and time, awash in the massive electronic trash dump of “too much information,” the “tales of ratiocination” of Edgar Poe, which reveal the true method by which crimes like Russia-Gate and “the mystery of Jeffrey Epstein” might be readily solved, are ignored, just as the great intellectual and political achievement known as the American Revolution, which produced Edgar Poe, is intentionally misunderstood.
The important revelations coming from DNI Tulsi Gabbard on the Russiagate hoax represent much more than a break from “business-as-usual” in Washington. She should be supported, in order not only to bring long-denied justice to the treasonous actors within the Obama (and Bush!) administrations, but to reveal the true enemy of the United States, and humanity as a whole—the British Empire, in May of 1945, in a document titled “Operation Unthinkable,” Britain drew up plans for an immediate preemptive war against the Soviet Union, to begin in July of 1945–two months after the end of the war in Europe, and a month before nuclear weapons would be dropped on Japan! In the words of that report, “The overall or political object is to impose upon Russia the will of the United States and British Empire.” This meant that nuclear weapons would be used against the Soviet Union, either in 1945, or as soon as possible thereafter. As reported elsewhere in this White Paper, that is the intent, now, in 2025, of British financial and intelligence forces—which are the same thing—toward both Russia and China, in pursuit of ”final victory“ in what the British have for centuries called “the Great Game.”
In October, 2008, the American ambassador to Kyrgyzstan, Tatiana Gfoeller, found herself in Bishkek in a testy confrontation with Prince Andrew of Great Britain, now infamous and shunned because of “the mystery of Jeffrey Epstein.” When Ambassador Gfoeller protested against the idea that “Great Game” politics should be the template for policy in Central Asia, “Prince Andrew….stated baldly that ‘the United Kingdom, Western Europe (and by extension you Americans, too) were now back in the thick of playing the Great Game. More animated than ever, he stated cockily: ‘And this time we aim to win!’” Andrew is known to have been, until his disgrace, integral to the Empire’s international weapons trade.
One of Jeffrey Epstein’s earliest sponsors, in the mid-1980s was the late British “defense contractor,” Douglas Leese, a key architect of Al-Yamamah, one of the largest weapons deals in history. Leese is reported to have introduced Epstein to Robert Maxwell, and described Epstein to convicted swindler Steven Hoffenberg, once-owner of the New York Post, thus: “The guy’s a genius, he’s great at selling securities. And he has no moral compass.”
This is the face, and the soul, of the leaders and lackeys of the War Party. Both “The Mystery of Jeffrey Epstein” and “The Mystery of Russia-Gate,” in the way they have been reported, have, so far, been diversions from the truth. The truth is that the old colonial-imperial order has died, and can never be revived. The War Party does not accept that, however, and intends to impose its will upon humanity, either by subjugating it, or by destroying it in thermonuclear war. “Epstein” and “Russia-Gate” are one. Several of the actors in both are the same, in fact. “Imposing our will” upon humanity, whether that be the impassioned destruction of nations, or the remorseless destruction of innocent children, originate in the same Nietzschean view of humanity. If the two can be combined, as in Gaza, causing the victims of the Holocaust to commit that same ultimate crime upon Palestinians,“ that is the most delicious corruption. Of the War Party, Edgar Poe said it best: “They are neither man nor woman, they are neither brute nor human; they are pestilential carcasses, disparted from their souls.”
July 31—Executive Intelligence Review, acting in the tradition of responsibility toward the Presidency of the United States undertaken by its founder, economist Lyndon LaRouche, publishes as its lead today the Introduction to the forthcoming White Paper issued by The LaRouche Organization: “Worse Than Treason—The Actual Motive Behind ‘Russiagate.’” There are three crucial conceptions that appear in this document, to which we call attention.
Conception Number One: “What DNI Gabbard has released thus far, shows that in August, September, and early December of 2016, the intelligence community had determined that Russia was neither capable of, nor interested in hacking U.S. election infrastructure to affect the outcome of the presidential election.” Instead of this new emphasis, which definitively removes Russia from any espionage role like that claimed for the past nine years—and vindicates former National Security Agency whistleblower Bill Binney and his associates, including former CIA operatives Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern, as well as many other members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity who challenged this false claim from the time it was made nine years ago—everyone is still being encouraged to only focus upon the important, but secondary angle that “the Obama Administration did it”—thus letting off the “originating agent” behind Russiagate, which was not the Obama Administration.
