Oct. 12—“Die alten, bösen Lieder, Die Träume bös’ und arg, Die lasst uns jetzt begraben, Holt einen grossen Sarg.” (“The old, evil songs, the spiteful and mean Dreams, let’s bury them now; fetch a big coffin.”—Heinrich Heine’s words, and their musical setting by Robert Schumann, come to mind, seeing the too-familiar dance between Macron and Zelenskyy, Zelenskyy and Washington, Zelenskyy and various nations in South and East Europe, etc., pretending that they do not know that the Ukraine war is all but lost. They mouth that they are in full support of “victory for Ukraine” in its unwinnable war against Russia, with the full realization that they are lying, and will soon be discovered—but continue, nonetheless.
About them, and their predecessors in history, the Old Testament prophet Hosea put it well: “For they have sown the wind, and they will reap the whirlwind.” As for the descendants of dictators, and those with a despotic mind-set, as Plato depicted the Greek Thrasymachus in his dialogue The Republic, the “strong men” of perpetual wars and conflicts, they never think twice, and never apologize. It is futile to ask them what their objectives are. Netanyahu’s objective, for example, is to do exactly what he is doing. There is no need to ask, “What is Israel trying to accomplish?” Those who sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
Neros who believe that “tyranny means never having to say you’re sorry,” are, sooner or later, ultimately broken by natural law, which suddenly appears in some guise—for example, expressed in the form of an unexpected, uncontrollable hurricane, of varying form or function. It can be the hurricane of the unpayable $2 quadrillion-plus trans-Atlantic debt. It can be the hurricane of a new pandemic. It can be an actual hurricane, or two, or more.
Biden, for example, it is said, suddenly could not go to Germany’s Ramstein military base on Oct. 12, where many thought that he would announce that it was now okay for Ukraine to use American weapons to strike deep into Russia, despite Vladimir Putin’s clear warnings since Sept. 25 as to what that decision might mean—including the end of civilization. Biden's spokesman said that he was not going to Germany because of Hurricane Milton. In one sense, that may well be true. The Helene/Milton hurricane combination has revealed to the people of the United States, and the world, that America has presently deployed its National Guard into the improper service of unwinnable wars overseas, “for America’s national security,” only to have poor Americans at home drown , or be swallowed by mudslides and die by the hundreds.
What does that imply about the survivability of any section of the American population in the event of a nuclear attack? What does that imply about the actual physical and physical-economic state of the United States itself? And what does that imply about the sanity of the presently ruling Anglo-American elite’s “unipolar” foreign policy, especially with regard to the emerging Global Majority, soon to gather in Kazan for the BRICS summit?
Whatever those who presume themselves to be the prime world-actors may think is about to come to pass in Ukraine, or Southwest Asia, or the Pacific, another, higher power is at work—and it isn’t global warming. We are now living in a time where the power of true ideas, of “profound and impassioned conceptions respecting man and nature,” when wielded against a seemingly overwhelming material, “profane” force, can triumph—if you believe in, access, and refuse to betray the power of Reason.
EIR’s interview on Oct. 6 with former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad, who served in that post for a total of 24 years, 1981-2003, and 2018-2020, will remind those who once knew, and inform those who have yet to discover, that it is not only possible to stand up to predatory financiers like George Soros, in defense of one’s country—but it is also possible to defeat them. This is crucial to understand why a New International Security and Development Architecture, contained in Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Ten Principles, based on a higher-order conception of humanity unbounded by geopolitics, is not merely “plausible”; rather, it is the only policy that will possibly work in the present “world correlations of forces.”
On Sept. 19, 1997, the Asian Wall Street Journal ran a story, “LaRouche Report Helps Feed Malaysian Attacks on Soros,” which began, “when Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad recently accused financier George Soros of leading speculative attacks on Southeast Asian currencies, Malaysia’s pro-government press quickly cranked out articles vilifying the American billionaire. Some of their vitriol apparently came from an unusual source: a publication run by Lyndon LaRouche Jr….” The Wall Street Journal Europe carried a front-page story, “Malaysia’s Mahathir Finds Strange Source for Soros Campaign—Asia Country’s Media Tap U.S. Conspiracy Theorist Lyndon LaRouche Jr.”
