This transcript appears in the June 28, 2019 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
The Exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche Is Crucial To Stop the British Empire’s Drive for World War III
This is the edited transcript of the Schiller Institute’s June 21, 2019 interview with the founder of the Schiller Institutes, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, by Harley Schlanger. A video of the webcast is available.
Harley Schlanger: Hello! I’m Harley Schlanger from the Schiller Institute, and I’d like to welcome you to this week’s webcast. It’s June 21, 2019. We’ll be speaking with Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the founder of the Schiller Institute and its chairwoman.
This is an incredible moment in history. We’re a week away from the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, where there’s a potential for an historic turning point around the idea that Lyndon LaRouche had put forward almost two decades ago, a Four-Power Agreement to establish a new financial system, a New Bretton Woods. At the same time, there’s an incredible war mobilization coming from the war party, defending the bankrupt system.
Mobilization to Exonerate LaRouche
But I think to start this, we really have to address this question of LaRouche’s exoneration and the initiative that was taken by LaRouche PAC and the Schiller Institute with the release of two new videos. The first is called, “The LaRouche Case: Robert Mueller’s First Hit Job,” and the second is of the memorial event that took place in New York City two weeks ago, titled “In Memoriam: The Triumph of Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.”
So, Helga, why don’t you give us a sense of the mobilization that is underway around your husband’s exoneration, and the importance of these two videos released today.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: Well, it may not be obvious to many people, but I am convinced that if Lyndon LaRouche is not exonerated, we will not be able to stop the present drumbeat to World War III. His exoneration and neutralizing the war machine, which is driving the world toward World War III, is one and the same thing. The apparatus that prosecuted my husband, despite the fact that he was completely innocent of all accusations, is the war party, which is now driving the world to the verge of extinction.
We launched an international operation today, simultaneously in many countries around the globe, with the release of the documentary, “The LaRouche Case.” I urge all viewers, all of you who are watching this program, to go to https://action.larouchepac.com/exonerate, download the video, and watch it; send the link to every possible contact you have—email lists, social media, everyone you know—and help us distribute this feature-length documentary internationally. This video demonstrates the absolute unprecedented violation of justice in the case against Lyndon LaRouche. The documentary includes the authoritative voices of Lyndon LaRouche’s defense counsel, Odin Anderson, and former Attorney General of the United States, Ramsey Clark providing, in depth, the reasons why the LaRouche case is the most incredible case of the warping and destruction of U.S. justice in the history of the United States.
Now, our aim is to get both videos distributed everywhere and get them acted on—that action being the exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche. The reason this is so absolutely important is, in my best judgment and that of my colleagues, the only way to stop World War III. The reason is very simple. The apparatus which prosecuted my husband in the 1980s, which has continued its operations into this century, is the same machi ne that is now the driving force for confrontation against Russia and China.
Drumbeat for War
This is clearly absolutely urgent. Look at how close we are to what could become World War III. The fact that, according to President Trump’s tweet [of June 21], the order to attack Iran after the shooting down of a U.S. drone was already given; and only ten minutes before the attack, which had three sites in Iran as targets, Trump called the attack off. According to the President’s tweet, he asked the relevant military commanders how many casualties such an attack on Iran would cause, and they said around 150. Then he said, “This is out of proportion,” and he called off the strike. Now this is an incredible story, because if this would have happened, we may have been on the way to World War III, and that is not an exaggeration.
The drumbeat for war was absolutely unbelievable. Just take a couple of steps back. You had the New York Times article saying that the U.S. security forces, the Pentagon, had escalated cyber-attacks against Russia behind the back of Trump, which Trump called treason. Then you had the story that supposedly the Iranian Revolutionary Guards were behind the attack on the two oil tankers in Gulf of Oman. This is, in all likelihood, another one of these fake news, false-flag operations. And it points to the fact that you have, in the United States right now, a dual power situation.
As we will discuss more, this is one week before the G20 meeting, where if this blows up, the last chance to have peace may be lost. Yet, there is the potential of Trump meeting Putin and Xi Jinping, and finding a solution to the many problems of this world.