Conception Number Two: “What has not yet been mentioned by Gabbard, other than limited reference to the ‘Steele Dossier,’ is the role of British intelligence in manufacturing the Russiagate story, and the role played by key individuals such as GCHQ Director Robert Hannigan, MI6 Chief Richard Dearlove, former Prime Minister Tony Blair, and others.” This is crucial, both because this, not Russia, was the foreign threat against the United States which illegally sought to determine the outcome of the 2016 American Presidential election, by America’s historical enemy, and because both Dearlove and Blair are all over the disastrous Trump Administration policy in the Middle East right now.
Conception Number Three: “The reason for the British-orchestrated confrontation between the United States and Russia was so that the British could consolidate a global financial empire based on depopulation and looting raw materials and labor.” China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the BRICS New Development Bank, launched in 2013 and 2014, respectively, posed a great threat to what King Charles has called “Global Britain.” This, and nothing else, is the actual motivation behind the disastrous “American realist” policies toward China, and the supremely stupid economic policies of self-destruction being pursued by the United States.
In fact, the United States’ primary allies, were it to re-adopt its once-traditional policy of investment in mining, manufacturing, agriculture, advanced nuclear fission and thermonuclear fusion research and development, and the correlated advanced machine-tool design, would in fact be the very Russia and China that are today said to be its enemies! The Lincoln Administration understood the role of Great Britain. The Franklin Roosevelt Administration understood the role of Great Britain. And 200 years ago, the Presidency of American Revolution veteran John Quincy Adams (1825-29) exemplified an independent American foreign and domestic policy, which he had eloquently expressed in his 1821 Fourth of July speech to the Congress, delivered in his capacity as Secretary of State.
Only if the Presidency has the courage to name the names of the real “perfidious Albion” perpetrators of Russiagate, the real foreign enemy of America, and the real War Party will the drive toward thermonuclear war with Russia possibly be contained. The world security and development architecture proposed and detailed by participants in the two Schiller Institute conferences held in the past three months is the clear pathway forward. This can work, but only if the American Presidency leaves the obsolete, hostile fantasy world of “unipolarity” and its NATO bastard child behind. By recommitting to its original anti-colonialist purpose, America can yet liberate the trans-Atlantic world from the radioactive fate to which it seeks to condemn mankind. All that is needed is to summon what the assassinated Yitzhak Rabin called “the courage to change axioms.”
by Mr. X
July 23—It is true that Director of National Security Tulsi Gabbard has just called attention, through a series of now-declassified documents, to a 9-year-old story, that she has referred to as “a treasonous conspiracy,” on the part of the 2016 American intelligence establishment, including the then-President Barack Obama. But on behalf of whom is this treason being committed? The Russiagate caper, for example, was instigated by British intelligence, in the form of then-GCHQ Chief Robert Hannigan. That is, a foreign government, the British Empire, interfered to defraud the 2016 American Presidential election, by claiming that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee.
As journalist Aaron Maté wrote on July 22: “According to newly declassified documents, U.S. intelligence leaders concealed high-level doubts about one of Russiagate’s foundational allegations: that Russia stole and leaked Democratic Party material to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. In a September 2016 report that was never made public until now, the NSA and the FBI broke with their intelligence counterparts and expressed ‘low confidence’ in the attribution to Russia. The previously undisclosed dissent about Russia’s alleged hacking activities in the 2016 election is among several revelations released last week by Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence.” But it was British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) Chief Robert Hannigan and Christopher Steele’s controller, “former” MI6 head Sir Richard Dearlove, that were the instigators and the brains behind it all.
Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter responded to these revelations on July 21 on George Galloway’s show: “[W]e’re at a point right now in American British relations where we need to be calling a spade a spade. You are not our friend. In fact, you are our enemy. You facilitated active treason against the sitting President of the United States. Under some circumstances, that would be a casus belli (cause for war)…. And you’re lucky I’m not the president, because I’ll tell you what, you interfere with American democracy to that degree, you will pay a heavy price, as you should. Not you, George. You’re my friend and not the British people. And that’s why we’ll never do this. But your government is the absolute enemy of not just the United States, but all of humanity.”
