Mr. X | Internationally Recognized Intelligence Author Defying the Narrative

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.

July 16—“Fear them not, therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hidden, that shall not be known.”.

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.

May 12—At 2 a.m. Sunday morning, May 11, Russian President Vladimir Putin, after three days of non-stop meetings and ceremonies commemorating the Victory against Fascism in Europe, held a press conference and proposed resuming full negotiations with Ukraine to end what is effectively a NATO-imposed war on the country. Putin suggested that talks restart in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Thursday, May 15.

Putin’s Proposal Catches European Leaders Off Guard

Just hours before Putin’s statement, European leaders meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv had demanded a 30-day ceasefire beginning Monday morning. These same leaders, gathered in direct opposition to the 30 heads of state assembled in Moscow for the Great Victory celebrations, were caught off guard—both literally and figuratively—by Putin’s early-morning announcement.

"Russia is ready for talks without any preliminary conditions," Putin stated. "There are combat actions and war going on now, and we propose to resume negotiations that were not interrupted by us. Well, what’s wrong about it?"

As Putin and others know, Ukraine itself halted the negotiations that had taken place in Istanbul in April 2022. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to Kyiv on April 9 that year, demanding that Ukraine abandon the peace treaty already agreed upon with Russia—and Ukraine complied. To this day, a decree passed in Ukraine’s parliament in late 2022 forbids any Ukrainian president from negotiating with Russia while Putin remains in power.

"Ukraine is still legally prohibited from negotiating with the Russian side," Russian Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov stated in March.

Zelenskyy’s Challenge and Trump’s Reaction

Despite this legal barrier, Zelenskyy responded to Putin’s proposal later on Sunday, dramatically challenging him to a Western-style "High Noon" showdown, daring him to "meet him in Istanbul" this Thursday.

U.S. President Donald Trump, unconcerned with formalities, had clear advice for Ukraine:

"President Putin of Russia doesn’t want to have a Cease Fire Agreement with Ukraine, but rather wants to meet on Thursday, in Turkey, to negotiate a possible end to the BLOODBATH. Ukraine should agree to this, IMMEDIATELY. At least they will be able to determine whether or not a deal is possible, and if it is not, European leaders, and the U.S., will know where everything stands, and can proceed accordingly!"

While many had speculated about Trump’s position on the war, this statement leaves little doubt: "Ukraine should agree to this, IMMEDIATELY."

Pope Leo XIV’s Surprise Appearance and Historical Connections

The second significant event on Sunday was the appearance of newly elected Pope Leo XIV in St. Peter’s Square before more than 100,000 people, where he unexpectedly led the open-air assembly in singing the Easter antiphon "Regina Caeli."

Leo XIV—the first member of the Augustinian order elected to the papacy, the first English-speaking pope since Pope Adrian IV in the 12th century, and the first pope from the United States—also clarified his choice of name.

"In his first meeting with Cardinals on Saturday, the new Pontiff said that he chose his papal name to continue down the path of Pope Leo XIII, who addressed ‘the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution,’" CNN reported.

In 1888, Pope Leo XIII met with Archbishop Patrick John Ryan of Philadelphia, who presented him with a copy of the United States Constitution, personally gifted by President Grover Cleveland. At the time, Philadelphia remained a stronghold of the American System of Physical Economy, represented in the works of Lincoln advisor Henry Charles Carey and his father, Revolutionary War-era thinker Mathew Carey, an opponent of British East India Company economist Adam Smith.

"The harmony of interest" between capital, labor, and agriculture is said to have been central to their discussions, reportedly leading to the drafting of Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum.

"One hundred years ago, Rerum Novarum treated the remedying of the evil, then being run by a 'devouring usury,' which, ‘although often condemned by the church, but practiced, nevertheless, under another form by avaricious and grasping men, has increased the evil’ effected by the handing over of workers, ‘each alone and defenseless, to the inhumanity of employers, and the unbridled greed of competitors,’" wrote Lyndon LaRouche, quoting Leo XIII in the preface of his book The Science of Christian Economy.

Pope Leo XIV also addressed ongoing conflicts in Southwest Asia, India-Pakistan, and Ukraine.

A Higher Strategy for Peace

These two events—Putin’s unexpected challenge to Western narratives and Pope Leo XIV’s revival of economic justice—can be seen as two "flanks" working toward a higher strategy of victory for humanity.

