Schiller Institute Conference: Creating A Peace Paradigm, A New Era For Mankind Where We All Become Truly Human
This September 12th conference is designed as an important part of the international mobilization to stop the immediate danger of confrontation against Russia and China and to give voice to permanent solutions to global conflicts and war. The event's feature presentation will be a dialogue between American Statesman Lyndon LaRouche, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, and former U.S. Senator and 2008 Presidential candidate Mike Gravel, who made history in 1971 when he read a significant portion of the Pentagon Papers into the public record. With all eyes on Manhattan on the eve of the U.N. General Assembly and Pope Francis' first visit to the United States, Mr. LaRouche's intervention into Manhattan, to shape the debate about the very existence of the future of mankind, is something you do not want to miss. Join the discussion, tune in live, this Saturday the 12th, at 2:30 pm eastern.
DENNIS SPEED: My name is Dennis Speed, and on behalf of the Schiller Institute I'd like to welcome you to today's conference: "Creating a Peace Paradigm: A New Era for Mankind Where We All Become Truly Human." Our format today is that we're going to have a symposium and we're going to begin right away with our first speaker, the Founding Editor of Executive Intelligence Review, economist and statesman whom you all know, most people love, and some people are scared as Hell of, Lyndon LaRouche. [applause]
LYNDON LAROUCHE: I'm particularly relieved that I've had another chance to meet with our dear friend here, and I'm really honored by his appearance here at this time.
The issue before us, is one of the most momentous in modern history, and probably history in general. We're on the verge of a general thermonuclear war on a global scale. That does not mean that this is necessarily going to happen, but it means the actions we're going to have, to take in order to prevent that from happening are very strenuous and also urgent.
Now, we in the United States, have the opportunity to present the case for this situation. The problem is — well, let me put it this way; I have time considerations, I'll add to.
But at the end of this week, and the beginning of next week, one of the most momentous developments in all modern history is about to unfold. It's going to unfold underneath this new assembly of the international movement of peace, which is the best term to call it. And so from that point on, we have to realize that that's the case. We are at the threshold of thermonuclear war. The President of the United States Obama is one of the principal instruments leading the world toward a thermonuclear war, and this means generally an extinction form of war.
This thing is going to happen, on the beginning of this next week, is probably, absolutely necessary to avoid the danger of thermonuclear war. Now, of course, our President is the key source, the greatest source of that threat right now. He's not as an individual, but as an individual as President of the United States, unless he were suspended under the rules of the 25th Amendment, he could, still, set off a thermonuclear war on a global scale. All the potential for that exists now. And therefore, what is going to happen in the next week, the coming week, and henceforth in that period is going to determine whether or not the world is ready to prevent the launching of a thermonuclear war. That's what the issue is.
There are many aspects to this. The question is, why did mankind ever let itself get involved into this kind of mess? Well, there were problems, faults, in the way people thought, for example, since the beginning of the 20th century, our very system of life has become more and more degenerate. People are not quite as smart, or quite as concerned about humanity as they were at the end of the preceding century. And therefore, this is an urgent issue. We have to recognize that the way our school systems, our education system, our economic system as it's organized, our standards of living, our standards of education of our young people, all of these things have been put into jeopardy, since the beginning of the 20th century when this change occurred.
So now we've come to the point, where the 20th century issue, has come to the point of the paymaster. We must now take this moment, of this new international assembly, which is fully aware, its best people is aware of the implications of this situation, now. And, therefore, what we must organize around in the United States, in particular, but throughout the world is to prevent the launching of a thermonuclear war. That's what Obama represents! And, to get him off the agenda, by the 25th Amendment, is the absolute requirement, for the safety of mankind in general today. And, therefore, what was being assembled in the coming period, the international event, this event, is absolutely crucial. It's also absolutely crucial, that we contribute our abilities, into making this next great convention successful. Because, this may be the last chance for humanity. That's the extreme view, but things approximating that are there.
They have, however, been building up. Ever since Franklin Roosevelt left office, There has been, despite good Presidents, who, a few of them have occurred; despite those Presidents and other representatives of our government, the general characteristic of our government has been one of degeneration. Degeneration in everything; degeneration in respect to our Constitution, and its meaning. And, therefore, this event, which is to be assembled in the coming week, is the thing on which we must all concentrate, not only inside the United States, but globally. There are movements in the world which can do this, but they have to be brought together, and the forces of a different disposition must be curtailed.
And, that's what I think the situation is, what I see, and what I fear.
SPEED: OK. Very good. [applause]
Our next speaker is Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of the United States. So, Ramsey, why don't you go right ahead, and respond, as you will, to what you've just heard.
CLARK: From here? I forgot I was wired! [laughter] I usually oppose wiring, but here I am, in front of all these people, wired. How good to see so many beautiful faces, that believe in the preparation, behind their faces, for struggle to overcome the human propensity toward self-destruction, war.
You know, when you think about our schoolchildren and all our babies, you realize that we still have this maniacal energy. Energy can be dangerous, as essential as it is to life, and the energy committed to destruction, to self-destruction; the billions we spend, on the most sophisticated means of destroying big pieces of real estate, with lots of people on them; and, even the pride that we take as a people, in the capacity for self-destruction. Militarism ought to be the supreme crime, because it has been, and remains, and because of its capacity for total destruction, is now more than ever, the greatest threat to life on Earth, and all the things that we can hope for, for our children, or, in my case, our great-grandchildren. Our materialism distracts us from, not only the best parts of life, those that really bring the most joy, and happiness, and satisfaction. But the clamor of our society, with technology in the driver's seat, and the driver without a license.
When you think about militarism, think of Syria today: Damascus, beautiful Damascus, historic Damascus; a contender for, among half a dozen other places in the region, for the oldest permanently settled place on Earth by human beings. It's been there for a long time; you don't have to be in the city but a few minutes before you're told about it, and, it's a great story. But the threat to it, is much greater than any of the destructive potentials of history. The Roman troops were nothing compared what can happen today — the obliteration of whole cities, with a single blast. And, somehow or other, we are able to live, reasonably happily and normally, and not even think about it. And, when we do think about it, we think less of ourselves, because we can't find a way to do anything about it. We haven't found a way to do anything about it, that's adequate, to address the phenomenon.