When looking at “Russiagate,” it is important to see the nature of the treason under consideration; thermonuclear war, after all, is treason against the human race. The present war of NATO against Russia is a war that London’s The Economist had written a script for, in 2007, before Barack Obama was elected to the Presidency. “In the dangerous second decade of the (21st) century, when Vladimir Putin returned for a third term as Russian president and stood poised to invade Ukraine, it was the EU that pushed the Obama administration to threaten massive nuclear retaliation.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zhakarova July 21 expressed, in her unique way, what this British-instigated march toward folly has actually meant. "Historically, we have done everything possible to build relations with a peaceful and prosperous Germany based on mutual respect. We forgave what no person, no nation, should be expected to forgive. We forgave the deaths of tens of millions of our people. And what did we get in return? What everyone is seeing today….
“To me, the most alarming thing happening in Germany is the complete amnesia regarding its own past. The country has forgotten its recent history, including its reunification. The fact that the country was divided did not happen by some global accident, but as a consequence of the crimes it committed. Germany has forgotten who played the decisive role in making its reunification possible. It was our country, our people, those who had every right not to forgive, but did, who also helped bring the German people back together. Even that has now been betrayed. They have betrayed themselves.”
Is America about to betray itself as well? Will that self-betrayal, given America’s importance, cause a global thermonuclear war? Perhaps the way to look at what Gabbard is calling attention to is, in the context of a larger, chronic problem of “Tory” treasonous behavior in the American Presidency, citing a series of years: 1989, with the Bush 41 presidency and the fall of the Berlin Wall; 1963’s Kennedy assassination; 1945’s April death, in office, of President Franklin Roosevelt and the subsequent unjustified dropping of the atomic bomb in August.
For a moment, then, reverse this perspective. See the American Revolution as the first successful anti-colonial revolution in history, 250 years ago. Then, consider the nearly 600 years of colonialism that is now coming to an end, and the role that the international collaboration known as the American Revolution played in causing that transition to come about. Then, realize that the promise contained in the American 1776 Declaration of Independence is best expressed in the present-day economic aspirations of the true heirs of that experiment—the vast majority of the human race, as assembled in over 100 nations, now called the “Global Majority.”
Yet, the United States has been caused to regard that very grouping of nations, grouped at the moment around the formation called the BRICS, as its enemy. In upholding this wrong idea, the United States commits treason against itself. It is of this that President John Quincy Adams, who occupied that office exactly 200 years ago, warned the Congress four years earlier in his Fourth of July speech in 1821: America “well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign Independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.”
Fifty years ago, the economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche, in what is today referred to as his “Oasis Plan,” outlined how to extend justice, not “IMF/World Bank loans,” to Palestine and Southwest Asia, and more generally to the nations of Africa, Asia and Ibero-America, in the form of “advanced technology transfer.” In this way, not only would the crimes of colonialism be addressed, but a new, self-sufficient economic platform would be created, based on technology transfer as expressed in advanced machine tool production and high energy-density physical production in the fields of mining, manufacturing, agriculture, and essential infrastructure, including in the fields of health and education. That would provide the economic foundation for a real new security and development architecture. That is the fight that must be waged in the United Nations now, for the people of Gaza, and for our own souls’ sake.
Don’t be distracted by the indigestible news-feeds and blog posts coming your way on every variety of topic today. Of course, there are events that “everyone is talking about,” such as the announcement of more weapons to be sent to Ukraine by the Trump Administration and NATO. These, however, no matter how important they may momentarily be, operate within the realm of entropic, predictable tragedy. Such, however, is not, and will hopefully never be, our focus.
We must be clear-eyed about unfolding tragedy, in order to avoid it. The tragi-comedy in Ukraine, with its Wal-Mart Pagliacci, is now coming to a close, no matter what the headlines say, and the weapons shipments, real and merely promised, are. Yesterday, a new deadline, 50 days, by which time the war in Ukraine must conclude, was decreed by President Trump. As with the famous story, “The Monkey’s Paw,” however, we should not only wish for the Ukraine war to end in 50 days, because that wish might be granted in ways that neither the United States, nor Russia, nor anyone else in the world, except for haters of the human race, would intend.
Annie Jacobsen, author of Nuclear War: A Scenario, in an interview, July 10, which also included as a guest former CIA intelligence officer Andrew Bustamente, told the following story. "So, this goes back to your terrifying point about miscalculation or mistake. I think that the mistake is where the real threat lies. People at this table may remember, in November, the U.K. gave—and I’m talking about the Ukraine-Russia conflict right now—the U.K. gave the Storm Shadow to Ukraine…. Ukraine we gave the ATACAMS. These are systems, missiles systems essentially, to be able to go further into Russia, to allow Ukraine to fire further into Russia. And Russia was pissed off.
