Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche’s statement “Call To Create a Council of Reason” begins: “In judging the outlook from the recent NATO summit in Washington, which defined Russia as the ‘most significant and direct threat,’ China as a ‘systemic challenge for the Euro-Atlantic security,’ and generally a perspective of a Global NATO, there seems to be no place anymore for diplomacy and dialogue as means to resolve conflicts.” Washington, D.C., which just hosted, not only the inhuman travesty called Benjamin Netanyahu, but far more significantly and ominously, the NATO summit, is not the place where diplomacy and dialogue find a home at the moment. That condition must be reversed; but how? A “Council of Reason,” an international association of those who dare to assert that the power of ideas, properly placed and advocated, is greater than that of armed force, must assemble, in many nations, as such councils once assembled in America, 250 years ago, in town halls, and eventually in continental congresses.
The first step to Reason, is to confront the truth, no matter how it conflicts with one’s previous beliefs. So, here is the truth: Who is now setting the world on the course to World War Three? It is not China. It is not Russia. It is not the nations of the “Global South.” It is NATO. Now, what is the truth about NATO? NATO, which is a supranational entity, begun in 1949, is as much an enemy to the United States, as it is to Russia and the other nations that it attacks. The world’s analysts, that would be wiser, must assimilate what that means. It is the truth.
A treasonous bipartisan faction in the United States, called “the War Party,” operating, particularly since November 22, 1963 through what is termed the “International Assassination Bureau,” moved to “President-Proof NATO” with an initial assassination attempt on candidate and former President Donald Trump. Note that Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s father was assassinated—though not, according to his son, by Sirhan Sirhan, the man that has been in jail for the crime for the past 57 years. For telling the truth about his father’s assassination, which is not what the government says, is RFK Jr.’s life, too, in jeopardy? A treasonous bipartisan faction has also lied to the American people, certainly for a year or more, about the mental condition of Joe Biden, the serving President of the United States. Unelected others have been running the White House, and the Presidency, possibly for much longer. The government of the American people has been illegally, criminally seized, and it is past time for it to be taken back.
To those who say, “Well, Presidents don’t run the country. That’s always the case, so why get upset about this?” consider the following true (and pertinent) story about the importance of the Presidency. On July 20, 1961, General Lyman Lemnitzer, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented a report to President John F. Kennedy. The report was from a General Thomas F. Hickey and his Net Evaluation Subcommittee. The report spoke of “a surprise attack in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions.” An attack on whom, by whom, and with what?
Establishment figure McGeorge Bundy, in his 1988 book Danger and Survival: Choices About the Bomb in the First Fifty Years reports that: “In the summer of 1961 [Kennedy] went through a formal briefing on the net assessment of a general nuclear war between the two superpowers, and he expressed his own reaction to Dean Rusk as they walked from the cabinet room to the Oval Office for a private meeting on other subjects: ‘And we call ourselves the human race.’” Bundy, however, is not being truthful. Five years after his book was published, the actual story, one which Bundy would have known, was declassified. On July 20, 1961, Lemnitzer, Gen. Curtis LeMay, and others presented a plan to JFK to launch a surprise nuclear strike on the Soviet Union, by no later than December of 1963.
Now, with this knowledge, review in your mind JFK’s secret back-channel negotiations with Nikita Khrushchev, particularly around the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, negotiations which deeply involved his brother, Robert F. Kennedy. Review his American University Commencement Address of June 10, 1963, and his United Nations General Assembly speech of September 20, 1963 calling for a joint Soviet-U.S. manned mission to the Moon. That was diplomacy. It took an American President to do that, not a faceless, unelected, Venetian-style “committee.”
Aren’t the United States and NATO identical, though? Actually, NATO was initiated by the British (and the “Tory” wing of American intelligence) after the Second World War, just as Winston Churchill had initiated the Cold War at Fulton, Missouri on March 5, 1946, in his “The Sinews of Peace” speech. “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.” The 1947 Dunkirk Treaty with France, and the 1948 Treaty of Brussels were “gateway treaties” to what would become NATO in 1949.
Here is another truth-fact. Churchill’s famous “Iron Curtain” formulation was not original. It is known to have been used earlier by Joseph Goebbels. This is documented in “Final Entries 1945: The Diaries of Joseph Goebbels” (1978), edited by Hugh Trevor Roper, and translated by Richard Barry. Goebbels’s diary entry of Tuesday, March 13, 1945, “These are the old Kremlin tactics: As soon as the Soviets have occupied a country, they let fall an iron curtain so that they can carry on their fearful bloody work behind it.” Saturday March 17, 1945: “The iron curtain has descended on the fate of Romania.” Sunday, March 18: “Stalin has long since let down the iron curtain."The “Iron Curtain” formulation was also used by others, like Count Schwerin von Krosigk, the Reich’s Finance Minister. Did Churchill plagiarize the phrase, or is this simply a case of great minds thinking alike?
Regarding NATO as such, historian Derek Leebaert makes it clear in his 2018 book Grand Improvisation: American Confronts the British Superpower, 1945-1957 that “as late as the winter of 1948-1949, when the topic of defending Europe came up in international settings, the Americans tended to speak about opposing “an aggressor,” unnamed. [British Foreign Secretary] Ernest Bevin made it his purpose to get them to specify how, when, and under what terms they would rise to the occasion of specifically opposing Russia. To that end, he inserted two paragraphs into a slowly emerging draft—soon to be the North Atlantic Treaty—that would commit all signers to respond together in case of attack, with retaliation to include the use of force. Those paragraphs will become the Treaty’s article 5—then as today, NATO’s central principle.…”
Two years ago, New York U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare put up a billboard bearing the words “U.S. Out of NATO!!” NATO, a relic of an earlier time, must now be dissolved. If American voters caused money to be withdrawn from NATO, that will go a long way to accomplishing that. Some hope that reason will soon strike. Deborah Anne Palmieri, former Honorary Consul of the Russian Federation in Colorado, in an interview this week observed, “Regardless of the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, there is the sober realization in Washington’s corridors of power that Russia cannot and will not be conquered, although there was optimism especially with the escalation of the Ukraine coup in 2014…. Now, with Russia having been tested in battle by NATO through the Ukrainian proxy, I expect to see more realism, communication and diplomacy by the new presidential administration, whoever it might be.” The assassin’s bullets—bullets that flew only two weeks ago—could shatter that “great expectation.” We need the Zepp-LaRouche Council of Reason, independent, International, and intelligent, composed of patriots and world-citizens—people who have or are developing the courage to change the axioms of all, for the General Welfare of humanity and its posterity.