So, we are in a countdown. But as I said, the exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche is absolutely crucial. The only way to disarm and neutralize the war party in the United States is to make the LaRouche case the most prominent issue right now. That case points to the coherence between the war party today, the apparatus that is responsible for the cover-up of 9/11, and for creating Russiagate as part of an attempted coup against President Trump. People have to understand that connection.
‘The LaRouche Case’ Video
Schlanger: The video of the LaRouche case is available on the Schiller Institute’s website, and also on the LaRouche PAC’s website. From watching this video, Helga, and talking to people about it, what becomes clear is that even though the hearings are more than two decades old, the topics are the same as what’s occurring today. It’s astounding, wouldn’t you say?
Zepp-LaRouche: Well, I think that the tribunal that took place in 1995—in which a number of prominent people from all over the world, and American legislators, reviewed the case and heard the testimony of Odin Anderson and Ramsey Clark—makes absolutely clear that that case of my husband has to be remedied.
I urge people to watch the video of the LaRouche case together with the three-hour video of the incredibly beautiful and moving memorial for him, because you have to see the two things together. The prosecution and vilification of my husband is in complete contrast to his real life and works which you get a glimpse of in the memorial, which combines musical tributes and other narration with key presentations by LaRouche himself. That really is the message which has to be gotten out to the world. As I said in the tribunal, the crime against Lyndon LaRouche was not just that he, an innocent man, was put in jail; but that what was also put in jail, so to speak, was the entire body of his ideas and solutions to the world’s crises, and those ideas and solutions are more urgently necessary, now, today. So again, I am asking you, please take the time; watch these two videos. Then help us to distribute them worldwide, in any channel you possibly can, because this is the key to solving the war danger. So, that is my urgent appeal to all of you.
Ten Minutes from World War III?
Schlanger: Now, as you said, we could have been at World War III as of last night. While that was avoided, the push for confrontation continues from the war party. Do you see any change in that as a result of the decision by the President to pull back?
Zepp-LaRouche: We will have to see. I think this is a very incredible demonstration that, indeed, we have a dual power situation in the United States. That has become a topic of public discussion. Let us review this again, especially because our international viewers may not be as alert to the fact that the New York Times article bragging about the story that National Security Advisor John Bolton is reported to have told a seminar of the Wall Street Journal, a couple of days ago, that the U.S. security forces, intelligence services, and Pentagon had escalated an already existing cyber warfare ordered originally by Obama, targetting Russia. Now, this allegation is not a small affair. A nation’s electricity grid supplies power for hospitals, for the military command and control, and for crucial services including water supplies, and, therefore an attack on a nation’s electricity grid would have to be regarded as an act of war.
Trump tweeted immediately, saying the Times story was “a virtual act of treason.” He also said the story leaked in this way was “fake news.”
Prof. Stephen F. Cohen, a very well-known Russia analyst in the United States, pointed to the fact that in all likelihood the New York Times leaked that story in order to ruin the potential of a summit between Trump and Putin at the upcoming G20 summit, as the media have done before on many occasions. Every time there was a potential for a solution, they would leak something or do some outrageous act, to sabotage such a summit.
So, obviously this begs the question, if the President is not informed, who does run the United States? That’s a question which is being asked by many people around the world, who noticed that Trump is one thing—as demonstrated by him calling off this attack against Iran—but such members of his Cabinet as Bolton, Pompeo, and others are clearly something different. So it is not clear who gives the orders.
The same thing seems to have happened in the case of Iran—which is a rather unbelievable story: The Iranians were supposedly responsible for the attack on the two oil tankers—for which there is no proof; several governments, including the German and Japanese governments, have demanded evidence, because the video Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued is clearly no evidence.
Then, yesterday, the Iranians shot down a U.S. military drone. The U.S. said this drone was over international waters, but the Iranians have now released a video showing not only the drone, but a U.S. aircraft taking off from the United Arab Emirates, flying over the Gulf of Oman, returning, and then overflying not only international airspace, but Iranian territory. According to the Iranian military commanders, they sent several warnings that these two U.S. vehicles—the drone and the aircraft—had entered Iranian airspace, without getting any response. The Iranians then shot down the drone as a warning to the United States, but purposefully did not shoot down the aircraft.