“And in response, they fired an intermediate range ballistic missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, OK? This is the first time in history that a ballistic missile was used, in this kind of a kinetic war, a hot war. And I was on an airplane, leaving London, and I went, ‘Oh my God, is this that situation, where I’m not going to land because there’s a nuclear war?’ Because that is precisely the kind of thing I write in Nuclear War: A Scenario, where something’s launched, and the United States, because we have a ‘Launch On Warning’ policy, launches before it lands, because we’re not willing to wait to see what was in that warhead.
“Now, what was in the warhead, was nothing! The Russians launched an inter-range ballistic missile into Ukraine, with nothing in the warhead. Why? I mean, this is so terrifying. Well, we learned later, when Lavrov went on television, he said that he had notified his American counterparts in advance. I was taken to the State Department to see where that advanced notice came into. And it’s called the NNRRC—the”national nuclear security center" in the State Department—I’m messing up the name, but it’s known as the NNRRC. (This may refer to the National and Nuclear Risk Reduction Center of the State Department.) It’s inside the State Department.
“And it’s basically, the ‘Hello, We’re Not At War’ room. Meaning every 90 seconds you hear, ‘bing, bing, bing,’ and that’s all you hear. And I was with the Assistant Secretary of State, who said ‘Annie, that’s the Russians telling us we’re not at war.’ And she explained to me that Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, when he said on TV, which went over everybody’s head, including mine, ‘oh, we notified our American counterparts,’ what did that mean? Well, what Mallory Stewart, the Assistant Secretary of State told me, was what it meant was that Lavrov rang up the NNRRC, and said, ‘you know, we’re launching, and it doesn’t have a nuclear warhead.’”
Andrew Bustamente: “That was such a big deal. And I don’t think the average person understands how big a deal that was. I think it was called the Oreshnik.”
Jacobsen: “It was called the Oreshnik.”
Bustamente: “The Oreshnik was the newest, most modern version of an ICBM, intermediate ballistic missile, that the Russian inventory had. We had never seen it deployed. It’s never been seen before. And it reminded the whole fucking world, you do not want to go down this road.”
The interview has 2.9 million views as of this writing.
Meanwhile, regarding Ukraine, an intriguing, if unconfirmed report from Alexander Mercouris of The Duran was filed yesterday: “This (involves) a Ukrainian commentator who published, apparently, a plan, details of a plan, which he says he was given by Ukrainian officials, in which there are now apparently serious preparations planning for a relocation of the Ukrainian government to the West. In other words, away from Kyiv. Now, the Ukrainians immediately said, ‘This is fake. This is not an original document.’ But the Ukrainian commentator who is apparently a well-regarded one, stood his ground, and he said that that simply isn’t true. It is an absolutely real document. And he has absolute confidence in its authenticity, especially given the people who gave it to him.”
As in Shakespeare’s Anthony And Cleopatra, the veracity of the rumor is less important than what the very existence of the rumor itself expresses. Nothing done by anyone in NATO, including the United States Presidency, can reverse defeat on the battlefield there, which was inevitable. This includes escalation with more weapons being sent to Ukraine, or with sanctions, for reasons contained in Annie Jacobsen’s story. Loss of the fragile trust that now exists between Russia and the United States can mean that the slightest miscalculation, or careless dismissal of an evaluation provided by officers that go against prevailing opinion, including that of the leader of a nation, can cost humanity everything.
Instead, we invite you to challenge the hidden axioms that underpin tragedy. We investigate reality, not “virtual reality.” We rely on our real ideas, and not others’ “artificial intelligence.” We stand for the sovereignty of principle, not “the rule of law.” Our forces have just addressed, over July 12-13, the international community, particularly the BRICS nations, with the Schiller Institute’s Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture, placed at the center of the world dialogue.
This dialogue and call to action consists of our organizing a series of presentations, now in the ascendancy, including conferences, seminars, classes. The purpose is to fashion a new system of international and intercontinental congresses, in person and online, focused on the method of discovery and re-discovery of new ideas, and old ideas that have been lost. In doing this work, we are walking in the footsteps of thinker Lyndon LaRouche, and the mission expressed in the life’s work of the late economist and statesman.