Iraq, today, is a vast wasteland, as we used to say. The "cradle of civilization" in the 21st Century, a vast wasteland. You don't really want to go there. I have to go there; I've been going there, too much, for the last 20 years. Hasn't done any good, but we keep going, keep trying. With all that history, and all that love, and all that knowledge, and all that violence, that was mixed in with it, and finally, the violence seems to come out on top, doesn't it? Just staying alive in Iraq has been the principal challenge for every man, woman, and child that's living there. That may sound excessive, but go there and take a look. It's not just the constant threat of violence, it's where are you going to get potable water in the next days? And whether food will be available? And whether bombs will come down again?
And, still, rather than examine that, in acts of human unity and concern to change it, most of our energies and concentrations are, on this subject, devoted to more efficient means of mass destruction.
I'm an optimist, which has to mean, having said what I just said, a little crazy; but, you have got to be crazy enough to face the situation, you know? A sane person would turn away from it.
And just look at the babies, and hug them. And there's more, what their future will be, if we don't put our hearts and minds toward creating conditions, where there aren't millions constantly struggling to stay alive. Leaving their homelands, and going across wastelands and dangerous waters; and dying of thirst, and drowning of sinking boats. While we're wondering what the next Saturday afternoon movie will be, at the theaters, a way of going away, of avoiding facing the reality of the condition of human conduct, and the life it's creating, on a planet that in many areas is largely overcrowded, and doesn't seem to understand the possibility that that could create a problem; for all the organizations and mail we get about addressing the subject.
Our capacity to change all that is, to me, clear. It's a question of will. But we first have the will to face the facts, to organize and present the facts, in a way that every man, woman and child can see the havoc we're wreaking on this beautiful planet. A pretty terrific place to be born into, most of the centuries that we're aware of. There are scuffles around here and there, that were cruel, and our species was the principal offender. But it's only in our time that making Mother Earth as lifeless as the Moon became a real possibility. We could scruff it up a little bit, in the old days, but nothing serious. It's like walking through a rose garden, and getting scratched by a barb or two, here and there, a thorn.
Our capacity to overcome the problems we see, those that are risking their lives in boats to cross dangerous waters, that they've never seen before, to try to get to a place where their feet could be dry, and their babies can be fed, and they can live in peace. It's clear, but we have to set our minds to it, and devote our energies to overcoming.
I'm a believer that energy is genius, and all that thinking doesn't change a thing, until all that energy organizes and mobilizes it and moves it. And, that's probably the main reason we're here, today, is to see the problem, analyze the solution, and address it outright, and overcome.
So, I'll be anxious to hear your wisdom. Most of my time is, — like today, I have to go someplace else — I'll never get there in time. But, I'll be with you in spirit, and I'll hear what was said later.
Best wishes to you, and our thanks to those who brought us together, Lyn. You're looking well, pal! I hope I'll see you, in person, around Christmastime. [applause]
DENNIS SPEED: Our next speaker, former U.S. Senator from Alaska; 2008 Presidential candidate; most notorious for his work back in the 1970s, concerning the infamous Pentagon Papers, Mike Gravel. [applause]
MIKE GRAVEL: Thank you very much Dennis. Lyndon, I've got to say that you've got me by eight years, and what I've noticed in reading history, is the biographies of people like Arnold Toynbee and Will Durant (and of course his wife, but primarily Will) that, as they got older in life, they became more pessimistic about the survival of the planet. And I must say, that I'm an optimist, but I've got vestiges of this fear as I get older, that is there hope for the human race?
But, what I'm really impressed with, is the work that you've done, Lyndon, your wife, the Schiller Institute, the Intelligence Report, and this didn't come to be naturally, or quickly. I want to say, that this lady up front here, Anita Gallagher, has been beating on me for a decade, and calls me. [laughter] And I got to tell you, I have been captured. I am now part of the team, and will work towards the goals.
I want to compliment you, and first off, let me say this, that when you look to solutions, I wish I could say, as an American, because I love my country, and I'm sure all of you do, but I love the world more. When I was in the Senate, I used to get away with making extensive speeches, where I would end the speech, that my priorities in life are first, the human race; second, the United States; and third, Alaska, and all my priorities are in that order.
And so all I can say now, is that I don't see a solution within the confines of the United States. I think that you're quite right in your assessment of the Obama administration. But I've got to tell you, that when you look to the Congress, and I can say when I was a Senator — you know, we had a certain arrogance, being Senators, we'd look to the House, and say, "Well, that's a zoo over there." But now, when I look from this distant position, on the entire Congress, it is a total zoo, not just the House! And so, we focus on the administration and the Presidency as the agent to work on. Well, I got to tell you, this other body is co-equal, and they can do things, and have been doing things, that have been sabotaging — sabotaging — and destroying any possibility we have for world peace. And so, I've come to the conclusion after a number of years, that I look elsewhere. And I look to where the successes in life have been, of recent nature, and the attitudes. And I want to compliment you, by underscoring what China is doing today. And I personally feel that Putin is running his country a hell of a lot better than our last three or four Presidents, have been running, our country. [applause]
And so, when you take the combination of the Chinese leadership—and I'll go into, in a moment, what they're doing, which is I think is the touchstone of the 21st century. If [henry] Luce wants to continue to hold the view that the last century was the American Century, I think it's not a good mark on our history, because it was a terrible century.
But now, when you look at the 21st century, who is the group that's actually acting in the most mature fashion, and have not made a reliance on military power? Of course, that's the problem with American foreign policy today, is that first, we think in terms of force, and use of our "superb" military. Well, one, they're not so superb; and two, it's horrible thinking. You can say, that well, the American people sustains this. Well, unfortunately, the American people, they're not stupid, but they are totally uninformed as to what's going on in the world today. Our six leading communications companies, which are total pawns of Wall Street, have guaranteed, that we will [audio loss] is, — did my voice go down? OK.
What's going to happen, from my perspective? I don't disagree with your sense of urgency, don't disagree at all. But, I've come to the conclusion that we could all be incinerated over the Kashmir, because any bombs going off between Pakistan and India will just wipe us out, too, in the process. It's the total human insanity we have, that we can deal and manipulate and control the bomb. We can't. Not at all. We're victims of circumstance.