War must become obsolete, but that cannot happen unless its root causes are eliminated. For that to occur, the world requires "A Beautiful Vision for Humanity in Times of Great Turbulence!" Such is the purpose and mission of the upcoming May 24-25 conference of the Schiller Institute.

April 30—The proposal by Russian President Vladimir Putin for a three-day truce, commencing May 8-10—“the Russian side reiterates its willingness to enter peace talks without preconditions, with a view to eliminating the root causes behind the Ukraine crisis and establishing constructive interaction with international partners”—has been met with panic and derision. This reaction, and rejection, comes from representatives—though not necessarily from the population—of Ukraine, as well as from the “Russiagate media circus,” i.e., the usual suspects from the Anglo-American intelligence agencies, sometimes euphemistically called the “legacy media.”

The reason for the rebuke is not, as claimed, the short length of the proposed truce—three days. It is well known that there was a previous 30-day truce in March, initiated by Donald Trump, to which both Russia and Ukraine agreed, yet it did not hold. The concern over the new Putin proposal lies in its timing and how it aligns with current history.

There is an “isochronic” character to this proposal. That is, an action occurring on May 8-9 not only implicitly re-celebrates the triumph of what President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called the “Four Freedoms” over the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, but by commencing a truce on that day, it recommits humanity—not merely Ukraine, Russia, or the United States—to a knowable, successful pathway out of Hell.

The truce is set to begin on May 8, known as “Victory in Europe Day,” marking the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe. It is celebrated in Russia on May 9, because the official time of the war’s ending was 11:01 Central European Time (CET) on May 8, 1945, making it 12:01 a.m. and later, on May 9, 1945, across Russia and the Soviet Union’s 11 time zones. Notably, May 8-9 was a celebration of victory over fascism before victory was falsely claimed to be contingent upon, and tied to, the deployment and detonation of the atomic bomb—something President Roosevelt would not have done.

The year 2025 will mark the last major anniversary in which any of the surviving veterans of the Second World War will be alive to participate. In 2024, there were still, remarkably, 75,000 veterans of World War II alive in Russia and 66,000 American veterans at the beginning of this year. Many of these individuals—particularly in the case of Russia—would have been no older than 12 or 13, some even younger, when they fought and perhaps killed to defend their nations.

There is also the “Immortal Regiment” assembly, largely identified with Russia, in which the photographs of those who died in the war are worn and carried by their descendants, so that they, through posterity, march, fight, and triumph again. This is not merely symbolic, but isochronic—the embodiment of the commitment for which not only 27 million Russians, but tens of millions of others worldwide, soldiers and civilians alike, gave their lives—their “last full measure of devotion”—so that we, their descendants, might live. (It is rarely mentioned, but 100 million Chinese were refugees in their own country during that war, and Chinese civilian and military deaths likely exceeded 20 million.) The celebration of that victory—not only over fascism, but also in favor of “the better angels of human nature” over evil—is worthy of recognition, including through a truce dedicated in the image of that commitment made 80 years ago.

In this context, discussions about a “peace without preconditions” are elevated beyond mere geopolitics—they take on a deeper meaning. That is necessary. There has to be a “higher hypothesis” for peace. As former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl stated in an interview: “It’s not just about bilateral or trilateral relations—between Moscow, Kiev, and Washington—but about an in-depth transformation of the entire security system in Europe. The issue is on the agenda, and Moscow has long been demanding that it be addressed. Simply negotiating a ceasefire around Ukraine won’t solve the issue, because its roots run much deeper.”

The thermonuclear threat remains barely contained. Former Russian Security Council head Nikolay Patrushev, in a TASS interview yesterday, accused Western powers of “deploying their military machine against Russia and becoming delirious with nuclear apocalypse scenarios.” He pointed to destabilization originating from Brussels, Berlin, Paris, and London. American Vice President J.D. Vance has remarked, “There’s this weird idea among the mainstream media that if this thing goes on for just another few years, the Russians will collapse, the Ukrainians will take their territory back, and everything will go back to the way that it was before the war. That is not the reality that we live in…”

Vance would do well to read the April 24, 2019 RAND report, Extending Russia: Competing From Advantageous Ground, to better understand how the “media” arm of Anglo-American intelligence—the same forces that attempted to prevent Trump from becoming president—have been briefed on their assignment to prevent the resumption of U.S.-Russia relations. That report, which outlined methods for baiting Russia into what Pope Francis once characterized as “World War Three in pieces,” recommended, well before 2022, the provision of lethal aid to Ukraine, increased U.S. support for Syrian rebels, promoting “regime change in Belarus,” exploiting tensions in the Caucasus, and other strategies to neutralize Russia. Reviewing the trajectory of events since that report was written provides valuable insight.