A clean break with our recent past, particularly the past 55 years since August 15, 1971, must be made by a United States that has not only de-industrialized itself, de-populated itself, and pauperized itself, but is now tearing itself down. Technological progress through mass employment in mining, manufacturing and agriculture, has to be returned to the United States. The promise of a future must be given to the nation’s (and the world’s) youth. And a new security and development architecture must be composed by Russia, the United States, China and other nations, with which this Presidency must engage.
by Mr. X
July 11—“Man Is Not a Wolf to Man! For a New Paradigm in International Relations!” is more than the title of the Schiller Institute’s International Conference this Saturday and Sunday, July 12-13. The intention, as well as the resolve, embedded in the title-statement, is to fight for the hegemony of a higher vision of humanity than that of today’s bestial “geopolitics.” Creative non-violent direct action, through fighting for world physical-economic solutions, is a winning method by which we rise above the self-containing, self-enveloping, self-destructive tragedy of violence, war and moral indifference that is the sum total of trans-Atlantic policy toward some 8 billion people on the planet right now.
As The LaRouche Organization pamphlet, “Economic Recovery Plan 2025 in the Spirit of 1776” puts it, “We can absolutely reverse this collapse, and revive our productive economy, but it will take a cultural shift, away from the worship of Mammon toward a better understanding of mankind’s relationship to the development of our species’ future, and the development of our universe as a whole.” For example, America’s descent into an imperial outlook, burdened by a “zombie dollar” created through the destruction of American industry, agriculture and advanced science, could only be reversed by a return to productive physical economy. Monetary manipulations, whether through tariffs, through zombie “crypt currencies,” or through the other zany pseudo-ideas of the artificially intelligent trans-human moral morons of Silicon Valley, are actually accelerating America’s loss of world influence and world power in the short term, no matter how loudly the opposite is bellowed to be the case.
A falling-down drunk worth a trillion dollars is a trillion-dollar drunk. The trans-Atlantic system, including the United States, is way worse. The war-intoxicated, post-Bretton Woods “funny-monetary” system owes an unpayable two-plus quadrillion dollars! The “golden billion” persons in the trans-Atlantic sector are part of this bankrupt system, which pretends to be not only solvent, but vibrant and even lucrative. Meanwhile, “outside,” at least 6 of the other 8 billion people on the planet, particularly in Africa, South America and Asia, are making a different choice than to play along with that financial video game.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, speaking on July 7 at a post-BRICS press conference in Brazil, said: “Addressing the BRICS summit via videoconference, President of Russia Vladimir Putin said that the old-time system primarily catered to the interests of the Golden Billion. This era is receding into the past. Everyone prioritizes principles being promoted by BRICS as a foundation of a truly multilateral, equitable and mutually beneficial cooperation between all countries.”
On BRICS, U.S. President Trump on July 8 said, “BRICS was set up to degenerate our dollar, to take our dollar—take it off the standard,” and said that result would be as bad “as losing a war, as losing a world war.” BRICS was not, however, in fact, set up for the purpose of creating an alternative currency to the dollar. BRICS exists so that those nations that have been thought of as “unequal” to Europe, those nations that Josep Borrell and others have referred to, and think of, as “the jungle,” will economically work together for their own benefit, in their own way, and with nations that do not view them as inferior.
The Global Majority, particularly those of the Global South, have been through the rodeo of physically paying, with their raw materials, precious metals, food, and their blood, for debts they did not actually incur in the first place. Through “bankers’ arithmetic,” for decades they have, like sharecroppers in the American South, paid back far more than they have incurred. The United States, because its leaders do not study the idea of economics and statesman Lyndon LaRouche, does not even realize that the idea of the World Land-Bridge, developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s by Lyndon LaRouche from a prison cell, was largely intended to involve precisely Africa, Asia, and South and Central America. This, in collaboration with, not in opposition to, China and other BRICS members, will be the key to an American Economic Recovery Plan for 2025-2026. It could occur just in time for the 250th birthday of the anti-colonial American Revolution, actually begun in the 1760s, which culminated in the Declaration of Independence and later, the Constitution of the United States.
Our present, tragic path has been fully outlined for us, as American “junior partners” by British intelligence and the Royal Institute for International Affairs’ Chatham House, which attacked the BRICS meeting. Chatham House was particularly disappointed that neither Xi Jinping nor Vladimir Putin were at the just-concluded BRICS Summit. It was hoped that by inducing President Donald Trump to attack the BRICS by name—which he has now done—British “intelligence” could thereby up the ante of division, especially between Trump and China. Chatham House asserted that BRICS itself was “divided” between the “anti-Western” Russia/China on the one side, and the “non-anti-Western” India and Brazil on the other. (South Africa is usually dismissed by the British for racialist reasons.)