Who does not wake up and know that we are on the verge of World War III?—such a person is not in the real world. We are closer to World War III I would say than at any time since the end of World War II. That danger is not yet gone. I think it’s a very good thing that Trump intervened in the last moments, but it was just 10 minutes before the attack! People should really realize that this is not a joke.
Again, the only way to answer that in the short-term is to keep up the drumbeat for the exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche. If you want to stop World War III, then help us to get the exoneration of LaRouche on the agenda internationally, but especially with respect to President Trump, who has a very good reason for doing it, because it would aim at the same forces behind Russiagate and who are giving him a hard time to carry out his intentions in respect of improving relations with Russia and China.
Joint Chiefs’ ‘Nuclear Operations’ Report
Schlanger: Helga, with the corruption of the media in the United States, not covering these things in any way in detail, or even in reality, the Russians seem to be more blunt than ever, in warning of the war danger. What can you say about that, that can help to wake people up to realize how close we are to a catastrophe?
Zepp-LaRouche: President Putin has warned that a U.S. attack on Iran would have catastrophic consequences. In an interview with Mir news agency immediately after the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, he said that relations between the United States and Russia “are getting worse and worse” by the hour. I think that is a fair description. On June 11, the Joint Chiefs of Staff published for the first time in several years their nuclear strategy. Let me read to you a quote which makes is absolutely clear. This is a review of the nuclear strategy, the planning, targetting, command and control, which includes the idea of use of nuclear weapons in any confrontation. The quote I want to read to you is this:
Using nuclear weapons could create conditions for decisive results and the restoration of strategic stability. Specifically, the use of a nuclear weapon will fundamentally change the scope of a battle and create conditions that affect how commanders will prevail in conflict.
—Joint Publication 3-72,
Nuclear Operations, page III-3
This is incredible! It is the idea you can use a nuclear weapon, in spite of that fact that many experts like MIT Professor emeritus of Science, Technology, and Internal Security Theodore Postol have written long and very convincing articles that it is the nature of nuclear weapons that once you use one nuclear weapon, it’s the logic of that kind of weapons system that all of them will be used. That would, in all likelihood, mean the extinction of civilization.
This report was reposted by the Federation of American Scientists, which wanted to point out the fact of this doctrine. I think that all has to be seen together, and it underlines the absolute necessity to neutralize the war party—which includes emphatically the British, about whom Craig Murray, the former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, said that for the UK political system, government, and media, the difference between fact and fiction has completely vanished; and this should be of grave concern to everybody, because the British role in instigating all of this is absolutely crucial.
G20: Potential for a New Paradigm
Now all this absolutely demonstrates that we have to change the paradigm, that the war party must be stopped, that Trump must be enabled to carry out his intentions to improve relations with Russia and China, which he has stated many times. That is really what I am asking you, the viewers, to help us to communicate: Because I think the danger right now is like it was in 1914. Without an in-depth mobilization of the people around the globe, but especially in the West, in Europe and the United States, we are in great danger of sleepwalking into a new war, exactly as it happened in 1914. So, join our mobilization to stop exactly that.
Schlanger: Going back to the question of Lyndon LaRouche’s exoneration, it was precisely under similar circumstances in the late 1970s under the Carter Administration, with lunatics like Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and others pushing for war, that Lyndon LaRouche intervened with the SDI and the deployment against him came as a result of Ronald Reagan adopting his policy. I think that’s another parallel that would be quite striking to people to understand why the attack today on Trump is parallel to what was done to Lyndon LaRouche in the 1980s.
Zepp-LaRouche: At this late stage of the strategic game, so to speak, the only way to get out of this situation would indeed be to have the kind of cooperation between not only the United States and Russia—between the United States and the Soviet Union as my husband had proposed it at the time—but to emphatically also include China and India. Because the argument he made was that you need the four most powerful countries in the world to end this British system of imperial control of the world. This is extremely important.
It would mean that hopefully at the G20 meeting, a summit does occur which is right now planned; but be on your toes, because the week before the G20 summit we have to expect efforts to destabilize that potential up to the last minute, as we have seen it now with this called-off attack against Iran.