When Prime Minister Mahathir arrived to speak on the morning of Sept. 20, 1997, at the annual meeting of the World Bank in Hong Kong, a copy of Wall Street Journal Asia was placed on every seat of the 3,000 people in attendance. Mahathir proceeded as he had intended. He not only defended the measures for currency controls and banking regulation that Malaysia had put in place to protect themselves against Soros’s speculation. He also spoke of what he called “prosper-thy-neighbor,” what he also referred to as “win-win strategies.” “In case you were wondering about what is meant by prosper-thy-neighbor, I would like to explain again that it simply means, if you help your neighbor to prosper, you will prosper along with it. When countries are prosperous, they become more stable, and the people need not emigrate to your country. ”The above cited EIR interview with the 99-year-old former Prime Minister Mahathir, the “witness to a century,” is now available for viewing on the Schiller Institute.
Oct. 5—“Where Is Israel Heading, When the Only Horizon Its Leaders Offer Is War?” asked the editorial in Israeli daily Haaretz. The same could be said of the leaders of every nation of today’s entire trans-Atlantic world, with a few notable exceptions. Indonesia’s President-Elect Prabowo Subianto recently pointed out that “We are witnessing heightened tensions, with global defense and strategy experts suggesting that we are on the brink of World War III…. History has shown that when powers seek to impose their will, wars erupt unexpectedly, as seen in World War I and II…. Thankfully, Indonesia has a strong tradition of non-alignment, and we will continue to uphold that position.”
A correct outlook, no doubt, and importantly espoused by the leader of the fourth-largest nation in the world. Yet, “here’s the rub.” Once thermonuclear war begins—and it begins with the first nuclear bomb deployed—it won’t matter whether you are aligned or non-aligned, whether you are “left wing” or “right wing,” or, indeed, whether you are “poor” or “rich.” The only way to survive a thermonuclear war, is to prevent it.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche began Friday’s 70th meeting of the International Peace Coalition by saying, “I think everybody on this call probably shares the feeling that the events are cascading more quickly towards a potential nuclear war than our efforts so far have been able to slow them down or even reverse them. If people have a more optimistic view, please go ahead and tell me.” No one could, in fact, offer a more optimistic view. That is not because there is nothing that can be done, but because what is required, has yet to be done by us".
It is necessary to face the truth: To get out of this situation requires that we change the axioms that constrain our behavior. This is not an introspective process, though introspection may be required. It is a deeply social, “interventionist” process, disruptive to the comfort zones and “safe spaces” of everyday life.
Why, for example, do the American people allow themselves to be, not governed, but herded, by a non-elected “bureaucratic fascist” war regime, possessed of lethal police-state power—a regime that, for example, ordered the assassination of journalist Julian Assange? In his first public statement since the end of his five-year incarceration in June of 2024, delivered in Strasbourg, France on Oct. 1 to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), Assange said: “It is now a matter of public record, that under Pompeo’s explicit direction, the CIA drew up plans to kidnap and to assassinate me within the Ecuadorian embassy in London and authorize going after my European colleagues, subjecting us to theft, hacking attacks, and the planting of false information. My wife and my infant son were also targeted.”
Even more chilling were these words of Assange: “I want to be totally clear. I am not free today because the system worked. I am free today after years of incarceration because I pled guilty to journalism.”
Is what Assange said correct? Is journalism—the right to investigate, discover, know and publish the truth—now, in effect, against the law, in the United States, and the entire trans-Atlantic world? Does merely telling the truth, or even thinking the truth, risk assassination? Before one answers that question, pose another: How much are we willing to personally risk, to prevent the world from going to thermonuclear war, which can kill us all, either directly, or through collateral effects? Then, pose another question: In Gaza, and soon to be in Israel, citizens and combatants are now indistinguishable. Is this our future? Where are we all heading, when the only horizon our leaders offer is war?