This weekend’s Berlin Conference will demonstrate the opposite of Chatham House—instead, “A New Paradigm in International Relations!” Its nature will be very familiar to those that know about United States President (1825-1829) John Quincy Adams, previously the American Secretary of State. It will be even clearer to those who know the 1644-48 process that created the Treaty of Westphalia. Quincy Adams’ words, “Always stand on principle … even if you stand alone,” should be kept in mind in this turbulent situation, when reading Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Tenth Principle:
“The basic assumption for the new paradigm is, that man is fundamentally good and capable to infinitely perfect the creativity of his mind and the beauty of his soul, and being the most advanced geological force in the universe, which proves that the lawfulness of the mind and that of the physical universe are in correspondence and cohesion, and that all evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome.” We must strive that all policy in international relations, and in this crisis, must start with that principle.
by Mr. X
July 2—This Friday, July 4, will mark the opening of a one-year commemoration and recollection of the 250th birthday of the United States of America. Former Ohio Congressman and Presidential candidate (2004, 2008) Dennis Kucinich released, on July 1, a statement, “July 4, 2025: The Desecration of the Declaration of Independence and a Call for Renewal.” The document begins with its own resolution: “If America is to remain what the Revolution envisioned in 1776, a nation governed by laws, then we the people must speak out, we must act and defend that vision.”
When the Schiller Institute was founded, it issued a “Declaration of the Inalienable Rights of Man”, which is almost identical to the Declaration of Independence. Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s proposal then, as now, was that the nations of the Global South, the now-expanded group of nations that had originally assembled 70 years ago in Bandung, Indonesia, then declaring themselves the Non-Aligned Movement, should co-opt the Declaration of Independence, temporarily abandoned by the United States itself, but still, as it will always be, universally valid. The principle, “that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—” is not a decree but a law of human nature. There are unalienable rights that cannot be taken from any human being, because they are universal, and come from no state. These are the aspirations being spoken of in the policies associated with the BRICS nations, policies which have been given concrete physical-economic expression in works such as the 2014 EIR Special Report, “The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge”.
In her “Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture”, Zepp-LaRouche’s Tenth Principle reads: “The basic assumption for the new paradigm is, that man is fundamentally good and capable to infinitely perfect the creativity of his mind and the beauty of his soul, and being the most advanced geological force in the universe, which proves that the lawfulness of the mind and that of the physical universe are in correspondence and cohesion, and that all evil is the result of a lack of development, and therefore can be overcome.”
There are those, in Silicon Valley and in the City of London, who vehemently disagree. These are the “new eugenicists,” who believe they can remake a “trans-humanist” race in their image. The “unfit,” particularly the poor, will simply be deleted from the human race. “Once rejected largely due to Nazi atrocities, eugenics is being embraced by both the Left and Right. Yet its beating heart lies not in politics, but in tech-driven approaches,” writes author Joel Kotkin. “One big difference from 20th-century eugenics is that today’s effort is a largely private matter, at least until now, shaped not by the state, but the technocratic elite. What’s emerging is a modern version of John Calvin’s Protestant ‘Elect.’” Are these, the creatures from INCUTEL, Palantir, etc., a “new breed” of Anti-Christian soldiers, marching the human race off to war?
Who, for example, has decided on the “governance” of the United States by “the War Party”? Not the people of the United States. They are opposed to the present war policy and voted for a President who was opposed to “forever wars"—yet the war has happened, nonetheless. Why does the United States fight continuous wars, against the people’s will, no matter whom they elect, even as its physical economy and the livelihood of its people decline at an accelerating rate?
It isn’t just war, however. Three weeks ago, on June 19, “A Chinese magnetic levitation train, using a 1.1 ton test sled, and employing an electromagnetic propulsion system, accelerated to a speed of 650 kilometers per hour (404 mph) after travelling just 600 meters—the fastest speed ever achieved by a maglev—and then braked to a crawl within 220 meters.” But American physicists James Powell and Gordon Danby of Brookhaven National Laboratories in Long Island, New York got the first patent for the design of the maglev almost 60 years ago! Did the Communist Party of China stop the United States from building its magnetically levitated trains, or high-speed rail, for the past 60 years—or was it the War Party? Why has NASA, the core of the United States space program, in the “Big Ugly Bill” just passed in the United States Senate, been cut back to pre-Kennedy Moon-shot levels of funding, including the entire Artemis Moon Program being essentially killed?