And so, when I take your views, they're as valid as mine. But, my view is optimistic; I'm not old enough, yet, to be totally pessimistic, but my view is that what China is doing, and with the help of Russia, and with the BRICS, is really where the future of mankind lies, in terms of solutions. Not our leadership. It's going to be what they're doing, and how they're handling it. As I pointed out to you earlier, Putin has run things very well. After the provocation of Ukraine—and most Americans have forgotten that we're the ones that did this; we're the ones that did it. They don't hear that any more in the press. And I don't know if anybody has seen the recent "Frontline" piece on "Putin's Way": It was horrible. And I have an intelligence background, when I was 23 years old. I was a top secret control officer.
At 23, mind you, I was in Germany as an adjutant for a communications intelligence service. Our cover was the CIC. What did we do at this place? There was only two military officers—myself, 23, as a second lieutenant; and a lieutenant colonel, who was in the sauce a good part of the time. The rest of it were run by Germans. And What we did is, we'd open people's mail, wantonly, and wire-tapped people in Europe, wantonly. Now, that's when I was 23 years old.
So, you can figure, when we had the Pentagon Papers come up in the Senate, and a Senator could not go in and read the papers, except being under guard, couldn't take any notes; all I could think of was: when I was 23, I was acting with more power than any Senator can act right now, in viewing the Pentagon Papers! So, little wonder, that when Ellsberg approached me, and asked if I would read the Pentagon Papers as part of my filibuster against the draft, I said, instantaneously, "Of course, yes I would!"
And so, now we come to the same situation that existed then and exists now, is what the government, our government, is doing, is really what's leading the destruction, throughout the world community. When you see the blow-back of these refugees, which we have not seen it at this level since the Second World War, when you see that going on right now, who's responsible for that? I would hope that, maybe, our European leaders, who are all wimps, led around by the American forces, both civilian and military, through NATO, which I want to characterize, as, NATO is the globalization of the military-industrial complex; that's what NATO is, and it's as useless as anything you could think of. We should dissolve NATO, first opportunity.
But let's get back to where the answers are, and what's going forward, is, what China is doing. And it's in their self-interest. There's nothing wrong with intelligent self-interest; and that's what they're exercising. Because they have overcapacity; they have a great deal of presence in the world—not military presence—but what they're going to do, is to amass this into a force, to create the economic union, via communications and transportation systems, and general broad economic systems. They're going to go from western China to Europe, and then all the areas in-between. And this is going to give the world a focus of attention on economic solutions, rather than what we focus on now.
I was just listening to General [michael] Flynn. A fine thing, the guy's admitting that they were doing things wrong, but not too much of an admission. But he was saying, we failed, but the real answer is, is economic development in these areas, so that people could be concerned about their well-being and jobs in the future, rather than what they're doing now, is annihilating themselves.
Well, this is exactly what China is putting forth, with the help of Russia, and tying it in. And thank God. we have these institutions that are creating financial institutions, to overcome the short-sidedness of the World Bank and IMF. So, they're leading in the financial area; they're leading in the economic area. And, if only we would have enough sobriety in this country to say, "Let's work with them." Can you imagine? Since the Second World War, we have been the ascendant power in the world, and we've not acquitted ourselves very well. Look out today, since the Second World War, and say, "This is nothing to be proud of." But, what China is doing—and if we were to now say, "They're on the ascendancy, economically, and they're going to ride that horse to the saving of human civilization."
And so, here again, I want to compliment the LaRouche organization for all that you're doing in this regard, in communicating this. And this is in line with views that I found out 20 years ago: I went to an event, as a normal citizen, to a LaRouche gathering, and that's when became aware of, what you wanted to do, in crossing the Bering Sea into the Kamchatka Peninsula. And I was always fascinated by that as an Alaskan, because there's no question, it's very do-able.
I won't live to, and you won't live to, see the fruits of what is going on today with this new wisdom exercised in China, in their leadership. Of course they're not falling prey to what we did. Their defense budget is 10% of our budget. And it's ridiculous that we feel such suspicion about what we're doing. But we've been on an ego trip for decades and decades, and all of a sudden there's somebody coming forward that is going to eat our lunch, and we don't know how to stop them, because they're not talking about eating it, with the force of arms. They're talking about outperforming us, in an economic fashion.
And so, I just want to add my voice to the work that the Executive Intelligence Review is doing, what the Schiller Institute is doing, and say that any way I can help, I'm there. Because the opportunity is there—and, a little bit which is a take-off from your career, Lyndon—is that, the truth be told is fully recognized by those who hear it, unfortunately. And you have a cadre of people who do hear it, who are committed to it, and now, count me as one of those aboard. Lyndon, thank you. And Helga, thank you for what you're doing. [applause]
DENNIS SMALL: Now we're going to hear the founder of the Schiller Institute, Helga LaRouche. [applause]
HELGA ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, thank you. Thank you, Senator. Hello, Lyn!
When the Senator made his remarks, I reminded myself that when the Iraq War was conducted, we had a conference on the same day. And we were truly horrified. As a matter of fact, we knew that this was based on lies. The EIR had produced a report, half a year earlier, where we predicted that they would make this war, the Bush-Cheney-Blair combination. And we had tried to warn against it, because there were no mass weapons of mass destruction; there was no way how Saddam Hussein would have reached any city around the world in 45 minutes. So we knew it was a lie and we published that in an EIR report, and we had distributed many leaflets around the world. And in Germany it led to a situation where in August, shortly before the war broke out, Gerhard Schr^der all of a sudden made an about-face and said Germany is not going to participate in this war. And that had a very important influence in causing Jacques Chirac to also not go in this direction.
And so on that day when the war started I was so horrified. I gave a speech at this conference and I just recalled that I said, are these people not aware that there is a higher law which will avenge this injustice? And I think I recalled the Ibykus poem by Friedrich Schiller; I said "Don't you know the lesson that if you commit a crime, there is such a thing as Erinyes, the goddesses of revenge which will come down on you?" And I think that that is exactly what we are seeing right now. Because one war followed the other one. You had the Iraq War. You had before even the Afghanistan War, which was also based on lies, because if you look at what really happened on Sept. 11, then Article 5 of NATO should not have been evoked. Then you had the murder of Qaddafi. Look at what all of these countries now look like. Then you had the attempt to overthrow Assad. You can add Yemen. You can add Palestine. So, the whole region from Afghanistan to the north of Africa is a nightmare.