In Peru this past week, a horizon other than destruction, death and war, was proposed. The Oct. 3 conference, “The BRICS: Development Strategies and Cooperation Mechanisms in the Multipolar World,” co-sponsored by the Schiller Institute of Peru and attended by 500 people, heard representatives from Brazil, India, Germany, Egypt, Italy, Russia and the host nation, among others, outline a truly human future for the whole human race. The founder of the Schiller Institute, Helga Zepp-LaRouche opened her address to the meeting:
“The tension in world affairs has never been stronger in human history: On the one side the genocide happening in front of the eyes of the world public and the terrifying threat of the possible extinction of mankind in a global nuclear war; and on the other side, the concrete perspective for the creation of a new economic system, where the aspiration of the Global South nations for development, prosperity and a fulfilled life for all of its citizens is about to come true. This tension characterizes the end of the epoch of colonialism, which started about 500 years ago, and is now about to end—one way or another.”
How this five centuries epoch of history ends, is up to us—should we choose it to be. In every age of every century, and every millennium of humanity’s existence, the number of fools that have merely ruled mankind has far exceeded the number of wise women and men that have truly governed. In a post-thermonuclear age, we can no longer afford that. We can no longer afford wars, including “splendid little wars.”
Instead, the durable self-government of humanity requires “beautiful souls,” for whom “the benefit of the other,” not government by assassination, is the basis for policy and decision-making. Self-government of a nation requires principled statecraft, which means that the people must know and be educated to know what a principle is. A principle is not a program; it is not a “policy.”
In this moving battle situation, Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture can provide the bedrock conceptions, respecting man and nature, which, if mastered, can illuminate the path from war and certain self-destruction to obtain peace through economic development. That horizon, not the horizon of final war, is the destination of true leadership.
Sept. 25—Declarations and speeches of an unusual importance were made on Tuesday, Sept. 24, at the opening of the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly Debate. (That did not include the embarrassment of President Biden’s troubled remarks.) While the threat of thermonuclear war palpably loomed over the UN proceedings, addressing that threat in its true form required a strategic upending of the “masters of war,” to seize the moral high-ground before the “collective Zelenskyy/collective Biden” show could gain traction.
On the first day on which heads of state and government addressed the UN, the “NATO narrative” was upset and outflanked. In the case of the remarks delivered by Presidents Lula of Brazil, Erdoğan of Türkiye, and Ramaphosa of South Africa, and King Abdullah II of Jordan, NATO’s “Israel” population war against the people of Palestine was clearly identified as the actual, central theater of injustice on which the world’s attention must be concentrated, and that must be immediately addressed and resolved—not the NATO/Ukraine “moral crusade against Russia.”
Integrity was shown in this moment by the several of the national leaders. Türkiye, a NATO member, knew that it was criticizing NATO’s support for the mass-murder in Gaza, when Erdoğan said, “And those who unconditionally support Israel! For how long will you continue to bear the shame of looking on this massacre, of being its accomplices?” This demonstrated that a line can be drawn, showing the clear difference between the moral as well as strategic priorities of the Global Majority, and those of NATO-world.
The “moral crusade of Ukraine” is, of course, the desired NATO “public relations” focus. The intent is to use Zelenskyy’s “Victory Plan” speech as the trigger for the United States in “finally deciding” to authorize the deployment of long-range missiles to Ukraine, which will be used to attack deep into Russia. That is the very thing that was said to be off-limits by the Biden Administration in 2022, because it would “lead to a nuclear world war with Russia.” Russia has, in fact, made it clear what its response will be if and when such a decision is made. Sane people in Germany, as seen in the recent Brandenburg state elections, want no part of the “NATO Victory Plan.”