Are the people that decided these things, the same people who decided that the United States would be plunged into another no-win-war on Iran, a war planned since 2001? Several commentators, from Scott Ritter to Jeffrey Sachs, have found themselves, in the last 48 hours, discussing the possibility that Israel’s Netanyahu would use thermonuclear weapons, or even, under certain circumstances, used by the United States, since Iran has, at the moment, officially decided not to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to re-enter their country.
And with good reason. Journalist Kit Klarenberg has just called attention in “Spying on Iran: How MI6 Infiltrated the IAEA,” in The Grayzone, to the case of British MI6 operative Nicholas Langman, whose name and self-description was discovered in “a trove of leaked papers detailing the activities of Torchlight, a prolific British intelligence cutout.” Langman says that he “worked to prevent WMD proliferation through … support for the [IAEA] and Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW] and through high level international partnerships.” He also says that he “enabled [the] major diplomatic success of [the] Iranian nuclear and sanctions agreement.”
Klarenberg writes: “The influence Langman claimed to have exerted on the IAEA adds weight to Iranian allegations that the international nuclear regulation body colluded with the West and Israel to undermine its sovereignty. The Iranian government has alleged that the IAEA supplied the identities of its top nuclear scientists to Israeli intelligence, enabling their assassinations, and provided critical intelligence to the U.S. and Israel on the nuclear facilities they bombed during their military assault this June.”
Is this what the United States, on the eve of its 250th birthday, has come to? Worse than acting as “a cockboat in the wake of the British man-of-war,” are the United States’ massive military forces being deployed, not on behalf of the General Welfare of the American people, but on behalf of what is, both in Ukraine and Southwest Asia, British imperial policy for total war with Russia? When Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump meet next week in Washington, with what British operatives will they have each met beforehand? How actually independent, 250 years after its inception, is the U.S. government, or the people of the United States?
Kucinich concludes his July 4, 2025 declaration: “If America is to remain what the Revolution envisioned in 1776, a nation governed by laws, then we the people must speak out, we must act and defend that vision. Our freedom ultimately depends upon an enlightened, active citizenry. Otherwise we betray the past and surrender the future, and the nation fails.” By that citizenry, however, we must now mean a worldwide citizenry, not organized primarily by party, or nationality, but by intent."
If the world is not only to survive, but also to grow and develop, citizens, particularly young citizens from around the world, should first read the Schiller Institute’s “Declaration of the Inalienable Rights of Man” and the “Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture,” and then convene, in person or online, for its July 12-13 Conference “Man Is Not a Wolf to Man: For a New Paradigm in International Relations!” in Berlin, Germany. Also, particularly through this upcoming July 4 weekend, wherever you are, help circulate and distribute, in the streets and online, the statement “Will There Be Thermonuclear Fireworks By the Fourth of July?”
by Mr. X
June 27—It should not have come as a surprise. “Trump Warns U.S. Will Strike Again If Iran Resumes High-Level Uranium Enrichment” read the headline in the afternoon online issue of the New York Times. The Jewish Insider carried the following additional headline: “Trump Suspends Negotiations with Iran after Defiant Speech from Ayatollah—The President also said that he would require Iran to allow entry for international inspectors to ensure the regime doesn’t rebuild its nuclear program.” This particularly does not come as a surprise to those who have already been circulating the statement, issued June 23 by The LaRouche Organization, “Will There Be Thermonuclear Fireworks by the Fourth of July?” If you have not done so yet, start circulating it now!
The second paragraph of that statement, an immediate response to the bombing of Iran by the United States, asked: “Here is a question: if the sites were not destroyed, or if Iran announces it is able to rebuild, what will happen then? Will the use of tactical nuclear weapons be the next step?” In the last days, as distributors passed out the statement on street corners and at subway and bus stops, the credulous, the wishful thinkers insisted that “it’s all over. We did the job. It’s a one-off. There won’t be any war, especially nuclear war. The war is over.” The fearful avoidance of reality—that some fool, or group of fools, could propose, or simply move to use, for example, one or more of the undeclared but very real nuclear weapons in the possession of Israel, for example—was evident, and palpable.
