Subscribe to EIR Online
This transcript appears in the December 16, 2011 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

We Need a New Presidency,
a New Concept of Politics

[PDF version of this transcript]

Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., gave this keynote address to a LaRouche PAC Town Meeting in Windsor, N.J., on Dec. 11, 2011. The panel was moderated by Diane Sare, who is one of the slate of six national LaRouche Democratic Congressional candidates. The video address is available here.

We are in a very interesting world, which means it is a very frightening world. And what is being done at this point, on both sides of the Atlantic in particular, is not at first glance particularly refreshing or reassuring.

The situation is as follows: We have a President who is unfit, even for citizenship, actually; who is clinically insane. There is no question in fact but that he is clinically insane.

The American System vs. Oligarchy

However, the problem is, that because of certain things that have happened over the recent several decades, we in the United States no longer have, generally, the kind of courage that a citizen would tend to have in earlier times. The assassination of John F. Kennedy, and the launching of the prolonged Indo-China War, in which we lost our morality, our courage, and everything else, has taken its toll. And what's happened since then, particularly in the past nearly ten years now, under George W. Bush, Jr., and Obama, has done everything to destroy the confidence and even the morality of our people.

Now the problem is intrinsically an old kind of problem. We in the United States were particularly fortunate, in the sense that there was a renaissance which occurred, actually probably implicitly with the birth of Nicholas of Cusa in 1401. This man turned out to be probably the greatest genius in all history, since his approach toward maturity. He changed science, he changed everything, more than any other single individual, in this process. And out of this, we had developments, scientific and other developments, which are unprecedented, in the sense that everything before Cusa's birth, everything before the beginning of the 15th Century, was far inferior to, in every respect, what happened with the Council of Florence, and the things associated with that.

And despite all the evils that have been done in the course of modern history, modern European history in particular; despite the long religious warfare from 1492 through 1648; despite the horror show which the British Empire created in the Seven Years War, and has continued to create ever since then; despite the horror which has hung over from the Roman Empire, from Byzantium, from the Crusades, and from the horror show of the wars from 1492 to 1648, that period, we have accomplished something, especially beginning in 1620 with the landing of the Pilgrims there [at Plymouth Rock], and then the Massachusetts Bay Colony development.

During this period, from 1492 until the crushing of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, we had launched the greatest initiative for civilization since actually the work of the great Renaissance. And out of this came, despite the crushing of us by the British interests, or what became the British Empire, we succeeded, over a period from 1620 until 1782, in establishing a republic which is unique in all human history, but which found itself at the end of that century, with the French Revolution and similar effects—we found ourselves repeatedly crushed. Because here we were: We were a great movement, a great nation really coming into being on the Atlantic side of the world, while all hell was bursting loose under the British Empire.

Ever since, there have been periods when our influence—and we've had friends and allies in other parts of the world—at least we've had a momentary surge, as typified best by the case of Franklin Roosevelt, President Franklin Roosevelt. It was an absolute revolution; we were a political, moral junkshop from the assassination of McKinley until the election of Franklin Roosevelt. Under Franklin Roosevelt, we achieved for a moment a great affirmation of our traditions.

With the death of Roosevelt and the advent of Truman, we began to go down again, and down, down, down. For a moment, John F. Kennedy resumed the influence and the trends of Franklin Roosevelt, and then he was assassinated. He was assassinated by people tied to Wall Street, and tied to London; that's who killed him. And it was deliberate. And the killing of his brother, Robert Kennedy, that assassination was also deliberate. And from the assassination of those two Kennedys, this nation has never fully recovered, to the present day. Bill Clinton did an excellent job in what he tried to do, but the circumstances under which he lived as President were not the best.

Obama Is Clinically Insane

Now we come to the point, as of this past week, beginning this past Monday, in which Europe, Western Europe, began to degenerate into a collapse. And the United States is on the verge of plunging into the same trans-Atlantic collapse. In fact, the entire trans-Atlantic world, from the Americas into Europe, is now in a general breakdown crisis. It's finished in its present form.

And in its present form, there will never be, in our lifetimes and beyond, there will never be a recovery, unless we bring it into effect now. And my estimate is, that we shall never escape from this, unless we very soon expel the current President of the United States from his office. If we can not find the people who have the guts, when the evidence is that this President is clinically insane... I said that in 2009, and everything I said then is true today. I made no error. This guy should have been thrown out of office then, when I first presented the case for his insanity. You see him now—he's destroying everything. He's killing Americans en masse with his economic and related policies. He's conducted illegal wars; he becomes an agent of a foreign power, working against the interests of the United States.