And, as a result of it, because of various dubious policies, t say the least, of the Obama Administration in support, first of the mujahideen, then al-Qaeda, then Al Nusra, then ISIS, you have now a situation where the largest refugee crisis since the Second World War has erupted. There are now every day, tens of thousands of people coming from mainly Syria, but also Iraq, Afghanistan and other war-torn regions and this is clearly over stretching the capacity. People arrive, 10,000, 20,000 on the shores of the Greek islands; and the Greek Islands are poor, so the authorities have no food, they have no water, they have no medical supplies.
So, people are now trying to get to the mainland in Greece, and from there they are trying to get to Macedonia which is exploding with refugees. People are trying to go further to Hungary and there is barbed wire wall built around Hungary. So, you saw these absolutely horrifying pictures, where you have small children between tear gas deployed by the police and refugees trying to get through these barbed wires. This is a breakdown of civilization what is happening there; on top of all the other things which happened in Ukraine and other places. So, as a result you have, now, an explosion of misery and refugees.
But something positive has happened. And I think it remains to be seen what all went into it but there was a sudden shift in the German policy. Now Mrs. Merkel, who I admit is not my favorite politician, she responded to an impulse in the German population, where all of a sudden the German population who was pretty much in a soap bubble of unreality until very recently; because people in Germany behaved exactly like Americans, they said there's nothing you can do anyway. They felt completely impotent to change anything. As a matter of fact, this was not the American outlook some years ago, but in the recent period, Americans and Germans became pretty similar in their pessimism, but also indifferentism, not being interested in all these matters. And suddenly — suddenly — people recognized, these poor people running away from war needed help. So you had an outpouring of love, of charity, people streamed by the thousands to the main rail stations in different cities, bringing clothes, bringing food, bringing necessities of life. And I think it was that which caused Merkel to say, wait a second, the majority is going in this direction and I can only stay in power if I go with the majority; being a truthful politician, so she took the initiative.
I think other factors were involved because in the recent period, there were many, many people in Europe who warned that we are on the edge of World War III. Helmut Schmidt who is 95 years old, Gorbachov who's not liked in Russia but the Germans always liked "Gorby," warned three times in a row that we are at the verge of World War III. The head of the Duma, Naryshkin, said if it comes to World War III this will be the last one of mankind because nobody will survive it. You had the European Leadership Network, which is a think tank of former defense ministers and military analysts, who put out three papers within six weeks, saying we are heading towards war, towards nuclear war. This paper, the first paper said "NATO is preparing a war against Russia and Russia is preparing a war against NATO" and therefore we have to have urgently, new rules of dialogue, of communication which does not exist any more, urging that such a code of behavior must be urgently established.
So, while the normal person on the street may not know all the reasons, the geopolitics behind it, the fact that the trans-Atlantic financial system is about to blow out in a much bigger way than 2008, but people in the last weeks have changed in all of Europe. We have information tables in many countries, and therefore we have a good reading on what is the mood in the population; and I think it was the combination of the euro crisis, people knew that if Greece would go in an unorderly exit, you could have an instant blowout of the entire financial system.
So people were caught in between anxiety because of world war, worry about the economic security because of the euro collapsing, and naturally then the refugee crisis on top of it. So, I think it dawned on people, all of a sudden, and this soap bubble, in which people were in the whole time, popped; and people realized, "hey wait a second, this civilization is about to crash against the wall and we have to change." And that, I think, led to a situation where people opened their hearts, and responded to the refugee crisis; I think the last time you had an expression of popular will like, that was when the Wall came down, and with the peaceful revolution, the peaceful demonstrations, the Monday demonstrations, in what became then east Germany and what was the G.D.R. before, which brought down the Wall. And the present mood in the population is approaching exactly that quality.
Now with that goes something else and that is what I referred to as the Erinyes, the idea, in this beautiful poem by Friedrich Schiller, the Cranes of Ibykus, which you should all read when you get home, we have a book where this is published also and translated, that there is a higher power, that you can't commit crimes for a very long time; that God is not an old man with a beard Who immediately if somebody robs their neighbor comes down with the lightning and strikes people down. It's not like that at all. But there is something which is called natural law, the Chinese are calling it the mandate of heaven, and in all great cultures you have this idea that there is a higher lawfulness which man cannot defy forever. And I think we are, at this point, experiencing such a moment where a great crime is awakening many, many peoples around the world and it is a moment of change, and we must absolutely not miss that moment.
Because what went along with the refugee crisis is suddenly people say, wait a second, where do these refugees come from? It is the United States. It is the wars which were conducted by the United States in the Middle East and it is the support of terrorist organizations, to eliminate and replace legitimate sovereign governments. Now, you don't have to be a friend of Saddam Hussein, of Assad, of Qaddafi, but the reality is when these people, who may have been dictators or not, — I mean, democracy is not such a thing to cherish so much, because where is democracy in the United States? Where is democracy in Europe? [applause] So these people have been called dictators, and you don't have to like them. I have no particular sympathy for any of them; but if you look at how they were running their countries — Iraq, with Saddam Hussein, had a functioning infrastructure, a functioning university system, women could study. You look at Libya, Qaddafi was involved in infrastructure development not only in Libya but in Africa. It was functioning country. Syria before this happened, was a country where you had a very functioning collaboration of all religions who peacefully lived together, Christians, Muslims of different types, other people, and now? Look at what has happened now! You have Wahhabi Salafists trying to destroy the memory of humanity about its cultural goods. The bombing of the Baghdad museum. There was no military reason for it. Schwarzkopf, who promised to bomb Iraq back into the dark age, did a pretty good job fulfilling his promise. Then you look at what happened recently with the ancient city of Palmyra. It was flattened. In Afghanistan, the large Buddhist sculptures. These people are trying to eradicate the memory of culture, which is universal history.
So, don't tell me there was anything good coming out of these wars. You have a situation where even some former American diplomats are making public speeches, to say that even from a narrow American interest, this is a failed policy from Cheney, Bush, to Obama without interruption, because the same neo-con apparatus is running both administrations. So, even from a narrow American standpoint, the objective is to increase American influence in the region: complete failure. So why is there not a movement in the United States that says: Yes, these are failed policies and we need to correct them.