Absurdly, such a missile deployment also stands no chance to lead to any victory by Ukraine, which does not have the soldiers; its population has gone from 52 million people in 1992, to 36 million in 2023. It has been depopulated by 30% over the last decades, and particularly since 2022. The Malthusian policy against Gaza, and the Malthusian policy in Ukraine, are the same. The Dark Age “moral outlook” of both wars is also the same. What must be contrasted to both is a different vision of humanity, and that vision, best expressed in Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s Ten Principles for a New International Strategic and Development Architecture, must become manifest in rallies, demonstrations, elections and dialogues involving millions, then tens of millions, as rapidly as possible.
There is an important American intervention that may provide an additional flank for the defenders of humanity that decide to make the UN act. Two doctors, Mark Perlmutter and Feroze Sidhwa, recently returned from Gaza, are attempting to be heard by delegates at the UN, after members of the United States Congress and other American officials have ignored the surgeons’ devastating report about the Satanic nature of the war against children in Gaza. In the words of Dr. Perlmutter: “I was at Ground Zero on 9/11. I was at the earthquake the day that it hit in Haiti, and went back four more times. I was at Katrina the day that the hurricane ‘hit dirt,’ and I’ve done 40 surgical missions in austere environments on four continents. When you combine all of that experience, none of it touches what I saw in Gaza….”
Like Drs. Perlmutter and Sidhwa, the Global Majority must demand that the killing of what probably amounts to more than 200,000 Palestinians in population war—in which the target is not “Hamas,” but women of child-bearing age and their progeny, in Gaza, in the West Bank, and soon in Lebanon—be immediately stopped, by any ethical means possible.
In the case of President Erdoğan’s remarks, there was an allusion to the possible invocation of UN Resolution 377, which “resolves that if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or active aggression, 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.”
Invoking Resolution 377 would not only force the issue on Gaza. It could also up-end the practice and (im)moral pretext of the “Right to Protect” NATO doctrine, promulgated by Tony Blair in 1999 as the “end of the Treaty of Westphalia,” and which Blair and British intelligence used to start the 2003 war crime known as the Second Iraq War, which killed over a million people. A return to the 1644-48 Treaty of Westphalia, and its principle of “the benefit of the other,” is the subject of the Zepp-LaRouche “Ten Principles.” It is also the outlook that Independent candidates in New York Diane Sare and Jose Vega, in their respective U.S. Senate and Congressional campaigns, have brought to the 2024 American electoral season. The time is now for all those who believe in one humanity, to bring that one humanity to bear in the corridors of power worldwide.
Sept. 18—“Captain Ahab! It’s the white whale! Moby Dick! He’s headed straight for us!”
“Wrong, Mr. Starbuck!! I’m headed straight for him—and so are you, sir!!”
Neither first mate Starbuck, nor the ship of fools that had signed on to sail on what would be their final voyage with Captain Ahab, realized that another name for Moby Dick was Hell, and another name for Ahab was Satan—the Prince of Fools, as well as of Darkness. Today, the deluded Starbuck’s spiritual descendants, many of them smugly sipping five-dollar custom-made beverages at the churches that today bear his name, are unaware that they are, at this moment, hurtling toward thermonuclear Hell, as supporters of a fictitious, “collective Biden” Presidency that Captain Ahab wanna-be Dick Cheney, “the president of vice,” now enthusiastically supports.
Is there a sane voice of Reason, anywhere?
Former Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has penned an op-ed, together with Donald Trump, Jr.—“Negotiate with Moscow To End the Ukraine War and Prevent Nuclear Devastation.” It begins, “The New York Times reported Thursday that the Biden administration is considering allowing Ukraine to use NATO-provided long-range precision weapons against targets deep inside Russia. Such a decision would put the world at greater risk of nuclear conflagration than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis.” The op-ed usefully points out that “It is past time to de-escalate this conflict. This is more important than any of the political issues our nation argues about. Nuclear war would mean the end of civilization as we know it, maybe even the end of the human species.”