This also explains why, when the Iranian foreign minister proposed last week that the United States should rejuvenate its flagging nuclear power industry by assisting Iran in building 19 civilian nuclear power plants—referencing Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace initiative of the 1950s—the “mainstream media” would never report it to the American people. Re-conceptualized, could this proposal actually be seen as an invitation for Russia, the world’s leading nuclear power plant producer, to collaborate with the United States on global stability through economic development? Could a pilot project in Iran serve as a means of de-nuclear-weaponizing the region? “Our longstanding game plan is to build at least 19 more reactors, meaning that tens of billions of dollars in potential contracts are up for grabs. The Iranian market alone is big enough to revitalize the struggling nuclear industry in the United States,” said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in an April 21 speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The United States—and the world—stands at a crossroads. Will it follow the neo-imperialist policy path of the disastrous Vietnam War, which ended ignominiously on April 30, 1975—exactly 50 years ago—or embrace FDR’s vision of ending imperialism, including in its fascist forms, creating prosperity in the wake of war, particularly in what is now called the Global South? Though the proposal for a May 8-10 truce is only a first step, the spirit in which it is advanced—the spirit of the Immortal Regiment of World War II veterans—offers a foundation for embracing the Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture, the focus of the Schiller Institute conference, A Beautiful Vision for Humanity in Times of Great Turbulence!, scheduled for May 24-25, 2025.

March 21—As the great strategist, revolutionary, and supporter of President Abraham Lincoln, Dr. Sun Yat-Sen once said, “Acting is easy; thinking is hard.” Dr. Sun, the creator of modern China, wished to shock his Chinese contemporaries into the realization that we must also elicit from our contemporaries—that their fundamental weakness is not that they fail to act, or to react, to world crises, but rather, that they fail to think of themselves as acting on the world as a whole, through particular and even individual actions based on a shared idea of humanity. The Ten Principles for a New Security and Development Architecture that inform the May 24-25 conference of the Schiller Institute, demand the kind of “hard thinking” which, if embraced, places each thinker in immediate dialogue with the changing landscape of world history expressed in the emerging communities of discourse that have emerged in the Global South, and are emerging in pockets of the Anglosphere itself.

There is a greater power now available to the citizens of the Anglosphere than at any time before, but the mind must be alive in order to wield it. That assertion runs counter to the everyday “narrative” that is accepted and repeated, especially by those who claim to be “politicized,” that “the deep state is everywhere” and is omnipotent. For any citizen in today’s trans-Atlantic sphere, successfully proposing and enacting lawful and productive change in foreign and domestic policy requires that one first recognize that you can’t ignore the fact that “there’s a war going on.” The Anglosphere, terrified by Tuesday’s two-and-a-half-hour Trump-Putin dialogue on March 18, and the already-discussed possibility of a meeting between the two leaders in Saudi Arabia “in the near future,” is increasingly attacking its own population. This can most readily be seen in Europe, with the at first gradual and now headlong dismantling of parliamentary democracy, under the Orwellian banner of “rearmament for peace.”

On the Trump-Putin exchange, Russian strategic analyst Fyodor Lukyanov remarked that “real diplomacy has returned.” He cautioned, however, against two impending illusions. “One is the illusion that everything will be resolved quickly and painlessly, and the other is the cynical belief that any agreement is fundamentally unattainable.” The “mainstream media” of the multiple intelligence agencies are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain the charade of the “War Party,” even when the previously “sure bet” of “helping our friends in the Mideast by starting wars” is invoked. In America, there is little enthusiasm for the bombing of Yemen, and far less enthusiasm for a war with Iran, including, and perhaps especially from much of the Trump support base.

Don’t let your mind be disassembled by the dissemblers. Don’t be bamboozled, bum-rushed, or bushwhacked by media misdirection, as is, for example, being done around the release of the 80,000 pages of the Kennedy files. No one has had time to read or digest them, but “responsible media” assure us that there’s nothing there, even though they weren’t released for six decades.

The Los Angeles Times “reported” on March 18, “A cursory review of the release did not immediately yield any major revelations or challenge the well-established facts that Kennedy was fatally shot by Lee Harvey Oswald while traveling in an open-topped convertible through Dallas. However, the vast drove of documents will take significant time for historians and The Times to comb through.” In other words, “we haven’t read them, and we know you won’t, so stick to your knitting until further notice from the authorities as to what you are instructed to think.”