Take the financial situation.

What happened at the beginning, essentially, under George W. Bush, Jr. They launched a policy in opposition to my Homeowners and Bank Protection Act proposal of 2007, that would have stopped this crisis; but no, some people thought they were smarter than I was, and what they did is, they led us, from that time on, down the lane toward what happened in 2008: the beginning of the disintegration of the U.S. economy. And the U.S. economy has been disintegrating ever since, with no hope of recovery under the policies of either George W. Bush, Jr., or those of Obama.

Obama has done more to betray and destroy the United States than any other traitor in our history. But we have to forgive him, because he is clinically insane. But then, can we forgive those who, faced with the evidence of an insane President, who is committing murderous acts, acts of warfare which are a violation of the Constitution, can we forgive the people who are in power, who have the power, who don't have the guts to throw this guy out of office under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, for which he is culpable, fully culpable? For the violations of the Constitution, the frequent ones, for which he is culpable?

We sit there like impotent cowards, seeing our people and our nation destroyed under the influence of this British-owned puppet? And the only people who fight are a few of us. I, for one, and some generals, some senior general officers and similar people, who've warned us that what Obama is doing is a threat to the existence of the United States. It has an effect which is tantamount to that of treason against the United States and its people. He's increasing the death rate among our people willfully. He's destroying the institutions upon which recovery depends. He's acting to destroy the food supply that should come in the Spring of next year.

We're going to have a threat right now, of mass destruction through starvation and similar kinds of conditions, on a large scale, among our people. And only a few of us, some generals, me, some others, have shown the wisdom and guts to recognize that the policies of this President must be brought to a cessation. Otherwise, this nation, and probably civilization more generally, will not survive.

Threat of Thermonuclear War

We're now in a situation where we're threatened by drawing the United States into a general thermonuclear war. Not just a nuclear war, but a thermonuclear war. And this past week, the President of the United States, so-called, attacked his Secretary of State, and forced her, under intimidation, to say things contrary to her belief, by using the full muscle of the Presidency to threaten to crush her. And she did things under that pressure of being virtually crushed by this beast, this madman called the President, which caused a strain with our most important U.S. ally at this time.

Russia, under the leadership of Medvedev and Putin, are seriously the most effective—together with China—the most effective partners of the United States against this threat. Cooperation between Russia and the United States, with the agreement of China, and some other features, would stop this war, would stop this danger. So this President, who is not fit to be dog catcher—the dogs would probably agree—has now created this kind of situation where he is in effect a British agent.

In effect, he is only a British agent; he probably was not elected. That is, he was probably not nominated for the Democratic nomination for President. A very screwy kind of little thing happened there, and it was all paid for with British drug money—and I do mean British drug money. The Queen of England does push drugs! And we've got a little trial hearing on that question going on in the United States involving the Attorney General of the United States. Were they covering for a drug-pushing operation, which is what it was, or not?

So, here's where we stand: We stand in a desperate situation; the preconditions for a general thermonuclear war have existed. What has happened is, since the mass murder in Libya, which was perpetrated by the President of the United States in defiance of the Constitution—and it's criminal murder; this is not killing, this is criminal murder, politically motivated murder of a head of state, in a war which was conducted in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Now this has led to an attempt by the British, the French government, and the government of the United States presently, to push a war into the Middle East, targeting specifically Syria and Iraq. However, if you look at the military configuration in the eastern Mediterranean and in the Persian Gulf, you see that the troops there are not in there for a little operation, like a new Iraq War. What is intended is a confrontation with Russia, the principal nuclear power on this planet. That is, Russia, the former Soviet Union and what is left of that; and Russia has the greatest potential, in terms of strictly nuclear power on the planet. The only other nation which is relevant for major warfare, using nuclear or thermonuclear power, is the United States.

The significant deployment of U.S. forces in the Mediterranean region and in the Gulf, is U.S. thermonuclear war capability. We have repeatable, in-depth strength to conduct thermonuclear war, which Britain does not have, and other nations do not have. They may have thermonuclear capabilities, but they don't have a sustainable knock-out-blow capability in terms of thermonuclear war. The only relevant opponent of the United States, Britain, and France, which perpetuated this crime, this war crime, is Russia. It's the only nation which has any comparable capability.