A ray of sanity? Yes, but not yet a change of policy. Also, on cue, a Mephistopheles-like creature from the black lagoon of perfidious Albion has emerged, named Lord Ashcroft, to admonish the American colonials. Ashcroft, lifetime peer of the House of Lords, member of the Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George, with a personal wealth of $1.6 billion, has, as a representative of His Satanic Majesty and the interests of the Crown, deigned to speak. He has proclaimed that “the West must finally summon the courage to stand firm against tyranny.” Ukraine is being “held back, tragically, by the very partners that profess support for its cause. The most glaring example of this restraint comes from the United States, a country that calls itself ‘the home of the brave.’ Yet Washington has continually hesitated when it comes to allowing Ukraine to strike targets deep within Russia…. Putin’s regime can launch missiles, bomb cities, and terrorize Ukrainian civilians, but when Ukraine seeks to retaliate against those responsible, it is told to refrain. This is not how wars are won, and frankly, it is shameful.”
“White House, show some guts!! Head straight for the White Whale!” That is the British-Babylonian priesthood’s demand of its present policy-vassal, the United States. It might be true that there has indeed been a temporary hold on American deployment of long-range missiles in the NATO-Russia theater of war. It may also be true, that the wreck called the “British military-industrial complex” produces missiles of questionable effectiveness. The larger truth, however, is that the NATO world war against “the rest,” including the Global South, the BRICS-Plus nations, the Belt and Road Initiative, the Eurasian Economic Union, etc., is a compulsive, Malthusian population-war, as in Gaza, based on a hopelessly self-destructive view of humanity. It is driven by an unpayable debt, with an unsustainable monetary system that should have ended together with the Cold War in 1989. Instead, it survived, not as a real economic system, but a shared popular mass delusion that still seems real—like Moby Dick.
What is the “collateral damage” of NATO’s doomed pursuit? In a Monday night presentation to the supporters of Independent candidates for United States Senate and Congress, Diane Sare and Jose Vega, Dr. Mark Perlmutter, past president of the International College of Surgeons (https://icsglobal.org/) and current president of the World Surgical Foundation (https://worldsurgicalfoundation.org/about-wsf/) described his recent mission to Gaza, sponsored by the Palestinian American Medical Association in collaboration with the World Health Organization. Dr. Perlmutter, who was at Manhattan’s Ground Zero in 2001, in Louisiana for Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and in Haiti for the earthquake in 2010, said that none of those experiences, nor anything else in his 36-plus years of practice, prepared him for what he encountered in the weeks he went to Gaza. A quarter-million dead, he said, will be closer to the estimate of how many people were actually killed, when the truth is finally told.
Why will Linda Thomas-Greenfield, America’s Ambassador to the United Nations, not speak to him? Today, “the UN General Assembly is scheduled to debate and vote on a resolution that Israel end ‘its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory’ within six months,” reports International Peace Coalition member, author and academic Oliver Boyd-Barrett. “Assuming that Israel will ignore any such demand, and that the U.S. vetoes a Security Council resolution to enforce the ICJ ruling of July 19 which found Israeli settlements are being maintained in violation of international law and that Israel should pay restitution to all those whom its illegal occupation has harmed, the General Assembly could convene an Emergency Session to take up what is called a Uniting for Peace resolution,” known as resolution 377, around which the Schiller Institute and the IPC have been campaigning for some time.
The United States, the trans-Atlantic world, has a rendezvous with Truth which it will not avoid for long. It will either be our relentless drive for a New International Security and Development Architecture that will prevail, or NATO’s relentless drive to self-destruction will plunge humanity into an unthinkable sea of carnage, of which Gaza and Ukraine are merely the prologue.