Now, on the optimist side, I was very happy that the Senator was praising China so much, because it is a different model of working together of nations. Not only has China developed the idea of Confucian economics. It's a meritocracy. It's maybe still a little communist, but I think that can really be neglected, because the Confucian element is so much stronger in what the present Chinese government does, the emphasis on education, the emphasis on brilliance, on excellence of young people, of bringing the best minds forward, of having as many people as possible participating in the best possible education. And offering a model of collaboration based on win-win, on sovereignty, of respect of the other social system. And they have offered to the United States a collaboration on equal footing. So why not take that offer?
The BRICS countries have developed a completely alternative model of economics, of great projects, of overcoming underdevelopment, and it's steadily progressing. Just now, China had a big conference with leaders from the Arab world. Now, when I read that, I was extremely happy because, how are the hell are we going to bring peace to the Middle East? Obviously, and from everything we know, President Putin will make a speech at the United Nations General Assembly, where he will demand and offer international coalition to fight terrorism, and other forms of extremism.
And I know that Germany, for example, is already backing a flanking move, which Russia just did in Syria by moving its military there, because they don't want to have the last secular government in the region being wiped out. Now, the United States government was completely caught by surprise. They said, "how didn't we see this coming?" The CIA said, "Oh, we missed that one..." But, what is the NSA good for, if they're spying on everybody, when they can't even catch a move like that?
So, now you have a situation where Germany backed already the Russian move in Syria. Hollande is backing it. Even the British are forced to realign their view on it. So, when Putin will make a speech in the United Nations, saying, we need to have an international coalition against terrorism, if the United States should turn out to be the only country opposing it, that would really make them look very bad. So I hope that they use the remaining days to think through this question very well, and make up their mind to join this coalition.
Because what we need to do, is not only to end this terrorism, but we have to eliminate the root of terrorism, and that is poverty. The only way how we will bring back peace to the Middle East, is by taking the BRICS conception of a "win-win" collaboration of all the participating countries, of extending the New Silk Road — the idea to rebuild the ancient Silk Road with modern means, modern technology, modern infrastructure, and extend it to become the "World Land-Bridge." Now we — EIR, the Schiller Institute — we have produced a 370-page study, with the title, "The New Silk Road Becomes the World Land-Bridge," which is the idea to take that conception, in a certain sense take an economic miracle, like the United States did it repeatedly, with Lincoln, with Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Kennedy; or Germany did it after the Second World War, with the German Economic Miracle; or China is doing it now, for the last 30 years, where China developed in 30 years what other major nations needed 200 years for!
And China is now offering that Chinese economic miracle as a model of economic development for all the countries who want to be part of it. And it is moving quite nicely: Latin America is already part of it; large parts of Asia are part of it; Africa is very much interested in it. The Egyptian President el-Sisi, has just completed the second Suez Canal, in one year. And, that is part of the Chinese Maritime Silk Road.
So, when I read that the Chinese just conducted a conference with the Arab leaders, and they responded very well to the idea to have economic development in the Middle East, I was extremely happy. Because this is what we proposed in 2012, where we said we have to have a solution, where Russia, China, India, Iran, Egyp, and hopefully Germany, Italy, France, the United States, are all working together to develop the Middle East economically. We have to give a perspective of especially young people, that they want to study, in order to be able to raise a family, rather than joining the jihadis; where we have to offer them something where they start to love you, instead of hating you. I mean, the only way how we will ever come out of this is, stop the hate! Stop this destruction! Stop the drones! For every drone killing a terrorist, you are creating 50 new terrorists! Have we not learned that lesson?
So, we have to replace this policy of destruction, of militarization, which doesn't serve anybody except a couple of billionaires. And look, the United States is falling apart! Have you travelled recently over a highway? Have you tried to go by car from Washington to New York? Your chance that you end up in a pothole, is higher than winning the Nobel Prize! [laughter] Well, that's not a good proportion. But anyway, if you go by the train, how many miles of the fast train system has the United States built in the last decades? None. Zero. How many has China built? I think it's around 18,000 km right now. The goal is 50,000 by 2020-something. But, they have already built 18,000! I was lucky enough to travel from Beijing to Shanghai with one of these Chinese-engineered made fast trains, and it goes 310 km; and you can take your water, fill it to the brim and not one drop falls out of it, because they go smooth, quick, quiet — more quiet than this room! [laughter]
GRAVEL: Siemens. Siemens is the one that built that technology. Isn't that maglev?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: Well, no, no. The train I went on was a Chinese-engineered technology. I'm not talking about the maglev, no. This was a different fast-train system.
I'm saying, why can we not create a movement, in the United States, which says: If the United States joins the Silk Road, joins the World Land-Bridge, rather than wasting all this investment in military products — which is not so great anymore, anyway ; you know the Chinese are just outdoing there too? And, why can we not build an infrastructure in the United States, having fast train systems connecting the East Coast; replacing obsolete, old airplanes by having maglev trains, or other fast trains? And reconstruct the United States! Build a couple of new cities! The Chinese are building one new city after the other; why can the United States not build a dozen new cities in the middle part, east of the Rocky Mountains? This is a pretty depopulated, underpopulated area. And we need to do something, in any case, in order to fight the drought and the desert. So, when we go to new water systems, like ionization of water over the ocean to fight the drought in Texas and in California, and the other Southern states, let's just build a couple of cities! New science cities, beautiful cities! I'm for building a beautiful city in the United States! [applause]
So, I think that what we need to do, is really have a Renaissance movement. Modi, the Prime Minister of India, called for a mass movement for development, and I think that's what we need in the United States. Because, you have to get the sense that there is a chance to turn the situation around. China is progressing, offering a "win-win" cooperation. Germany, they are already increasing the number of people who say, "Wait a second, for us to work with the Silk Road would be so much more profitable, than being drawn into wars against Russia with sanctions, which is hurting us more than even Russia." Russia can go to China, to India — they're reorienting! But, Germany is about to lose — Germany exports machine tools, machine tool design, and some of these take five years to build! These are not things you just "pop out" like popcorn; these are things which need planning, designing, tooling for specific purposes; and when sanctions ruined that, and you're losing a market, you're losing it forever. And that is the fear in the German industry right now, if the sanctions are being maintained, then extremely important relations between Germany and Russia will be lost, for economic purposes.