So, what you're looking at here is, if the U.S. forces strike, they know that a strike means a thermonuclear confrontation, which means that the United States has to be committed to a preemptive thermonuclear strike, which means that we are faced with general thermonuclear war. And who can survive from that is very much in doubt. But the President of the United States, together with the people who control him in London around the British Queen, are determined to push us to that policy.

We have a man who I have contempt for; he's an old enemy, Garbage-chov I call him. He was my opponent when I was proposing, at one point, the Strategic Defense Initiative; something which I concocted and had a lot of support for from various countries, including from the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, at that time.

We are now at the point, where our capabilities are thrust against the combination of the British forces, are taking us to the edge of not a local war—not a "this," not a "that." We're headed for, this confrontation with Russia, which the President of the United States pushed very hard in his attacks on his own Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. This man and his British backers are madmen, worse than Hitler, and they're taking us to the brink of thermonuclear war, and most people in this audience don't even know what thermonuclear war is. It's something way beyond anything in their imaginations.

And the only people, apart from me and a few others who are effectively opposing this publicly, are some general officers and people of similar credentials in the U.S. military. They have been the only thing significantly standing in the way of our already being plunged into a thermonuclear war, from which the human race might not survive.

Gutless Politicians

And that's our situation; and the problem is, our politicians, our leading elected politicians, have no guts when it comes to the challenge of acting to save the United States from this kind of horror show. From bending to an Obama, who they could throw out of office in the morning, and who should be thrown out in the morning—and it should be yesterday morning if possible. And that's what we're faced with.

So, we can talk about courage and so forth, but courage is not just the idea of going out and having the guts to punch somebody, or something like that. No, courage is the ability to do what you must do, when doing it is extremely dangerous. That's courage. And we don't have much courage of that type among our members of Congress.

Oh, we have a few—there are a few suspects I know who I would presume to trust, both on the Republican side, as probably some on the Democratic side. I know the former President of the United States, Clinton, has good intentions on these kinds of matters. I know that his wife, who was practically brutalized by the President of the United States, also has instinctively excellent intentions and character on this issue.

But she has been bullied—you want to talk about racism, and similar kinds of things, feminism, and so forth? That's it! You have a brute! A madman! A man unfit to hold office. A basketball player! Who threatens her, and tries to intimidate her, against her own intention, to try to make her a vehicle in trying to create an incident between Russia and the United States, with the threat that something terrible will happen to her if she does not submit. We have a press that doesn't tell that story, and it's a truthful story, well known. And it's a story which involves the threat of our being involved in a global thermonuclear war.

That's where we stand; and I don't find the politicians in general, or even the majority of our citizens, who have a sense of the guts to do anything about this. They sit there and complain, and say, "We have to go along to get along." They say, "Let's wait for the next election." "Buddy, you're going to be blown away by the next election if you don't do something now." This man must be thrown out of office now. He is clinically insane; Section 4 of the 25th Amendment prescribes precisely the remedies to be taken. He also has committed violations of the Constitution which are sufficient for his expulsion from office. Why don't we do it? Why don't we do it?

That's where we stand.

You Can't Go by Sense Perception

Now, there's another aspect to this situation which is also equally important. How do we know anything? How can we say we know something? On the one hand, what we have as the way to know what's going on in the world is sense perception. Now I can tell you that sense perception is not very reliable. It's something from our animal side. These are not precision scientific instruments. But mankind, by using a set of several instruments of these types, these so-called sense perceptual instruments, is able to use contradictions and contrasts among different kinds of sense perceptions, to try to come up with a formula of how to deal with things.

For example, the discovery of gravitation, which was done uniquely by a great man, Kepler. Kepler was the only man who ever discovered gravitation; nobody else ever did. The only people who did, were those who repeated his discovery, or worked upon perfecting the understanding of it. So Kepler discovered gravitation. How did he do that?

Well, first of all, he took two principles. One was the principle of sight, using the telescope; the other was harmonics. And these two kinds of sense perception, human sense perception, juxtaposed against each other, were used as a way of testing experimentally a single conclusion which we call the principle of universal of gravitation. Which Einstein, for example, referred to in defining the nature of physical space-time and the way it's organized.

So, all of our great scientific discoveries were based on use of imperfect instruments, those with which we are usually born. Sense perception—sight, smell, and so forth—these are the means by which we attempt to find out what's happening outside our skin. We don't actually have a direct knowledge of what's going on outside our skin, but we have, by this kind of method, a way of approximating and estimating what is going on outside us. Now, in more recent times, we've come with a better source of information.