Seasoned organizers, however, are coming up with creative and humorous ways to “kick people in their axioms” and disturb the waters between their ears, without terrifying them. One activist in Boston “was dressed in an approximation of colonial garb with a tricorner hat, etc., and a sign, ‘Nuclear Fireworks for July 4?’ with mushroom clouds drawn on it…. He got hundreds of leaflets out in downtown Boston. The costume and sign appeared to amuse some people. He called out. ‘Don’t let nuclear war ruin your vacation,’ ‘A nuclear war will ruin summer’ and joked ‘It will be the bigliest fireworks in history. It’s going to be YUUUGE!’”
Former Ohio Congressman and United States Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich spoke to several hundred people assembled for the June 27 meeting of the International Peace Coalition, following opening remarks by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, transcribed in this Daily Alert. Here is an approximate transcript of portions of his comments: "I just want to say, just listening to Helga’s remarks, how important, concise, how literate her recitation of the moment is…. I want to make some observations, based on what Helga has said, and based on my own experience.
“When Lavrov called for a new security architecture, we have to recognize that the security architecture which is in place right now, has been shredded. The UN Charter—shredded. The Non-Proliferation Treaty—torn up. And the context of Lavrov’s remarks is a challenge for us to demand, even as a rearguard action, to say, ‘Look, we have to enforce these existing structures—but as we move toward trying to find structures that can ensure the survivability of the planet.’
“Now, given the pratfalls which pass for policy in Washington, the bombing—which was against our Constitution, totally; the President doesn’t have the authority, unless there is an imminent threat to the United States; I’ve sued several Presidents over this—doesn’t have the authority to go ahead and conduct this action. So, they did it! Then, they claimed obliteration. Well, if what they claimed was successful, there would be radiation traveling right now, in clouds going around the world!
“So, there’s this—we must keep in mind that there are elements, particularly connected to Israel, who keep pushing, pushing, pushing, for this fantasy of regime change in Iran. And what that would ultimately mean, in the States, is a full-scale invasion. Just running some off-the-cuff numbers the other day, we would need about 2 million troops. We would need a draft, and we would need to be prepared for World War Three….
“I think this meeting is really important, when you look at the condition that Trump is in right now….The narrative that’s going out right now is, ‘well you didn’t really destroy anything there, maybe a couple of buildings on the surface.’ That causes others to say, ‘well, let’s have another strike. Let’s do it again! Let’s get ’em!!’ … The unbridled use of the military is a challenge for the United States right now. And it’s something that we have to deal with.
“The callous discussion of the nuclear question—having a President yesterday, or the day before, compare his illegal action against Iran as a thing on the same level as Hiroshima. What that says is that he doesn’t understand Hiroshima! And that whatever Truman does—which I’ve spoken against, in my assessment, I wasn’t around at that time—but whatever Truman does, or did, is now being twisted to legitimate further bombing. And it’s really dangerous.
“We’re in a very difficult time in world history, with what Helga said. The West is still up to their old colonial tricks. Still lusting for empire. At a time when the world has changed, we have a multipolar world, and there are people that refuse to accept it, and for those of us who believe in human unity, this is our task, this is our challenge, to weigh in, and to say: Stop what you’re doing, and let’s recall how we must move forward in a world which could be dangerous, but in a world which also could be a world of tremendous potential and blessings.”
The second of two Schiller Institute conferences will take place in Berlin, Germany on July 12-13. The first conference, held in the United States in Newark, New Jersey, was titled “A Beautiful Vision for Humanity in Times of Great Turbulence!” The Berlin Conference title is: “Man Is Not a Wolf to Man: For a New Paradigm in International Relations!”
The organizing for that conference has featured the work of a group, “The John Quincy Adams Brigade” of organizers from America—North and South America—who are working in Europe, as a living expression of that intention. Graham Fuller, 25-year veteran of the CIA, former U.S. diplomat, and Islamic scholar, who also addressed the meeting, said: “I just want to say I’m very hearted by hearing all these reports of various activities around the world … this is very heartening. At the popular level, we’ve got to get through, to break through the New York Times, Washington Post, and everything else, that simply either print a lot of nonsense, or simply, more to the point, ignore these very, very important developments.”
What you choose to do, in your way, to mobilize others, in these next days, is equally or more important than anything being done by most elected officials. When individual patriots and citizens around the world, combined in solidarity, choose to, they can represent a far stronger force for good than the evil that the well-heeled few—even with their guns and computers—can commit. The world must be our responsibility to change, such that A New International Security and Development Architecture can arise. Our chosen role in changing history must be, through our conferences and actions, the subject of these next days before us.