The same people are thinking in France, in Italy. So, there is right now, a groundswell to stop the sanctions. But, obviously the question is, will people have the courage to buck the United States? Because that is really the bottom line of all of this.
So, what I'm really doing is, I'm calling upon you to become even more active than you are already. We have the United Nations General Assembly, and I wrote an appeal to this effect, and in my view, maybe, and Lyn said the same thing, it may really be the last chance for humanity to change course. You have an extraordinary number of political leaders — Xi Jinping will come, Putin will come, the Pope will come, other important people will come; and we should create an atmosphere in New York, and around the United States to say: "Enough is enough! We want the United States to join with these other countries to build the world, and stop wars based on lies and support of terrorists, one organization after the other!"
And, I think if we get enough motion of people who say, it is really time for the United States to be a republic again, and not try to be an empire, and having a unipolar world, based on the Project for a New American Century doctrine, which is really what is working here still; that the United States will not allow any country or a number of countries, to come up and be superior or even equal, that policy has to stop! The United States must accept they are not the only superpower anymore.
Nobody wants to deny the United States a role. They should have a role. They should be part of the nations like John Quincy Adams said. I don't mind if the United States wants to be the primus inter pares, the first among equals; that's fine! But, you are not the only one, and that is what has to be said very clearly as a message.
So, I think it's really a moment, where everything depends on the subjective factor. Because objectively, all the elements for change are there, and you have to be aware that many times, you cannot change anything, because structures are cemented; it looks like you can't really do much because you have alliances, you have processes, treaties, and nothing moves forward. But, then come, from time to time, what I call the "star hours of history" [Sternstunden der Menscheit]: '89 was such a moment, when the Wall came down, and the German reunification was the result of it: that was a "star hour of history."
And I know that we are now in this kind of a period. We may not be at a November '89, but I think we are like October '89. You can see it coming, and it comes like a groundswell, where both the forces of destruction are accelerating, but also the forces of construction and of the Good are also moving.
So, everything will depend on the Americans. Because if America joins this world movement for development, everything can be solved.
So, please, live up to the moment of history! [applause]
SPEED: Now we're going right to our question and answer period...[describes format]
Q: Hello, I'm E— from Russian Center, New York, and I thank you very much, Helga, for such a nice presentation. I have one question, which bothers me a lot, and I'm very concerned. Recently, you talked about this move — Russian military to Syria. Is there any chance that Americans would back a Russian initiative? Or do you think it's going to be opposite? I'm a little bit concerned about this confrontation between U.S. troops and Russian troops, so what do you think is the possibility that they can really come together and fight ISIS at this point?
ZEPP-LAROUCHE: I think it's not yet totally decided, yet. And I'm not saying I have the last information on it, I go only on press reports, which say that the White House was completely caught by surprise. And that there is a big faction fight where one say, why don't we just work with the Russians and stabilize Assad because ISIS is the bigger problem? And there is another faction which is against that. So I don't think it's yet decided.
But I think it was a true flank. I mean, you know, when you are confronted with a an almost unsolvable solution, an excellent military commander always thinks about the flank, you are not running with your head against the wall in a head to head confrontation, and , obviously, you know, the situation in Syria had reached a point, where, because Erdogan had bombed the PKK, and the PKK was practically the most efficient force outside the Syrian army to fight is ISIS; and Erdogan had about two years ago requested Patriot missiles from the United States, Holland and Germany, and they were moved there and they had created a no-fly zone over parts of Syria, because the range of these Patriot missiles was much larger than to the Turkish border. And that no-fly zone allowed ISIS to advance almost to the suburbs of Damascus. And at that point , either Russia would have done nothin, and then the danger would have been that ISIS takes over Damascus; and, as you know, Russia has this naval port Tartous, and it's building a second naval military facility a little bit further north.
So at that point the question was, and people realize that if all of ISIS takes over Syria, then the next countries falling would be Jordan and Lebanon. And it is estimated that if that would happen, then terrorism would, in a limitless way, go after Europe everywhere. And naturally it is a security threat also for Russia, because a lot of the ISIS fighters are Chechens; for China, because they are into Xinjiang, and working with the Uighurs. So there is a European, Chinese, Russian interest to stop this, because you know this is a barbaric phenomenon.
So Putin then made this surprise move, probably it was planned for a long time, to coincide with also the United Nations General Assembly. And I think that it really makes it so obvious where is right and where is wrong at this point, that I just hope there are enough military, diplomats, intelligence people, in the United States who say that the best way to get out of this is that the United States would join hands with Russia to do this. And that the moment will be the United Nations General Assembly, the time between now and then, we must all activate, multiply our own efforts to cause the international community to demand that. Because where should be the place to discuss that, if not in the United Nations General Assembly? That is the only available world court, so to speak; the whole world is looking at it, that's the place where you can bring it up.
So let's make a gigantic effort that this is becoming the change which is so urgently needed.
SPEED: Lyn, let me just ask you, do you have any response to that?
LAROUCHE: No, I think Helga does a good job when she wants to do it. [Laughter.]
Q. Good afternoon, this is J— W—, from Brooklyn, New York, and I want to first address Mr. LaRouche, good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, how are you doing? And I want to say that I'm sorry I missed your birthday party, I had to take care of my grandson, who is really cute, by the way, and I will be at the next one, okay?
And with that said, this is my question. It's something in the same vein of the young woman that just spoke. We have seen President Obama, a puppet of the British Empire, promise to fight terrorism while introducing economic and military policies that actually escalate terrorism. Now last week, Mr. LaRouche enlightened us as to the history of the destruction of the cooperation between Israel and other nations in the region, by the British and British run operations. And we know that in somewhat the same way, British operations have been enhanced in the U.S. through despicable policies put in place under the noses of the American people.
Now, in the same vein, the Israel government, and I want to make it clear that I am not talking against the Jewish people of Israel, or any other Jewish groups; I'm talking about the government of Israel and their policies that support the Al Nusra, which is an ally of al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria. With the United Nations meeting next week, right here in New York City, by the way, what do you feel, and this is for Helga, or for Mr. LaRouche, what do you feel Putin will have to do to deal with Israel, and at the same time, garner support from other nations, in his plan to deal with ISIS, and therefore, indirectly, deal with Obama?