Sept. 6—Today's meeting of the International Peace Coalition will expose to the people of the world, through the words and interventions of the participating international experts and former members of the American military and intelligence establishment, that it is the United States and Great Britain, not Russia, China, or anyone else, who would both provoke and initiate thermonuclear war. In the words of Col. Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell and IPC meeting participant: “The most likely state owning nuclear weapons today, to use those nuclear weapons, again, is the United States. And we have put ourselves in that position, and in that posture, by our incompetence at the other skill-sets, most prominently diplomacy, necessary for the relations of nations.”
Therefore, it is incumbent upon all thinking citizens to come to terms with the fact, that the primary concern, above all other concerns—even the most pressing economic concerns—is to find a way to prevent NATO, and the “secret government” now running the United States Presidency and the Congress, from going through with their mad war scheme, as seen in the ongoing military incursion into Russia.
The deaths of perhaps as many as 600 people, including several, possibly scores of NATO personnel Sept. 3 at the Poltava Institute of Military Communications in Ukraine has grimly lifted the veil on the truth of who is actually fighting, and dying, in the “Ukraine” war. Two Kinzhal hypersonic missiles—Kinzhal is Russian for “dagger” —found their target. Among those killed were an undisclosed number of Swedish military advisors, specialists and trainers said to be nearly irreplaceable. Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom resigned almost immediately following the news.
Who are the strategic geniuses that have placed the world on the brink of self-destruction, as though “world conflict” were a video-game?
Whoever they are, know this: Thermonuclear war will come to those that pursue it, and those whom they govern, in the same way that those Kinzhal missiles arrived at their Poltava targets—swiftly, ruthlessly, giving only enough warning to allow the recipients to become momentarily terrified before the flash of light that will signal “game over,” and their end. Therefore, “the only item on the agenda” is taking back our governments, today, from the daft usurpers steering us into Hell. We must expose them and their intentions, “and by opposing, end them.”
Who, for example, are the “brain police” behind Biden’s still-unpublished “Nuclear Engagement Guidance,” issued (secretly) in March of this year, which proposes that the United States will engage in a three-front thermonuclear exchange against the Russian Federation, China and North Korea? Is it an “interagency,” that is, a disavowable combine of undersecretaries of State, Defense, etc., and deputy assistants of various departments, such as the National Security Council, “spanning several levels of government,” holding “authorized” rump meetings supervised by Dick Cheney or Susan Rice types, that snarl and sneer as they “really run things”? Are we now in the age of the “post-President Presidency”?
Are we, for example to actually believe that it was the non compos mentis Sleepy Joe Biden, that issued, on July 29, “after deep thought,” the following amendment to the U.S.-Britain Mutual Defense Agreement of 1958? “The Amendment removes the expiration date of certain provisions of the 1958 Agreement that permit the transfer of certain equipment and material between the United States and the United Kingdom, to enable broad and enduring cooperation and make all provisions of the 1958 Agreement indefinite in duration. [emphasis added.] The Amendment also clarifies that Article II(A) of the 1958 Agreement provides for the exchange of atomic information and other related classified information … sensitive nuclear technology, and controlled nuclear information, as is jointly determined to be necessary for the development of defense plans….”
Yes, Joe Biden probably signed this—but do you believe he actually thought about it? And why would an agreement between Britain and the U.S. concluded in 1958, and regularly reviewed over 66 years, suddenly require to be made “indefinite,” i.e., permanent? “It’s good news for the U.K. that it doesn’t need to worry about a future U.S. administration using a future renewal as leverage,” said British operative Malcolm Chalmers, the deputy director of the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI,) and also the co-author of the 2013 RUSI document, “The Future of the U.K.’s Cooperative Nuclear Relationships,” which says, “It is important to note that these relationships are not dictated, purely by financial considerations; rather, they are also sensitive to a number of doctrinal, political and technical dynamics.”