This started with a guy called Eratosthenes, who is the first person to discover the size of the Earth. He conducted a very famous experiment, actually several of them, which were the start of that. And this sort of process in development of astronomy, using also the general astronomy of the star system and so forth, was the first source of information with the aid of sight, in finding a way of knowing what the real universe is, as opposed to merely ordinary sense perception, which dogs and so forth have.

So, this gave us the ability to build up what we call today the general electronic or similar kinds of things, astronomy and these kinds of things that we're doing now. So we have two sources of information, which, in contrast, give us our knowledge of how the universe is organized. One is sense perception. Sense perception is intrinsically not reliable. It's reliable for certain purposes, but it doesn't tell us what the principles of the universe are, and how they're organized.

We have then also electronics, what we call electronics, which includes telescopy and so forth; these other means. And by contrasting these two sets of means—what we might call, on the one hand, electronics, and on the other, sense perception—the two of them, and the contrast of the two of them, gives us two media. One, the least reliable, which is sense perception. The other is electronics.

Well, electronics is much more precise than sense perception, in terms of the physics. And therefore, as we have advanced in physical science, we have been able to extend our human knowledge into the larger parts of the universe, as Riemann outlined this in his habilitation dissertation. We are able now today to do things, and are able to understand things, that mankind has never been able to understand before. This advantage, this gain, has given us the power which is for the good, and the power to destroy the planet at the same time. And the stupidity with which to aid in destroying the planet, all at the same time. And that's where we stand.

The Alternative to War

And therefore, the great decisions that have been made are not made in the form of the field of battle, although the field of battle is very much there. The decisions to be made are not about who can win the war, because winning the war now, when you're talking about thermonuclear capabilities, and the kind of warfare that makes those capabilities used on both sides, whatever the two sides are, you can no longer talk about warfare in the old-style fashion. Mankind has reached a degree of capability, and also grave stupidity and insanity, that we have the ability to destroy this planet. Or the ability to destroy most of the people living on this planet, to destroy civilization.

So, the issue is not war; the issue is what is the alternative to war. Because under the present trends, as long as the British Empire maintains the power it maintains today, and as long as most Americans are stooges, and are stooges-in-fact for the British Empire, war is not the question; it's getting rid of those, and the power of those, who would cause us to make war. There are problems to be solved on this planet. They can be solved by other means. War is not necessary to solve these problems; there are other means by which we can control this planet if we wish to. But there are some people who wish to destroy this planet in a sense. And typical of those is the British Empire.

Origins of the Oligarchical System

Now, there's a dark part of the history of mankind, which is very relevant to this situation. Mankind, again, has been essentially an educated beast, with certain capabilities. And most of what we know as civilization, particularly European civilization, as such, has involved various kinds of warfare under a system of "governance," which is called essentially an empire—an imperial system, an oligarchical system.

What has happened is that, in a certain part of our history—which is an area which is lost in the dust of uncertainties, but the effects we know; the exact processes we don't know in detail, but we know much about it—at a certain point, a maritime power developed on the surface of this planet. It was not just an ordinary maritime power; it was actually of a trans-Atlantic and similar nature. The great cultures, which gave us the knowledge of astronomy, were generally the great navigators of transoceanic travel.

And therefore from this group, which is much more intelligent, because much more informed, by information dealing with astronomy, that's how we got our whole astronomical system, was from the great navigators who were transoceanic navigators. And learning how to navigate by the stars, and similar kinds of considerations: Let's say 200,000-400,000 years ago, there emerged a maritime culture, which had superior power through this knowledge of astronomy and so forth, greater power than the ordinary people.

And from among these people, these mariner types, they became colonizers. Most of the human population was not on the land area; it was on the shore area, or in the lakes and waterways. And these were largely farmers, or like farmers, farmers and hunters. They were very weak in terms of their strategic capability, relative to the great navigators, who acted almost like pirates.

So this kind of quasi-piracy became a dominant feature, in much of the world's oceans and along the coasts of the oceans. And the ordinary people, who were farmers or the like, found themselves the victims of the strategic advantage of the maritime culture.

From this came what is known as the oligarchical system, which is what the Peloponnesian War, for example, was an illustration of. So you had naval power descending upon people on the land or coastal areas, enslaving them, and saying, "You are animals. We are gods!" And the term "gods" was applied in various languages, to the navigational maritime system, which was able to imprison and enslave, virtually. And these people would treat human beings otherwise, as animals! They would slaughter the excess animals, or control them by other means.