Hopefully, it will come to a summit between President Trump and Xi Jinping, and they will not only end the trade war, but come up with a comprehensive agreement. There should also hopefully be a summit between Trump and Putin. And if everything goes really well, there could be a summit among the four leaders. Remember that following the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan a couple of days later, the three leaders—Putin, Xi Jinping, and Modi, already having met in Bishkek, said they would meet again in Osaka, Japan at the G20 meeting.
So the best thing that could happen, would be that they would invite President Trump to join that summit, and that Trump would accept the invitation—to address the really pressing issue of the pending financial blow-out of the system and to go for a New Bretton Woods credit system, for the industrialization of the developing countries, and, with this New Paradigm in international relations, end the debt system of the casino economy we now have.
I think we must discuss the New Paradigm a little bit more, but the nations of the world need to have a completely different kind of thinking in their approach to strategic questions; because if they remain in the area of geopolitics, in the idea that Europe has to become a strong, unified bastion against other strong powers—the United States, Russia, China—and if the United States thinks it has to contain China and the rise of China—if we stay in that kind of thinking, it is only a question of time until the whole strategic situation will go completely haywire and out of control.
So, mobilize with us to put the Four-Power Agreement on the G20 agenda, because this may be the last chance for this to be done. It’s very clear both strategically, militarily, but also concerning the financial situation, that we are all sitting on a giant powder keg. Therefore, we need an urgent change in the entire approach.
Should U.S. Hit Iran for Downing Its Drone?
Schlanger: I want to get back to the financial situation in just a moment. But in this possibility of a new discussion—especially if it comes from the American people, demanding some response to the danger of war—apparently there were some discussions in the Senate, where people like Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, the usual war party supporters, were arguing that the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) is still valid, and under it, attacks could be launched. But there was some push-back against that. Do you know much about that discussion, Helga, and do you think there is a possibility of some change in the overall debate in the country?
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes. In a June 19 House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing on Iran Policy, Brian Hook, the State Department’s Special Representative for Iran, basically let it be known that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, at a previous, not public meeting, had argued that this military authorization act, which was passed in reaction to the attacks of 9/11, would still be valid, and enables the President to order acts of war without going to the Congress for authorization.
Now, there was a very interesting debate on Fox News TV which included the Democrat, Congressman John Garamendi from California, who strongly argued against such an interpretation of the AUMF, saying that it is absolutely not the case; that the President has to go to the Congress for approval of acts of war. Especially because this 2001-era AUMF only refers to a military reaction in defense; but in the case of this present conflict with Iran, Garamendi said, “We’re clearly in a situation where it could be a war. Any kinetic action against Iran would be an act of war. Now, they may have started it, but now you’re in that situation. And that does require congressional involvement in that process.”
This is extremely important, because before this whole incident, there was, indeed, a complete hype. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, for example, speaking about Iran’s “threat to start enriching . . . to weapons-grade,” Trump should “put Iran’s oil refineries on a target list and look at sinking the Iranian Navy if they attack shipping again.” If we don’t do that, North Korea will attack, he said.
Clearly, an atmosphere of complete hysteria is being created. Therefore, I think it was quite interesting that President Trump met with the entire Congressional leadership and the military two days ago, and then afterwards Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and so on, who told Trump they were worried about an accidental war breaking out.
A New Way of Thinking is Possible
So, I think that this all makes very clear, that if this incident didn’t go wrong, there is the danger that another incident will be created, another false-flag operation will be launched, as long as what we call the British Empire continues to exist—the apparatus of the imperial system of the City of London, of Wall Street, and the private security forces enforcing the policies of that monetarist system.
This British Empire apparatus must therefore be stopped and replaced by a credit system in the tradition of the American System, and a completely new set of international relations is established as the countries of the Belt and Road Initiative have already done. The United States must absolutely join this New Paradigm. If we don’t accomplish that, it’s only a question of time until another incident will be created. And then maybe the conditions will be a little bit less favorable, and war will not be called off ten minutes before it’s launched.
So, please help us to get this idea on the table, that a completely new way of thinking is possible, a new era of mankind’s history is possible, where all the countries work together for the common aims of mankind. That should happen fairly soon. The first step must be that President Trump joins with these other major forces to establish a New Bretton Woods system, preferably at the G20, because time really is running out.