But it’s not necessarily what’s in the files that holds the most interest. It may very well be what the files don’t show, and the way they don’t show it, that may be more intriguing, as well as useful. For example: Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA from 1953 to 1961 whom President Kennedy fired for actions undertaken (not only with respect to Cuba, but possibly Congo as well), was appointed to the Warren Commission investigating the President’s assassination. "Since its founding, to date, the chief defect of the Central Intelligence Agency is typified by Allen Dulles’s tenure as its Director of Intelligence…. To a large degree, the case of Dulles and of the FBI’s intrusion into foreign intelligence functions are key to everything fundamentally wrong with the post-1939 functioning of the U.S. intelligence services. … Although there is no doubt that Allen Dulles was committed to the U.S.A.’s winning the war against Nazi Germany, he and his brother John had previously been admirers of Adolf Hitler since the late 1920s…. During the 1930s, Allen Dulles was a member of the Board of Directors of Schroeder’s Bank, the ‘piggy bank’ used by Hjalmar Schacht to conduit funds raised to bring Hitler to power in Germany. During and after the war, the Dulles brothers played the leading part in sponsoring the establishment of the post-war Nazi international. Insofar as Nazi Germany became the military adversary of the Anglo-American forces, Allen Dulles worked without doubt for Hitler’s defeat; however, in political philosophy of practice, the Dulleses were Nazi, before and after the war…. If one were obliged to select a single postwar occurrence which locates Dulles’s influence on the failures of the U.S. intelligence community, it is the coverup of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy: the failure to detect and disrupt the operations before the fact, and the massive, arbitrary coverup after the fact." Lyndon LaRouche, founder of Executive Intelligence Review*, and his associates, who were in working contact with attorney Jim Garrison in the late 1970s and early ’80s, made that statement in 1984. LaRouche then added, “The evidence developed by New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison, was massive. This evidence is variously corroborated by and significantly supplemented by evidence assembled by other investigators, including the internal private news agency headed by candidate LaRouche.”

Senator Frank Church’s Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations with respect to Intelligence Activities issued a November 1975 document, “Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders” which cites a cable personally sent by Allen Dulles to the CIA Station Officer in Leopoldville on August 26, 1960, concerning the first leader of the newly independent Democratic Republic of the Congo, Patrice Lumumba, who was assassinated on January 17, 1961 (capitals all in the original) REMOVAL MUST BE AN URGENT AND PRIME OBJECTIVE…….(Name indicated by •••••) A HIGH PRIORITY OF OUR COVERT ACTION. YOU CAN ACT ON YOUR OWN AUTHORITY WHERE TIME DOES NOT PERMIT REFERRAL HERE."

It is not necessary to find in the 80,000-plus pages of the Kennedy files a smoking gun, whose smoke may have dissipated decades ago. It will be a revelation for the people of the Anglosphere, especially as the Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. files are also released, that their thinking about everything was changed by the assassinations. They were the major engine of a cultural paradigm shift from which the trans-Atlantic world will never recover, until not only those files are released, but also until people reject the very idea that the files should have ever been kept from the American people in the first place.

The Church Committee’s “Alleged Assassination Plots Against Foreign Leaders” study prompts several questions; for example, “Who Killed Israel’s Yitzhak Rabin, really?”in 1995. When we look at post-Rabin Israel, and post-Arafat Palestine—another death that should be more carefully scrutinized—not only with respect to the present actions in Gaza and West Bank, but the possibility of war with Iran, and perhaps others, what must we learn about the longer-term cultural effects of silence in the face of criminal execution of leaders?

Every action, no matter how small, or even small-minded, which seeks to impact “the course of contemporary policies and events,” is embedded, now, in an epochal change, being shaped by conversations involving the nations of Russia, China, the United States, the BRICS nations and others. Thermonuclear weapons, and the danger of thermonuclear war, have in part determined that. We, the people, must find a way, not only to impact the present world-discussion, and its immediate future pursuit of the path to either war or peace, but also to determine an outcome for the human race other than extinction. What gives us not only the right, but the responsibility to do that, is a shared vision, “A Beautiful Vision for Humanity in Times of Great Turbulence!” That is the title for the May 24-25 conference, and it is the mission to which those who would make the world better, joyfully aspire.