And so we had the Peloponnesian War, this fight, where the oligarchy said, "We are the gods, you are the cattle. When you become too numerous, we kill you. When you become threatening, we kill you. When you become too intelligent, we kill you, we destroy you." And that has been the basis for the dominant culture of this planet.

In the process of modern history, and earlier, there was a struggle against the oligarchical system, and from that there emerged the effort of modern society, in which the founding of our United States, as separate from Europe, was an essential part. The strength of our United States is, we are superior to Europe, in one respect: that Europeans have never freed themselves of the full continental European grip of the oligarchical system, like the monarchies; they've never freed themselves of this oligarchical tradition, in this monarchical expression.

The British Empire is still the British Empire! Every part of Africa is controlled by the British Empire! And anybody who doesn't admit that is a liar or stupid. The British Empire controls all of Africa; the British Empire owns Saudi Arabia; it controls the Arab Middle East. It controls other parts of the world. It's a real empire, like the old empires.

And we in the United States are crucial, because it is our position, from our founding of what we are in the United States, which gave the world the opportunity to get rid of the oligarchical system. But you have all these Wall Street types, who are nothing but British ass-kissers, agents of the oligarchical system, who, even as citizens of the United States, will ally with the British Empire to destroy the United States, or destroy what the United States means. And the suckers go along with it, inside the United States. The people who have lost their courage and judgment continue to allow this to happen.

What Removing Obama Would Do

We've come to the point that we're now at the edge of thermonuclear war. We've been there since the close of the Libyan adventure. We are now still there. Recently, with the assault by the President of the United States against his Secretary of State, we came a very large step closer to thermonuclear war. What President Obama did in his attack, his savage attack, in two successive attacks to brutalize the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, brought the world closer to thermonuclear war.

And nobody in the United States has done anything about it!

Nobody has moved to get this bum out of office, which is essential if we want to prevent thermonuclear war. No one has defended her, significantly, publicly. None of her colleagues has defended her against the abuse that was done to her. He should be thrown out of office for that itself. Any President who does that to one of his officers, on that basis, and for that reason?

First of all, how did this happen? Well, you have a former Soviet official, Gorbachov, an old enemy of mine, and a British agent, who I was up against, together with President Reagan, on this issue of the SDI. The SDI was my baby; President Reagan adopted it, promoted it. The Soviet incumbent who was also a British agent at that time, not really an honest Russian patriot, backed up the British, against the SDI. And Senators and others of the United States went along with the British, on orders emanating from Andropov, the head of the Soviet Union. Gorbachov, who went through a similar exercise, is also a traitor to the Soviet Union and to Russia, today—and also a British agent.

And this British agent, Gorbachov, was the guy who was involved in the intimidation of the Secretary of State of the United States in this matter. And the President of the United States was an accomplice in that operation. Using an agent of the British interest, in setting up the threat of a thermonuclear attack on Russia, and thus, a thermonuclear war between the Russia and the United States, etc., etc.

And we sit back there, and say, "Well, it's not our time to act. It's not our time to do anything. It's not our time to meet these challenges."

So what we face in our own people out there, especially those in higher influence in office, who do not act to throw this bum out, while we still have a nation, while we still have no thermonuclear war—they are acting like traitors. They don't mean to be traitors, but only cowards. And sometimes, there's little difference between the two of them. That's where we are now.

We are now starving to death. Our economy's being destroyed by this President, under orders from London! As of next Spring, if nothing else happens, many of our Americans are going to die of hunger, because the food supply has been destroyed under the policies of this incumbent President. There will be no adequate food supplies come this Spring, and the last time to solve that problem was the time to throw this President out of office, now: specifically, under the 25th Amendment, Section 4. And also under the fact that he has violated the Constitution, repeatedly, and is vulnerable for expulsion.

In the meantime, you've got a bunch of Republicans as candidates, those who are visible now, who are no relief to this threat. We don't have any great geniuses who you can trust out there in the Republican roster of candidates! We have some people who may be gentlemen—some not, but some others maybe act like gentlemen. We don't have a Democrat—this President, who wants to be re-erected, or something, he's no damned good. But if we could somehow just throw this present bum out, throwing Obama out, what would that do? It would mean you would have all kinds of prospects for a Democrat to be put up.