LAROUCHE: I would think say, in this case, that what Putin has done has actually thrown Obama off balance, and things have to be taken from that standpoint of reference. I've followed this thing carefully, and I've watched what Putin was doing, and I began to warn some of our people what was up, what was really happening. That Putin acted to exploit the stupidity of Obama, and Obama brought defeat upon himself.
Now, we hope that defeat is more than permanent, to get rid of him. We want him out of the government under the 25th Amendment, which provides for such actions. But what the issue is, is that there is actually a peace movement, implicit in what Putin did. It's not simply some accident, some coincidence.
If you look carefully, you look what happened in the course of this thing in terms of Germany. Now Germany was in a totally accepted submission to Obama on this question of policy. That disappeared. It disappeared when Germany supported the poor people, who were facing death in parts of Europe, especially in Germany. You find other developments like that; that Obama's destiny is downward. It could be permanently downward. We would hope that the result of the discussions during the coming meetings of this month will actually bring the Obama administration out of existence. That Obama go someplace else, let him not do this anymore. Let's get rid of other people. Huh? Cheney, Dick Cheney, "Dirty Dick" Cheney, another one of these characters. And if Bush had any brains he'd be dangerous.
Therefore the problem is of that nature, that we have a situation where Putin has acted, opportunely, to deal with the opportunity, which was presented by the foolishness of Obama. In other words, Obama's own greed and stupidity have been the instrument by which his future is being destroyed now.
SPEED: Senator Gravel wants to...
GRAVEL: I'd like to add a little comment on something that's barely been touched on. If you look very closely, you realize that the United States foreign policy in the Middle East has been dictated out of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. [applause] And it operates through AIPAC primarily, and I've had my run-ins with AIPAC then and since.
But I think you must appreciate that this is the first time, no the second time, in my knowledge, that AIPAC lost out, or the Jewish community leadership lost out in a confrontation over an issue. The last time was when I voted with respect to others on the jets to Sadat, which was opposed by AIPAC. And I've seen instances where a White House decision was made at 9 o'clock, and by 10:30 there was a majority letter, signed by a majority number of Senators opposing that policy. It worked like magic. But this is the first time that you've seen the Democratic Senators, other than the three, Schumer, [menendez] and [Corzine 1.17.07], who have gone along with Netanyahu.
Now we've really got to thank Netanyahu for what he's done for us. Because what he's done, in my mind is broken the back, of the power of what the Israeli government has over the United States. You're going to see this played out. There's going to be payback in the political process with respect with Netanyahu. And I would suspect that this defeat they've suffered will drive Netanyahu from office at some point in the next year or so.
And maybe I'm just wishful thinking and hoping that's the case, but you've got to keep in mind that the Jewish community is not of one voice any more. It was for a great deal of time. What's unfortunate is that the Jewish community, the wealthy people, are older and conservative. And so therefore those are the ones that have been pushing the policies that have been foisted on the United States Congress. And bear in mind, that now that the Republicans have taken over in their association with the Jewish Community to the detriment, political detriment of Democrats, that in itself is an earthshaking development.
And so what is going to happen as a result of this? Either it will neutralize any influence that we have, and we have very little in the Middle East with respect to being an honest broker, because we're not, never have been, and I don't think we can ever become an honest broker. No. Will Putin and others move in to this category? I think we are going to see this at the UN General Assembly.
I'll be speaking at the press club, which is the association of reporters at the UN, I'll be speaking at 11 o'clock on Monday, and I'll be carrying the same message about the importance of the Chinese moves, of the loss of influence of the Jewish community on the American body politic, and where the future lies. And I must say, I know you are very enamored of the fact that the United States should and could; and the problem is that it hasn't in the past and if it doesn't, the question is who is going to do it? And I think it will be a combination of China and Russia, and what I think we can hope for with the influence of your organization, is to get us to go along with that leadership. That's my hope on it.
But bear in mind that this was a very cataclysmic change in power that was suffered by the leadership of the Jewish community in the United States of America.
Q: Hi there Senator, Helga, Mr. LaRouche. My name is Mitch Feierestein. I'm an investment banker and the author of a book called, Planet Ponzi, which discusses the debt and the debt problem that we have. I believe that the situation that we have is not sustainable—the $230 trillion that the U.S. has in debt. There were several good points that were made here today about the European Union and about the BRICS. For people who don't know who the BRICS are, it's Brazil, Russia, India, and China.
GRAVEL: And South Africa
Q: [follow-up] Sorry, and South Africa.
So I think that what we need to talk about is how we got into state that we're in. There's too much debt, too much credit, and too much leverage, which started which started back when Glass-Steagall [was repealed] under Larry Summers, the Treasury Secretary, and Robert Rubin, who's ex-Goldman Sachs came in. What's happened is the debt has escalated from 1999 to the beginning of the credit crisis in 2007. China's debt has gone up from $6 trillion in the past six years to over $30 trillion. Russia, on the other hand, is probably the only country that runs a surplus.
What we're seeing now is the European Union is falling apart, with the mass of immigration from Syria and the countries where our foreign policy has failed. So I guess my question to you would be, if you could go back 25 years ago and look at how our economic policy, has been and the foundations by Larry Summers and Paul Krugman and the same people, does it strike you that Albert Einstein summed it up best when he said, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting to achieve a different result"?
LAROUCHE: I would reply to that proposition, on two points. First of all, Einstein is the proper person to refer to, if you understand the entire history of the U.S. economy since the beginning of the 20th century, because we have been in a long period of moral decline, despite things like Franklin Roosevelt. And Kennedy was a great President, actually, if he hadn't been killed, and his brother hadn't been killed.
The problem lies in the idea of Wall Street. Wall Street is the center of this, because what's the situation now? Wall Street is hopelessly bankrupt. It's super-bankrupt. What keeps Wall Street alive is an inflation, in worthless Wall Street money, and as long as people believe that that money which passes through Wall Street and pays off a few people, as long as they trust that, they're going to be suckers. And Einstein of course, is the kind of person who would cause a problem about that.