Schlanger: Also, occurring in this same timeframe, is the exposure of the British Empire’s role in Russiagate, in launching the coup against President Trump, and its role in attacking your husband in the 1980s and putting him in prison. That apparatus was not stopped, then, when it could have been. And this time it’s not just attacking President Trump and the voters who elected him, but it is pushing the world toward war.
Financial System Breaking Down
Now, with the breakdown of the financial system, this does put front and center the Four-Power Agreement for a New Bretton Woods. Please give us your thoughts on the reports that have come out in the last couple of days on Deutsche Bank creating a so-called “bad bank” to offload euro 50 billion in derivatives obligations.
Zepp-LaRouche: That “bad bank” of euro 50 billion is really a form of hiding bankruptcy; it’s nothing else than that. Deutsche Bank has euro 40 trillion in outstanding derivatives, many of them really Level 3 assets, which means they are basically worthless. This is 16 times the GDP of the German Federal budget! Economist Marc Friedrich pointed to the fact that now the stocks of Deutsche Bank are at EU6; if they go to EU5, in all likelihood the German government would take over and nationalize Deutsche Bank. But he also correctly noted that if Deutsche Bank crashed, it would make the collapse and bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008, then the largest bankruptcy in history, look like peanuts, because of the size and entanglement of the derivative apparatus of Deutsche Bank.
This is an urgent issue, and it is known and a matter of concern to China and also Russia. I thought the speech which President Vladimir Putin gave at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum was quite remarkable in this respect, because he warned of a global financial breakdown by pointing to the fact that the powers that be in the West have done absolutely nothing to address the causes of the crash of 2008. The quantitative easing has just postponed the crash into the future; and that a complete change and a new system are really required, going in the direction of the Chinese model, and so forth.
Putin said something else which I think is quite noteworthy. He said there are all these children and teenagers now who are so concerned about climate protection; they should be a little bit more concerned that we have a complete danger of global catastrophe in the form of nuclear war.
I think that is a message I want to reiterate, because of all the hype about climate change. It needs more discussion, and we should take it up in another program. Right now, I think, we need an urgent mobilization to address the causes of the war danger, which is the pending financial collapse, and the urgent need to replace it with a new financial system, a credit system, basically putting the present monetary system in the circular file. And that has to be discussed at the G20. All the leaders, including the Europeans, will be measured by history according to whether they had the moral responsibility and the intellectual capacity to address this most pressing issue of the danger of a financial collapse and the danger of World War III, by changing course entirely at the G20 meeting.
I can only reiterate that the exoneration of Lyndon LaRouche is the absolutely important step to accomplish both of these things.
Watch and Circulate the Two Videos!
Schlanger: Helga, just to conclude, I think it’s worth reiterating that the work of Lyndon LaRouche, as presented in these two videos—his concern with the future of humanity, and his prophetic insights—will shock people. Someone I spoke to this afternoon who had just seen the preview, the trailer, told me that he can see now why the British were so afraid of LaRouche. He said that it’s clear that everything that we’re seeing today in the attack against Trump, was already done against LaRouche: “How can we get people to recognize that?” I replied, “Well, get this video around. Get people to see it.”
So, Helga, I’ll say it just one more time: I think the idea of an all-ahead, full international mobilization is crucial: everyone getting this out at the same time as widely as possible. Be as bold and courageous as you can in challenging others to think through what it is that the exoneration of LaRouche would mean for the world today. Any final words from you on this, Helga?
Zepp-LaRouche: People may remember the words of Martin Niemöller, who once said, first they come for your neighbors, then they come for the Gypsies, then they come for the Jews. Well, one can only add, “They already came for Lyndon LaRouche; they came for the U.S. President; and you better help us now to change this entire dynamic.”
So, please get these videos around, and study them. Many people have been afraid to go out with the idea that LaRouche represented powerful concepts to solve the world’s crises. The entire prosecution was done with only one purpose: To poison the well, to get people afraid. But right now, overcoming that fear of joining forces with Lyndon LaRouche and the movement he created, is what makes the difference between war and peace. So, join our mobilization.
Schlanger: And again, you can find a link to the videos we’ve been discussing on the Schiller Institute website. Take advantage of that immediately.
Helga, thanks for joining us today, and we’ll see you next week.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, ’til next week.