Are the British seeking direct access to the deployment of American thermonuclear weapons? Do they already have it? Would anyone tell the American people, if they did? Consider former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s words, speaking at Chatham House, “The British were so matter-of-factly helpful that they became a participant in internal American deliberations, to a degree probably never before practiced between sovereign nations.” Is this cooperation, or treason?
But why would the Anglosphere want to go to thermonuclear war? Well, how does the Anglo-American imperial mind right now view the ongoing cooperation “to a degree probably never before practiced between sovereign nations” between Russia and China, each of whose leaders has just delivered a major keynote speech to tens of nations?
In the case of Chinese President Xi Jinping, there is his keynote Sept. 5 at the opening session of the Forum On China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC): “Joining Hands To Advance Modernization and Build a Community with a Shared Future.” The Heads of State, Government and delegation of China and 53 African countries and the Chairperson of the African Union Commission were present, according to China’s Foreign Ministry.
Meanwhile, there were representatives of 75 nations present at the Eastern Economic Forum just addressed Sept. 5 by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The commitment to economic growth with justice, to technological development simultaneous with eradicating poverty and disease, to space-based research and cooperation involving all nations and all people discussed among the participants radiated the optimism that was once present in the now-failed states of the trans-Atlantic nations.
What kind of new world does that represent? A world that cannot afford colonialism, or drug addiction, or enforced backwardness, and that believes more people are not only good, but necessary. That world is congruent with that described by Helga Zepp-LaRouche in her Ten Principles for a New International Security and Development Architecture. Would the promise of that new world cause the predators of the Anglo-American empire, who are an entity different from the people of the United States, or of England, Scotland or Wales, who are also its victims, and who are $2 quadrillion in debt, to risk blowing up the planet, rather than lose their mythical “rulership” of it?
Sometimes those who have served the predators, revolt. When he saw the move to threaten China with war over Taiwan in 2021, the late Daniel Ellsberg, author of The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War-Planner, posted online classified documents originally copied in the 1970s that showed that “U.S. military planners pushed for nuclear strikes on mainland China in 1958 to protect Taiwan from an invasion by Communist forces,” according the CBS News in a 2021 interview. Ellsberg also told CBS News reporter Michelle Miller that “I was part of a plan that should never have been made, that was a crime against humanity...The plan was to hit every city in the Soviet Union, and every city in China. There was no plan for fighting Soviets that did not also involve annihilating the Chinese population. The result was a readiness to annihilate 600 million people—a hundred Holocausts. When I say crime against humanity, it was actually a crime against the existence of the human species.” Reporter Miller involuntarily exclaimed, “This is The End of Days, and that was the plan?!?” to which Ellsberg responded, “Yes.”
Does the 1958 Britain-U.S. Mutual Defense Agreement, and the “Biden” amendment to now make it permanent, reflect anything different than that hundred Holocausts about which Ellsberg warned before his death? Now is the time for all diplomatic, military, intelligence and academic layers to find the courage that several of the International Peace Coalition’s participants have, and act in time in the defense and interest of their nations, and the world.
Sept. 2—Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern began his presentation for the Sept. 31 meeting of the International Peace Coalition thus: “It’s nice to be on with some people that have some semblance of sanity these days…. Elections still mean something. They still have a very determining effect on the behavior of world leaders. I’m thinking not only of the U.S. election in November, but of the elections coming in Germany … I’m told, reliably, that there a lot of Germans that don’t like Scholz’s policy with respect to Ukraine—the provision of arms, and the knee-jerk support for this new initiative, the initiative proposed by the U.S.” —actually, decreed by the U.S.—to install medium- and long-range missiles in Germany that can strike into Russia.
Indeed, as McGovern proposed, two days later, in the Sunday local elections in two states in Germany, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party was projected to win 33.1% of the vote in Thuringia, placing first, beating the Christian Democrats (CDU). Next door, in Saxony, the AfD was a very close second to the CDU. Sahra Wagenknecht’s Alliance (BSW) placed third. The parties that rule nationally in Germany’s “streetlight coalition”—the Social Democrats (red), the Free Democrats (yellow), and the Greens—were trounced in the local elections. This was a clear referendum against the German government’s policies, and specifically NATO’s policies around the Ukraine war.