A Bipartisan Ticket

And I wouldn't go for a Democratic-only ticket; I would go for a bipartisan ticket. Because what we need is a coordination and collaboration among the best people of our political system, in major national office. That's what we need. I certainly would not want to have a Democratic platform of candidates, of Federal candidates, which did not include certain Republican members. Because you can't trust the Democratic Party as a whole, but you could trust the testable qualities of leadership, of proven leadership of certain Democratic and certain Republican candidates.

And since we need unity in this case, we should not get ourselves tied up in a struggle between the Democratic and Republican tickets at this time. That should be our policy, right now. No showdown between Republicans and Democrats, per se. What we need, is an assembly of proven merit, in terms of potential candidates of both tickets, particularly the leaders, the best ones. And bring them together for a common cause. Let them be members of different parties, but let them be, first, citizens of the nation, and representatives of the citizenship of the nation. We want the best minds of both parties, in particular. We want to get rid of the rubbish of both parties. Dump it by the wayside, at the same time.

So we now must be acting, now, at this moment!, before Christmas, to get this bum out of office, and to understand that we need to get a selection of candidates who represent the best selection of Federal candidates, on both tickets, together. So we are going to make decisions on world affairs, on the basis of the interests of the nation and the world.

We are going to act—which we won't otherwise—we're going to act to bring ourselves together, in collaboration, not only with people in Europe and other places, but also in the East, in Asia, in the great nations of Asia, in particular. Because we have a job to do, in building not only the world, our world, but we have to get into space, now.

Look to the Future

The nature of mankind is—it may not look like that—but for some time, many of us have recognized, going back to the time of World War II and afterward, particularly the 1950s, we began to recognize, that mankind could not continue to confine our habitation to Earth itself. That our Earth-bound population must extend itself to become a space-bound population, as well. There are things we have to deal with, which constitute potential threats to mankind, from things floating in nearby space. Just like that big hunk of rock that passed between the Moon and Earth, and could have smashed our world to pieces.

So we need to get out there, in order to protect mankind on Earth from environmental threats. We need to explore the Solar System around us, for the same purpose. We have to extend our reach into the galaxy of which we are a part, and we have to find ways in which we can adapt man to the ability to live and function in space, and in a space environment, on that basis.

So we need, at this time, a sense of a world and national unity, a collaboration among nations, and close collaboration within the ranks of our own leadership, inside the United States. Without that kind of thought, as we go into this crisis today, I don't think we can make it. I just don't think it can happen. We can't wait. We can't wait until some last minute, to make these decisions on how the government is going to be composed.

We know this guy must be thrown out of office. We know the British monarchy is our deadly enemy, as it always has been, since the Revolutionary War. We know that we have needs for alliance and collaboration with other nations.

For example, let's take one thing that we're dealing with in our organization in particular now: The future of mankind on this planet lies immediately, in the withdrawal of ice from the Arctic region, and the opening up of the Arctic region for the shift of human activity into the Arctic region, rather than the present.

Now, the technology for doing that, has already begun; it's there. This development is absolutely necessary for mankind's role on Earth. It is also integrally necessary, for our extension, going back to the Moon, going ahead with the Mars project, and other kinds of things, areas which seems totally inhospitable, but which mankind can make hospitable, which we can discover how to deal with! This is the future of mankind.

And we have to get out from this past thing, this idea, this lurking idea, of going to a thermonuclear war? From which the human species might not survive? Probably would not survive, or at least not survive in any significant degree. We need to get rid of the policy that leads to that confrontation. Which would destroy humanity. We must throw out of office, those who would violate that, in all parts of the world.

We have great projects to perform, great discoveries beyond our present reach, to become able to deal with. These issues, facing us the next two generations and beyond, these are the issues of the remainder of this century: We must now proceed to begin to address those issues on behalf of the present mankind, both in this century, the remainder of it, and beyond. If we think in those terms, and we look at what mankind has accomplished in this way, in the past, in this direction, and say,

"We're going to do it again. We're going to make the next leap, for the next three-quarters of a century, as we made certain leaps in the last half-century, and in the century before that."

There is no limitation we can put on how far we're going to go, and must go.

So we need a new Presidency, a new conception of politics, a refreshed planet, which understands the challenges of today, into the remainder of this century. We must begin to mobilize ourselves, with long-term investments which lead in that direction. We must, above all, reeducate and inspire our citizens, with the mentality which enables them to attack, successfully, the kinds of challenges, which lie beyond escape from the present, immediate threat of a general thermonuclear war, which would, at the least, determine an extensive extermination of humanity throughout this planet.

And it is better to withdraw a bad President from office, than to allow a global extermination.

Thank you.

Back to top