But what we're faced with now, we have to do very simply. There's a very simple solution here. We have to simply go back to a Glass-Steagall policy, the one of President Franklin Roosevelt, exactly. Now, Franklin Roosevelt's policy in this regard is somewhat outdated, because the conditions have been outdated, but in principle, if you apply the principle rather than the details, his policy was the policy which is now required. Because all of Wall Street, the whole shebang, is absolutely worthless and should be closed down immediately!
Now, this thing that's happening this month now, we have an opening, an international opening, because around the world similar kinds of conditions exist. France is in a mess, Italy is almost destroyed, Spain is almost destroyed, Portugal—you can't even find it, that's how bad it is. So these and related kinds of things all come together with the problem in the United States. This is the time for an international Glass-Steagall reform, which cleans up the mess, and waste and fraud, which is shared among various nations. And by cutting out this artificial inflation, and it is artificial inflation, when an agency under the power of government begins creating investments which are non-value, that is no value, and no value whatsoever to mankind, that system has to come to an end on a global scale.
Now this reference to Russia's policy in this question is relevant, but it's not the solution. It can be part of the solution, but what we need to do is actually, and the United States should do it, we should throw Obama out of office right now. We have the 25th Amendment to do that job. Immediately go into a Glass-Steagall reform, which means you cancel Wall Street, all those values which are called Wall Street values, which are fake values, cancel them. We can take the properties in Manhattan, for example, which have this kind of occupation and say, what's your income worth and they don't have much to say. So some agency, of course, like a Franklin Roosevelt agency, would have to step in and organize a redemption of those properties which have some functional use, and use that as one of the ways of getting the reconstruction of the U.S. economy. And doing that will mean that the United States will be highly devoted to what that will have created, and I think that other nations will be equally affected.
Q: [follow-up] I think that one thing I'll follow with is T-TIP, you know the trade agreement that is a secret agreement. The United States has gone from a republic to a republic-democracy, and from democracy to plutocracy, and we're headed towards tyranny, where we're not even allowed to see what this agreement is all about. The Federal Reserve, which is a bunch of non-elected officials under Janet Yellen, and Ben Bernanke, and predecessor Greenspan, have run their balance sheet up to over $5 trillion. And as you rightly pointed out, Mr. LaRouche, the guarantees that were given to Wall Street were over $100 trillion. So our country is not in a position right now where we can get out from underneath the debt, so U.S. dollar hegemony is going to come to a rapid end, I think sooner than a lot of people think. Thanks for your thoughts on that. What do you think about the dollar?
LAROUCHE: [laughs] I think we can recreate the dollar.
GRAVEL: Today, and it's very historic, the person who has taken over the leadership of the Labour Party, which is the only alternative government that exists to Cameron, is a person, essentially his views are the same as Bernie Sanders. And one of the major platform issues is he wants to institute the concept of Glass-Steagall in Britain, if he's elected to take over the government. So this is a significant occurrence today. I don't know if you're aware of it. This could be as earthshaking as what I think happened to Netanyahu.
Q: [very strong accent, some paraphrased] Good afternoon. Mr. Lyndon, Helga.. I was born in Russia, I came to the United States 20 years ago, the most beautiful country in the world. If me being a Russian go to Germany for example, I would still be a Russian in Germany. But the only country in the world which I can become an American is the United States. I love United States, but I'm very surprised by the people who control the United States for the simple reason because they're not even Americans. The people who control the United States these are not Americans. So my feedback on Syria is, see after Sept. 11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya; so my feedback on that, it's got nothing to do with Sept. 11. I studied history when I was younger and I realized that history always repeats itself. So, Roman mentality was "divide and conquer." Once you make a [inaudible 1.30.19], it's easy to control. And once something happens, you should see who benefits the most.
So I think the crisis which is happening in the Middle East right now, if you think who would benefit from the turmoil. My mom was a Jew, so basically, I'm half-Russian, half-Jewish, so it could be your truth, it could be my truth, it could be whole truth, it's in general.
So the Jews for 2,000 years, they want to rebuild Solomon's Temple, because if you don't make a sacrifice in the Temple you're not redeemed. The people who control in this country are the masons — you can check this out — they truly believe the Temple should be rebuilt. So that's that they believe in. So basically, my point of view right now, they want to make all this chaos; you see, with the Solomon Temple is right now in Israel, there are two holy Muslim spots, which cannot be removed. But once the Middle East becomes [s/l eternal? 1.31.23] you can do anything you want to do.
So basically, I'm thinking, that's one of the biggest reasons why the situation in the Middle East is the way it is: The Masons want to rebuild the Temple for one reason; the Jews want to rebuild the Temple for another reason. But, it all comes down to the same thing.
Me, personally, I truly believe there is a God, [inaudible 1.31.45] Once I came to this country 20 years ago, I see all the spots, "God Bless America, God Bless America." I don't see it any more, I'll be honest with you. If I was to say to somebody "God bless you," he would look at me like I'm crazy. I've been honest with you, but I truly believe in that God engineered it for a reason, for a purpose, or we come from monkeys, so make a decision. I truly believe I came from God. I'm finished.
LAROUCHE: I can answer this thing. I think the point is, I think it's the wrong emphasis, because the point is, we think on details. We think on a detailed experience, a local one. That doesn't make any sense to me. I look at a longer term, say the period of the Great Renaissance, the Great Renaissance in Europe, for example. And that was destroyed. That was destroyed by a later development. And then there was a development again. Leibniz, for example, was one of the people like Kepler before him, who created a whole civilization. The civilization was essentially international. It does not mean that it included directly all nations, but the process of civilization has been international, in the main.
And if you want to account for these things, you try to pick some particular deal, and you say, wait a minute; let's stop right there. Isn't this a part of a larger operation, which is doing it? Now, the case of the Israeli case, I'm quite familiar with it, because I was involved in this when the Israeli organization was being created, as a military organization. And I associated myself with that institution, and as long as it lived, it was a so-called socialistic union. And they were a military operation. And I was in close support of them, for my own capacity, and I had people who were going into Israel, Jewish persons who going into Israel, to colonize the area.
And then they got knocked out, by whom? By the British Empire! And a British Empire election did it. And then you had assassinations of leading figures, Jewish figures in Israel, who were knocked out again and again by the British control,