The International Peace Coalition meetings are, as of this moment, the only place where citizens from all nations are able to speak with and hear from those who will tell them the truth. On the basis of that, if they comprehend the message, they can then organize and intervene, to reverse our war-direction, in ways that no others are able. This IPC formation, brought into being by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, now an institutionalized weekly conference, needs to erupt into a system of such conferences. It needs to be grown by all its participants, preferably to double, week by week. Why? This is not a mechanical or idealized request, but one of immediate, “life-and-death significance.”
Let us illustrate by referencing the words of an IPC participant and interlocutor, Col. Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff for former United States Secretary of State Colin Powell, spoken at a June 12 Emergency Press Conference, “The Danger of Nuclear War Is Real, and Must Be Stopped”: “The topic here, today, was nuclear weapons, and I’ll just say this, again: The most likely state owning nuclear weapons today, to use those nuclear weapons, again, is the United States. And we have put ourselves in that position, and in that posture, by our incompetence at the other skill-sets, most prominently diplomacy, necessary for the relations of nations. We are not a very competent, in any vein, of diplomacy entity any more.” This is the opposite of the narrative presently circulated in NATO land, and in the United States “Land of the Clueless,” where people prefer to believe that it is the Russians, not the United States, that is threatening thermonuclear war, when the opposite is the case.
In her Friday IPC presentation, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, near the beginning of her presentation, referenced “an article in the New York Times published on Aug. 20, where they wrote that, already in March, President Biden signed on to modification of the U.S. nuclear doctrine. While it is a top-secret doctrine, no electronic copies supposedly exist, only very few printed ones for very classified people, nevertheless, it talks about the U.S. preparing to fight a nuclear war on three fronts against Russia, China, and North Korea…. However, there is absolutely nothing new in it: The only new about it is that this has now reached the public domain.” Subscribe to Executive Intelligence Review and the EIR Daily Alert, so you are not caught below the level of events. We do not deal in information—we deal in intelligence, and there is a big difference.
But has it reached you? Are you acting upon the realization that this country, your country, is attempting to provoke thermonuclear war with a Russia that has made it clear that, under certain conditions, they will launch all their nuclear weapons? Is it clear that, with shorter and shorter warning times, that a false identification of an incoming attack could mean that the entire human race could be eliminated by a mistake? The Ten Principles for a New International Strategic and Development Architecture provides not only the solution, but also the mind-set that is required to face and determine this moment of crisis, perhaps the most dangerous moment in all of history, from which none of us is permitted to walk away.
This is, as former UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) weapons inspector, U.S. Marine intelligence officer, journalist and IPC participant Scott Ritter has said, the only item on the agenda. “September is way more important than November.” In a Friday interview, he said, “This is a very dangerous escalation, one that could rapidly create the conditions conducive for, not limited nuclear conflict, but a general nuclear war, a global-ending global disaster, the destruction of the U.S., the destruction of Russia, the destruction of Europe, the destruction of the world. Why? Because the U.S. and NATO will not be honest about the state of affairs in Ukraine today.”
Nothing else matters, if thermonuclear war initiated by NATO and London’s lackey, the United States, is not stopped. And though demonstrations are happening on Saturday, Sept. 28 in Washington and in Upstate New York, right now we need interviews, leaflets, messaging of any and all sorts. We need that 100 million people in the United States, at least, come to the realization that their country is at the forefront of not only provoking, but also initiating thermonuclear war, and that it is therefore each citizen’s responsibility, no matter from what nation, to stop the world from being destroyed by a secret government calling itself “the rules-based order,” “NATO,” “Project Democracy,” or other names. We, as citizens of our nations, and of the world, must take counsel of our Reason, and not of our fears.
